Official communications from the government of Taiwan continue to use coded language regarding the island’s relationship with mainland China, but Taiwanese leaders are far less ambiguous behind closed doors.

The Washington Examiner traveled to Taipei, Taiwan, to speak with members of the island’s government about their increased push for independence, as well as conservative opposition leaders who fear such rhetoric is thrusting their homeland to the brink of war.

Recommended Stories

• Conor McGregor ends long-shot bid for Irish president
• South Korea reviewing possible human rights abuses in US raid at Hyundai plant
• Musk’s Starlink suffers global outage, affecting customers from US to Ukrainian battlefields

When asked by the Washington Examiner why the current Democratic Progressive Party government is now leaning into rhetoric about full separation from the People’s Republic of China, Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung said that it was simply the will of the people.

“There is a consensus in Taiwan that Taiwan is not part of the PRC and Taiwanese people will decide their own future because Taiwan is already a democratic country,” he told the Washington Examiner. “So of course, our people can be their own masters and decide their own future.”

“And according to our opinion poll, in terms of identity, I can assure you that more than 80% of the Taiwanese people believe that they are Taiwanese [instead of Chinese],” Lin added.

At the same time Lin asserted this growing consensus of Taiwanese independence, he claimed that China was using its belief that “Taiwan would like to declare Taiwan independence” as an “excuse” for “verbal attack and military intimidation” against the island — implying that such estimations from Beijing are unfounded.

The foreign minister’s comments were confusing, but his deputy elucidated them in much clearer terms about the government’s self-conception.

“We are a sovereign country. We don’t need to declare independence. We are already independent. We have our army, we have our diplomacy, we have our government,” Deputy Foreign Minister Chih-Chung Wu told a gathering of journalists in Taipei on Tuesday. “And I can tell you my president has even more legitimacy than the President of China, Xi Jinping, because my president was elected by millions of voices. Xi Jinping was only elected by one voice. So who has more legitimacy?”

Wu, who formerly served as Taiwan’s representative in France, embodies the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s ethos: the belief that Taiwan is already sovereign, whether Beijing accepts it or not.

The deputy foreign minister continued, “Of course, we hope every country can recognize us, but this is not the case today. We are very pragmatic. We are not seeking, for the moment, more diplomatic recognition because we know that will make China very angry, and stability will be destroyed in the region.”

Taiwan, also known as the Republic of China, has existed in a geopolitical limbo for decades. Following its defeat by Communist Party forces in the Chinese Civil War, the Chinese Nationalist movement, led by Chiang Kai-shek, fled to the island in 1949 as a government in exile.

Chiang did not envision the island as a new country but as an operational base for the reconquest of the mainland so that the Republic of China could be reestablished. That dream never manifested, and eventually, the republican government’s international legitimacy was transferred to the surging mainland.

The Chinese Communist Party was recognized as the only legitimate government in China by the United Nations in 1971.

The CCP, therefore, insists under this “One China” policy that Taiwan, now a thriving economy and tech juggernaut with approximately 24 million citizens, rightfully belongs to Beijing.

The Taiwanese government has long preferred to eschew such conversations and maintain the status quo of ambiguous diplomacy, neither declaring itself independent nor reunifying with the mainland.

Recent administrations have tested the limits of this ambiguity, seeming to shift the question from “Is Taiwan independent?” to “Does Taiwan affirm its own obvious independence?”

Wu called the country’s current situation a “new form of life” in which citizens “don’t need recognition from other countries” because the country “just exists.”

President Lai Ching-te has been among the most provocative mouthpieces of the independence movement, stirring ire on the mainland with speeches that call China a “foreign hostile force” and all but explicitly declare Taiwanese sovereignty on the world stage.

“The Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China are not subordinate to each other,” he said during his New Year’s address in January, infuriating Beijing. “On this land, democracy and freedom are growing and thriving. The People’s Republic of China has no right to represent Taiwan.”

With each gesture toward independence, Taiwan is punished by military drills and invasion exercises from the People’s Liberation Army.

High-ranking officials in the CCP have claimed for years that the mainland intends to invade Taiwan by 2027. Experts claim this timeline may be extended due to the unforeseen return of President Donald Trump, whose international decision-making is unpredictable and troublesome for Chinese wargaming.

Lai has championed a “Four Pillars of Peace” action plan to deal with the mainland, which advocates “strengthening national defense, building economic security, strengthening partnerships with democratic countries, and stable and principled cross-strait leadership.”

“Peace is priceless, and war has no winners. However, while we have ideals for peace, we cannot harbor illusions,” the president said last week at a military ceremony at the Taoyuan Army Academy. “Only peace achieved through strength is true peace. Peace cannot be achieved by ceding sovereignty. Nor can peace be achieved simply by a piece of paper.”

Lai’s conservative opposition, however, believes that the president is far too bombastic, inviting China’s wrath at a time when U.S. protection is not a guarantee.

The Kuomintang, or KMT, also known as the Nationalist Party of China, is the party formerly led by Chiang Kai-shek that ruled the entirety of the Republic of China before Mao Zedong’s communist military forced it to flee to Taiwan.

The KMT rejects the idea of Taiwanese independence as a pipe dream, one that, if pursued too openly, could get the island’s population killed.

The Washington Examiner met with Alexander Huang, special adviser to KMT Chairman Eric Chu and director of international affairs for the party, at KMT headquarters in Taipei.

Huang, also a professional military strategist and university professor, told the Washington Examiner that his party sees the DPP’s posturing as a cynical move to build domestic support without considering the long-term consequences.

“A misjudgment in [Taiwanese] policy or miscalculation of how to deal with a neighbor that is only 68 nautical miles away from us is very dangerous. You can show your middle fingers for fun or to rally support and say, ‘We are independent’ — you get elected, however, you jeopardize our national security by doing that,” he explained. “Because you need to pretend [Taiwan is not independent] — that’s what we call ambiguity. There will be no cross-strait relationship if we give up ambiguity.”

“KMT’s position is to manage an ambiguous, vague concept of one [China], while actually maintaining two [Chinas], until such a day when the emperor dies and we will turn that page,” Huang said, alluding to Xi. “We will try to delay the D-Day as much as we can. We want to maintain the status quo. We want to ‘quietly’ enhance our military-to-military collaboration with the United States and allied forces. … We want to wave our hands to the mainland and say, ‘Hey, guys, no war, OK?'”

Huang sees the United States and other democratic nations’ political support as a valuable bargaining chip to maintain peace, but an unreliable backstop if an invasion is launched.

Despite broad sympathy for Taiwan, Western powers universally recognize the People’s Republic under the “One China” policy.

“They all have an official relationship with Beijing, not us, so talking is nice — but when things go down to the dirty side, they may not be able to help us,” Huang said. “We are not a member of the United Nations, we have only 12 diplomatic relationships, we have no military alliance.”

The KMT pursues a close relationship with the mainland in hopes that foreign intervention will not be necessary. It hopes that friendliness and cooperation, coupled with defensive preparations, will convince Chinese leaders that the cost-benefit calculus of invading is too much of a headache.

The cautious hermits of the KMT do not attempt to forecast the future. It is concerned solely with the here-and-now, preserving the peace for just one more day, and waiting for the CCP to collapse like the imperial dynasties that ruled China before.

TAIWAN SEES ITS FUTURE ‘CLOSELY LINKED’ TO THE ‘DESTINY OF UKRAINE,’ FOREIGN MINISTER SAYS

“I do not believe that the one-party dictatorship will be forever,” the professor told the Washington Examiner. “So, I tell my students, I tell my audience, I say, ‘We need to sustain this democracy. We need to protect this institution. We need to live longer than this.’ And finally, I say, ‘If you have a question that should be asked in the church, do not bring it to my class.'”

Asked what he meant by his last statement, Huang said he was referring to the unknowable future of cross-strait relations and how “only God knows the end.”