The Chinese Communist Party’s upcoming 15th Five-Year Plan and the Fourth Plenary Session communiqué indicate a more calculated approach toward Taiwan, according to Ming Juzheng, honorary professor of political science at National Taiwan University.
Ming warned that behind Beijing’s rhetoric of “peaceful integration” lies a long-term strategy to absorb Taiwan through economic dependence—a process he calls “integration to weaken.”
“This isn’t just propaganda—it’s an economic entrapment designed to bind Taiwan to Beijing,” he said. “Taiwan must be vigilant against this hidden poison.”
Ming cautioned that the policy could evolve into concrete action before 2027, when China’s military modernization goals are scheduled to peak.
Speaking on the program Xinwen Da Pojie (“News Decoding”), Ming noted that the Fourth Plenum communiqué mentioned Taiwan only briefly—“about one line,” the shortest reference in years.
Success
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Success
Check your email to complete sign up
While the language seemed subdued, he said, cross-referencing the text with related CCP documents exposes a coordinated policy shift.
“The problem isn’t the wording—it’s the intent behind it,” he said.
According to Ming, Beijing is transitioning from traditional united-front economic outreach to a systematic model of integrated development, leveraging trade and investment to erode Taiwan’s autonomy from within.
Fujian as a ‘demonstration zone’
Ming traced the strategy to a 2023 directive issued jointly by the CCP Central Committee and the State Council: “On Supporting Fujian Province in Building a Cross-Strait Integrated Development Demonstration Zone.”
Fujian, located across the Taiwan Strait, shares linguistic and cultural ties with Taiwan—making it an ideal testing ground for Beijing’s “integration” experiment.
Ming noted that the concept dates back to the 1980s, when reformist leaders Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang discussed creating an “experimental zone” for Taiwan.
Unverified reports even claimed that Deng Xiaoping once floated the idea of “loaning Fujian to Taiwan” for development—an idea never realized.
Beijing’s more recent Greater Bay Area initiative, linking Hong Kong and Guangdong, echoes these earlier proposals, aiming to economically absorb peripheral regions under central control.
Ming said Beijing’s reliance on economic ties as tools of political coercion has a long history.
In the early 1990s, when Taiwan’s GDP equaled roughly 45 percent of China’s, Beijing sought economic cooperation. Now, with China’s economy many times larger, the CCP dictates the terms of engagement.
He cited Beijing’s trade gestures—such as importing Taiwanese pineapples, bananas, and fish —as politically targeted operations.
“When Beijing is displeased, it simply cuts you off,” Ming said, referring to the 2021 pineapple import ban. “It hurts their own farmers, but it’s never about economics—it’s politics.”
The Kinmen–Matsu experiment
Under the 15th Five-Year Plan, Ming said, Beijing is elevating these tactics to a new phase of full integration, starting with Taiwan’s offshore islands Kinmen and Matsu.
China has unilaterally proposed building a bridge linking Kinmen and Xiamen, a plan Taiwan’s central government rejects but some local residents support for practical reasons such as water supply, healthcare, and cheaper goods.
“With lower costs and better services, retirees may gradually move to the mainland,” Ming warned. “If integration succeeds in Kinmen and Matsu, it becomes a Hong Kong-style showcase that undermines Taiwan’s identity.”
He cautioned that such a “demonstration effect” could later spread to Taiwan’s main island, achieving political subjugation without open warfare—possibly before 2027.
In another appearance on Zhengjing Frontline (“Political Economy Frontline”), Ming rebuked the CCP’s Taiwan Affairs Office, which accused President Lai Ching-te of “promoting independence” in his Double Ten Day speech.
“That’s a complete inversion of truth,” Ming said. “It’s the CCP—not Taiwan—that defies global democratic norms. Anyone who rejects CCP rule is labeled a separatist.”
Ming emphasized that the “Taiwan independence” label has long served Beijing as a propaganda weapon—useful for domestic mobilization, foreign intimidation, and ideological control.
Apart from its size, Ming said, China cannot rival Taiwan in democracy, human rights, or quality of life.
“Democracy is the global trend,” he said. “Authoritarian systems may achieve short-term stability, but prosperity ultimately drives societies toward democracy.”
He cited Taiwan and South Korea as models of economic-driven democratization, adding that under a democratic system, China could have reached a per capita income of $30,000 if governed by the Republic of China.
“The CCP’s one-party rule harms both itself and its people,” Ming said.
Rewriting history and legitimacy
Ming also criticized Beijing’s manipulation of history, asserting that the eight-year War of Resistance Against Japan was led by the Republic of China under Chiang Kai-shek, while the CCP “collaborated with Japan and the Soviet Union to undermine the Nationalist government.”
He said UN Resolution 2758 never mentioned Taiwan but has been distorted by Beijing to block Taiwan’s participation in international organizations.
“China’s military buildup threatens global stability,” he said. “Taiwan’s self-defense isn’t provocation—it’s necessity.”
Ming argued that peace across the Strait must rest on democracy, freedom, and human rights.
“Measured by Sun Yat-sen’s principles, Taiwan’s system wins,” he said. “True nationalism means resolving disputes through democratic means—referendums and elections—not through force.”
He cited Quebec and Northern Ireland as examples of identity conflicts resolved peacefully through democratic processes.
“Whether Taiwan is independent matters less than whether China remains communist,” Ming said. “That’s the real divide.”
Good’ vs. bad unification
Ming proposed reframing the unification question: “The issue isn’t whether to unify, but how. Rather than letting the CCP unify Taiwan, I’d rather Taiwan unify the mainland.”
He argued that if Taiwan’s democratic model prevailed, 1.4 billion Chinese people would live better lives; if not, both sides would suffer.
“The CCP is moving against history’s current—like Hitler sweeping across Europe, it will eventually collapse,” he said.
Political commentator Gongzi Shen criticized Beijing’s recent move to designate October 25 as “Taiwan Restoration Day,” calling it a politically motivated attempt to advance unification.
“The 1945 handover had nothing to do with the People’s Republic of China,” Shen said. “It was a military occupation carried out by the Republic of China without the consent of Taiwan’s people.”
He argued that the CCP is exploiting the term “restoration” to inherit the Kuomintang’s outdated unification narrative.
“Commemorating this date only deceives and disadvantages the Taiwanese people,” he said.
Shen added that under Japanese rule, Taiwan had already achieved modernization and effective governance:
“The ‘restoration’ simply replaced Japanese rule with Chinese rule—it offered no progress for ordinary Taiwanese.”
Both analysts warned that Beijing’s campaign of “integration” is not an economic partnership but a strategic project to dissolve Taiwan’s sovereignty from within.
“One-party dictatorship will eventually disappear,” Ming said. “Democracy and liberty will prevail. Study history—and you’ll see where the tide is going.”
By Hao Meng
