View of China as Enemy Provoked Hostile Obstruction
By Lin Huo-wong, United Daily News Opinion, April 24, 2026
President Lai Ching-te’s visit to African diplomatic ally Eswatini has been postponed after overflight permits for the presidential aircraft were canceled by three countries including Mauritius. The interference was, of course, orchestrated by the Communist China, but the originator is President Lai himself.
Communist China has labeled all three Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidents as pro-independence figures, yet former presidents Chen Shui-bian and Tsai Ing-wen were able to travel abroad smoothly during their terms. Why is it that only President Lai cannot go abroad? It is because both Chen and Tsai have legal backgrounds and maintain a certain respect for the Constitution of the Republic of China, thus they did not dare to deviate too far from the Act Governing Relations between the People of the Taiwan Area and the Mainland Area in their discourse on cross-strait relations.
However, President Lai, who lacks legal training and holds a firm pro-independence stance, not only frequently deviates from the framework of the Act Governing Cross-Strait Relations, but has also openly declared the other side as a “hostile external force.” If a president treats the other side as an enemy, can he still expect Communist China not to respond in kind?
President Lai’s handling of cross-strait relations is guided by a single unwavering principle of “resist China.” As a result, his governance shows almost no flexibility. For example, when Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun of the Kuomintang (KMT) visited mainland China, the Taiwan Affairs Office of the mainland’s State Council immediately announced 10 measures toward Taiwan, seemingly signaling reconciliation, yet the DPP administration interpreted them as United Front tactics and sugar-coated poison. Of course, we cannot naively assume that these 10 measures are purely “beneficial to Taiwan” without any ulterior motives; but neither should we interpret all possible goodwill as malicious intent. Is it truly in Taiwan’s interest to completely demonize cross-strait exchanges?
President Lai’s “resist China” has reached an incomprehensible level. In less than two years of his administration, accusations such as “Chinese Communist accomplice” and “pro-China, selling out Taiwan” have been used most frequently to smear political opponents. It seems that only those who share his political stance are considered to love Taiwan. President Lai fails to realize that in a free society, this kind of monolithic and exclusionary thinking is in fact akin to the values of authoritarian rulers.
President Lai’s “resist China” is not only domestic but also reflected in his foreign policy. One of his most frequent statements is to “unite democratic countries around the world to resist China.” This notion is somewhat wishful thinking and ignores international realities; it is essentially self-deception. Every country in the world prioritizes its own national interests. No country will choose to “resist China to safeguard Taiwan” simply because we are a democracy. The United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany are all advanced democracies. If these countries valued democracy more than their own interests, then they should immediately sever diplomatic relations with Communist China and establish relations with Taiwan instead. The question is: which democracy that currently maintains diplomatic ties with Beijing would switch to us purely out of alignment with “democracy”?
President Lai treats “resist China” as a sacred doctrine. Domestically, he does not tolerate dissent and creates internal enemies; externally, he openly declares the other side as a hostile force. It is hardly surprising that an enemy would do everything possible to obstruct him.
A president who harbors hostility both domestically and internationally cannot expect a harmonious and united society under his governance, nor smooth diplomacy. It is like trying to climb a tree to catch fish—because hostility can only beget hostility.
The author is a retired professor of the Department of Philosophy, National Taiwan University.