Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council (MAC), the cabinet agency responsible for China policy, says there is little room for debate over whether Beijing-organized cross-strait forums constitute “united front work,” the Chinese Communist Party’s long-standing system for cultivating relationships with non-Party individuals and organizations to advance its political objectives.
Speaking at a regular press briefing on July 2, MAC Deputy Minister and spokesperson Liang Wen-chieh argued that the nature of these forums is evident from how they are organized and who is permitted to speak.
The issue extends beyond Taiwan. In recent years, U.S. and allied governments have increasingly warned about Chinese Communist Party influence operations targeting universities, businesses, community organizations, and political institutions. Taiwanese officials argue that Beijing’s cross-strait forums provide a visible example of many of the same influence methods that Western governments say they have encountered abroad.
Liang was responding to repeated questions from reporters about how Taiwan distinguishes ordinary cross-strait exchanges from what it calls united front work, and what Taiwanese media mean when they say someone has been “united-fronted,” a colloquial expression referring to individuals who become part of Beijing’s political messaging, whether knowingly or unknowingly.
The questions followed the government’s earlier decision to advise local government leaders not to attend this year’s Straits Forum, an annual event organized in mainland China that brings together Taiwanese politicians, business representatives, and civic groups. Reporters asked where the government draws the line between normal exchanges and political influence activities.
Success
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Success
Check your email to complete sign up
What ‘United Front Work’ means
The term “united front” refers to a political strategy the Chinese Communist Party has used since before coming to power in 1949. Broadly speaking, it seeks to build relationships with individuals and organizations outside the Party, including business leaders, religious groups, overseas Chinese communities, academics, students, and politicians, in ways that advance Party objectives without requiring them to become Party members.
Mao Zedong famously described the united front as one of the Communist Party’s three “magic weapons,” alongside armed struggle and Party building.
Today, united front work is overseen by the United Front Work Department, an agency under the CCP Central Committee with offices throughout China. Party regulations assign it responsibility for work involving Taiwan, overseas Chinese communities, ethnic minorities, religious organizations, private entrepreneurs, and other non-Party groups.
Liang emphasized that Taiwan and mainland China use the term differently. In Taiwan, “united front” has no formal legal definition and serves primarily as a policy concept. In mainland China, by contrast, it refers to a fully institutionalized Party function carried out through an official bureaucracy established under Communist Party regulations.
Western governments have increasingly focused on this system. In the United States, the FBI and Department of Justice have prosecuted a number of cases involving individuals accused of acting on behalf of the Chinese government through organizations presented as independent community groups or business associations. Congressional committees and successive FBI directors have described united front work as an important component of what U.S. officials characterize as Chinese government influence operations overseas.
Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom have likewise investigated alleged foreign interference linked to organizations associated with united front activities, leading to legislative reforms in several countries.
Taiwanese officials argue that the controversy surrounding Beijing’s cross-strait forums illustrates many of the same influence tactics that Western governments say they have observed internationally.
READ MORE:
- Cheng Li-Wen Returns to Taiwan After US Trip Amid Scrutiny Over Alleged United Front Links
- Security Analyst Calls for Global Database to Track Chinese Influence Networks
- Taiwan’s National Security Bureau Publicly Urges CCP Officials to Defect
Only speakers who echo Beijing’s line get the microphone
Liang argued that public discussion has focused on the wrong issue. Rather than asking how Taiwan’s government defines a united front event, he said, observers should examine how such events are organized.
According to Liang, speakers invited to address Communist Party-sponsored forums are selected only after organizers already know what they intend to say, and only those whose views align with Beijing’s political messaging receive an invitation. Those likely to express dissenting views, he said, are simply never invited onto the stage. For that reason, Liang argued, these forums reinforce Beijing’s preferred political narrative rather than produce an open exchange of differing viewpoints.
Liang’s remarks followed a recent visit to mainland China by Chang Jung-kung, vice chairman of Taiwan’s opposition Kuomintang (KMT).
Chang attended several Beijing-sponsored events, including the Straits Forum, the Sun Yat-sen Forum, and the 2026 Cross-Strait Youth Summit.
According to Liang, discussions at those events included topics such as possible pathways toward cross-strait unification and the benefits that Beijing says unification would bring. Participants expressed support for those themes during the meetings.
“Whether or not this constitutes united front work is no longer something that requires debate,” Liang said.
He stressed that the council’s conclusion follows from the structure of the events, their agendas, and the public statements made by participants, rather than from any label the council itself imposed.
The real debate is why politicians keep attending anyway, Liang says
Liang adopted a more conversational tone when addressing reporters who regularly cover cross-strait affairs. “You cover these events. You already know,” he said, suggesting that journalists familiar with Beijing-sponsored forums understand how speakers are selected and how discussions are conducted.
His broader point, Liang said, is that a participant cannot realistically expect to appear on stage at a Communist Party-organized political forum while openly advocating positions contrary to Beijing’s stated policies. That consistent structure, he argued, explains why the government considers such events to be examples of united front work rather than genuine political dialogue.
Liang concluded by returning to the distinction between terminology and participation.
He reiterated that “united front work” carries no legal definition in Taiwan but has long been used by policymakers to describe Beijing-directed political influence activities. In mainland China, he noted, the concept operates through a formal Party bureaucracy extending from the central United Front Work Department to local offices nationwide.
Liang said the more pressing question, in his view, is why some Taiwanese political figures continue participating despite understanding how these Beijing-run forums operate and what political purposes they serve.
