Academics at China’s Xiamen University in Fujian have outlined what they see as the path forward for reshaping Taiwan in Beijing’s image after a forced unification with the island democracy.
The authors also call for the prior establishment of a “shadow government” to ensure the smooth running of the “regime change”.
The document, which does not name the authors, was shared online by the Washington, DC-based think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies after being removed from Chinese social media, where it was first published.
China claims sovereignty over Taiwan and has vowed to unite with the island, by force if necessary, even though the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) government in Beijing has never ruled the island. In recent years, China has stepped up military activity in waters near Taiwan to pressure its neighbor, including a series of large-scale military exercises launched after Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te was inaugurated in May.
Sam Yeh/AFP via Getty
The authors write that China’s experience with Hong Kong has shown that the “one country, two systems” framework introduced in the former British colony would not be suitable for Taiwan. That framework would have “little persuasive power,” they note, because of the “disruptions” — an apparent reference to the pro-democracy protests of 2019 and 2020 that were crushed by the special administrative zone’s Beijing-approved government.
Similarly, the authors argue that it would be unrealistic to grant Taiwan a 50-year adjustment period before assimilating into mainland China, which it promised Hong Kong in the Sino-British Joint Declaration signed before the handover.
The document states that the “complete takeover of Taiwan” after unification is “urgent” and then calls on Chinese authorities to prepare a “shadow” Taiwanese government that could be operational immediately to ensure a smooth transition.
In the meantime, a committee should be established to focus on “post-takeover policies” covering law, currency conversion, customs and infrastructure integration on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. Committee members would familiarize themselves with the Taiwanese institutions they would replace and develop plans for “screening” Taiwanese civil servants, teachers and members of the military.
The authors also recommend creating “a very realistic physical environment” in which to experiment with their policy ideas before putting them into practice in Taiwan.
“Taiwanese cadres familiar with the mainland” could be recruited to help advise Chinese planners on local norms to help shorten the “transition period,” while pro-unification individuals already in Taiwan should also be used, the authors add.
The newspaper notes that pro-unification sentiments have weakened considerably in Taiwan, adding that even the island’s relatively pro-Beijing opposition party, the Kuomintang, has “softened and moved toward implicit Taiwan independence.”
“The fact that the KMT is saying the country is moving toward ‘implicit Taiwan independence’ shows at least some awareness on the part of mainland China that it has all but lost Taiwan,” said Sean King, an Asia expert and senior vice president at New York-based consultancy Park Strategies. Newsweek.
“But the report ignores the upheaval that might precede any reunification, because the Taiwanese people would not embrace it,” King added. He said “nothing short of military action” would allow Taiwan to rejoin the union, and pointed out that the Xiamen University authors did not even mention possible post-war reconstruction.
The Taiwanese will continue to “actively oppose any form of PRC domination and seek to undermine it. That would not be a happy union,” he said.
China has threatened to declare war on Taiwan if it formally declares independence. President Lai has argued that this is unnecessary because Taiwan is already independent. Polls in recent years show that more than three-quarters of Taiwanese support maintaining the status quo of de facto independence across the Taiwan Strait, either indefinitely or moving toward eventual de jure independence.
The Taiwanese and Chinese foreign ministries did not immediately respond to written requests for comment.
