Lai's 'City on a Hill' a lie built on lies

The leader of China's Taiwan region, Lai Ching-te, wants Taiwan to be a "City upon a Hill": "a beacon of democracy", "a champion of peace" and "a model of prosperity".

Yet his speech in Taipei on Saturday exposed the hollowness of his words. He spoke of preserving the "status quo" in the Taiwan Strait while promoting a "Taiwan independence" separatist vision that challenges it; of "deterring war" while expanding military capabilities and falsely casting the Chinese mainland as an "existential threat"; and of economic resilience while demonizing the "red supply chains" that connect Taiwan with its motherland.

In Lai's telling, confrontation is the price of "peace" and separation the defense of "stability". The erroneous rhetoric may be reassuring to his secessionist-minded supporters, but it does not make his pursuit of "Taiwan independence" any less dangerous.

Lai's peddling of the false narrative of "democracy versus authoritarianism" played to the gallery of his external patrons. Yet no amount of ingratiating rhetorical flourishes can obscure his own governance contradicts the "noble values" he espouses.

While professing to defend "democracy and pluralism", the Democratic Progressive Party led by him has been suppressing political dissent and restricting freedoms in the name of "protecting" the island. Democracy is not a convenient label that can excuse political exclusion, much less a license to pursue "Taiwan independence" separatism.

Nor can economic achievements be detached from political reality. Lai cited the island's growth figures, technological progress and the global impact of its semiconductor industry. But the island's economic growth should serve the well-being of its people, not be used for the DPP's selfish and dangerous agenda of separatism.

Lai's disparagement of the "red supply chains" was particularly revealing as it was an appeal for a Cold War approach that would turn normal economic cooperation into an ideological contest. The mainland's industrial development and the deep integration of regional supply chains are mutually beneficial realities of globalization, not "threats".

The same contradiction ran through his rhetoric on the island's security. Lai insisted that increased military spending and the development of "asymmetric combat capabilities" are intended to "deter war" rather than provoke it. But falsely portraying the mainland as an "enemy", expanding military capabilities and mobilizing society for confrontation belie the "pro-peace" posture he tries to present.

Similarly, Lai distorted the postwar international order while demanding a so-called correct understanding of history.

The one-China principle, a fundamental norm of international relations and a universal consensus of the international community, is an important part of the postwar international order. Its historical and legal facts regarding the Taiwan question are clear: There is but one China in the world, and Taiwan is an inalienable part of China's territory.

This is an unshakable fact grounded in both history and law. The Cairo Declaration issued by China, the United States and the United Kingdom in 1943 stated in explicit terms that Taiwan is a territory that Japan had stolen and shall be restored to China. The Potsdam Proclamation in 1945 reaffirmed that the terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out. This series of instruments with legal effect under international law have all clearly affirmed China's sovereignty over Taiwan.

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758 solemnly reaffirmed the one-China principle, which "decides to restore all its rights to the People's Republic of China and to recognize the representatives of its Government as the only legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations". From political, legal and procedural aspects, the resolution resolved once and for all the question of the representation of the whole of China, including Taiwan, in the UN. It made clear that there is only one seat of China in the United Nations, and there is no such thing as "two Chinas" or "one China, one Taiwan".

Taiwan has never been a country and will never be a country. Lai's deliberate distortion of the postwar international order does not change the historical and legal fact that the two sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to one and the same China, nor will it undermine the international community's steadfast commitment to the one-China principle.

Peace across the Taiwan Strait cannot be safeguarded by issuing invitations to external forces to meddle in the Taiwan question, which is China's internal affair brooking no external interference.

Lai also invoked the "right" of Taiwan residents to "determine" their future while ignoring the most fundamental fact that the interests of Taiwan compatriots lie in peaceful development across the Taiwan Strait, expanded exchanges and shared prosperity. The future of the region can only and must be determined by all Chinese people, including Taiwan compatriots.

Secessionists' political slogans cannot rewrite history, and military posturing cannot manufacture peace. Lai's speech may have sought to portray an image of the island as a shining "City upon a Hill", but his "Taiwan independence" separatist agenda is built on a house of cards.

The path to lasting peace and prosperity for the island lies not in "Taiwan independence", but in opposing separatism, upholding the one-China principle and the 1992 Consensus, and advancing peaceful development across the Taiwan Strait.