Over the past few years, the concept of the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation” has become central in the political narrative of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), especially under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). While many Chinese in and outside China embrace the idea of national pride and cultural revival, there remains a persistent fallacy: Rejuvenation must involve political unification with Taiwan. This notion, perpetuated by the CCP, is not only misleading, but deeply damaging to the spirit of what rejuvenation means.
People must distinguish clearly between the state of “China” (中國) and the broader cultural concept of the “Chinese nation” (中華民族). The former refers to the geopolitical entity ruled by the CCP; the latter describes a vast and diverse community of people who identify with Chinese culture, heritage and values — regardless of nationality, politics or geography. This includes not only the Han majority and China’s 55 recognized ethnic minorities, but also overseas Chinese communities that have preserved their traditions.
Taiwan represents a unique case. Politically distinct for more than seven decades, it has developed a democratic system, civil society and cultural identity of its own, yet retains strong historical and cultural ties to Chinese civilization. Traditional Chinese characters are still in use, festivals are widely celebrated, and values such as filial piety and humility remain deeply rooted.
The fallacy lies in believing that “rejuvenation” requires bringing Taiwan under the control of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). This assumption is not only flawed, but morally troubling. It equates cultural pride with political conformity.
More importantly, it ignores the will of Taiwanese. Decades of polling show a consistent preference for maintaining the “status quo.” This is not a rejection of Chinese culture, but a conscious decision to protect democracy, civil liberties and human rights. For many in Taiwan, unification under the CCP regime means authoritarianism, censorship and the erosion of hard-won freedoms.
As a Hong Konger, I can attest firsthand to these fears. We were promised “50 years of no change” under “one country, two systems.” What we received instead was a swift dismantling of our freedoms. The National Security Law crushed dissent. Newspapers shut down. Opposition members were jailed. Civil society was silenced.
To claim that rejuvenation requires unification is to misunderstand cultural revival. Rejuvenation means restoring pride and vitality to a people and their way of life. It means preserving tradition while allowing Chinese civilization to flourish in the modern world. Chinese diaspora communities in North America, Southeast Asia and Europe contribute immensely to the global understanding of Chinese culture. They teach their children the language, celebrate Lunar New Year and maintain ancestral traditions. They are part of the Chinese nation. Are they to be “unified” as well? Of course not.
Likewise, Taiwan does not need to be politically absorbed to be part of the Chinese nation. Its vibrant culture, democratic institutions and technological achievements arguably contribute more meaningfully to the modern face of Chinese civilization than a coerced unification ever could.
The most dangerous aspect of the unification narrative is the idea that military force might be a justifiable path. How can the killing of fellow Chinese and the trauma of war be part of rejuvenation?
That is not revival — it is regression. It recalls an age of imperialism and warlordism, not the moral philosophy of Confucius or the humanism rooted in Chinese thought.
The global consequences of such an invasion would be catastrophic. China would face sanctions, diplomatic isolation and possible prolonged conflict. Any perceived gain would come at the cost of international condemnation and internal disillusionment. The idea of a united Chinese nation would be forever stained by the violence used to pursue it.
Political sovereignty and cultural identity are not the same. Taiwan can be politically autonomous while remaining part of the Chinese cultural world. This is not betrayal — it is reality. Embracing such diversity is far more consistent with the spirit of rejuvenation than enforcing uniformity through coercion.
If Xi’s vision truly seeks to uplift Chinese and restore the dignity of Chinese civilization, then it must make space for diversity, dissent and different paths to modernity. Rejuvenation should be about excellence, not obedience; flourishing, not fear; unity in values, not uniformity in politics.
Those who believe the “great rejuvenation” must include Taiwan’s political absorption are embracing a narrow and ultimately destructive vision. The real rejuvenation of the Chinese nation lies in celebrating the resilience, creativity and moral depth of Chinese culture — wherever it lives and however it is expressed. It lies in building bridges, not walls; in healing wounds, not opening new ones.
History will judge us not by the lines we draw on maps, but by the values we choose to uphold. Let rejuvenation be a renaissance of spirit — not a campaign of conquest.
John Cheng is a retired businessman from Hong Kong residing in Taiwan.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS