Published: 06:46 PM, 13 April 2026
Why the KMT Chairwoman’s Meeting with Xi Serves Beijing, Not Taiwan
When Kuomintang KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun travels to Beijing to meet Xi Jinping, the optics will be carefully choreographed, handshakes, platitudes about “peaceful development,” and appeals to cross-Strait stability. Yet beneath the veneer of dialogue lies a stark reality. The Chinese Communist Party CCP does not seek compromise, it seeks control. For Taiwan, this meeting is less diplomacy than theater, a futile mission that risks legitimizing Beijing’s campaign to absorb the island.
Beijing’s Endgame, Absorption, Not Dialogue
Xi Jinping has made “reunification” a central pillar of his national vision. In speeches to the National People’s Congress and at Party congresses, he has declared that Taiwan’s incorporation into the PRC is part of a historic mission and an unstoppable trend. The CCP’s military buildup around the Strait, its economic coercion, and its diplomatic isolation of Taipei all reinforce this singular objective. Dialogue with opposition figures like Cheng is tolerated only insofar as it advances Beijing’s narrative of inevitability.
For the KMT, engagement with Beijing is framed as pragmatic, an attempt to reduce tensions and demonstrate relevance in Taiwan’s polarized politics. Yet the asymmetry of power is glaring. The CCP dictates the terms of engagement, while the KMT risks being cast as a conduit for Beijing’s influence. In Taiwan’s democratic context, this undermines the party’s credibility among voters who prize sovereignty and resent any suggestion of capitulation.
The futility of such dialogue is underscored by precedent. In Hong Kong, Beijing promised “one country, two systems” and autonomy under the Basic Law. Within two decades, those guarantees were hollowed out, culminating in the imposition of the National Security Law in 2020. The lesson is clear, Beijing’s commitments to dialogue and autonomy are tactical, not principled. Taiwan’s opposition leaders risk repeating Hong Kong’s mistake by mistaking propaganda for progress.
For Washington, Tokyo, and other Indo-Pacific democracies, Cheng’s meeting with Xi is a reminder that Beijing prefers political subversion to outright conflict, yet both serve the same endgame. By showcasing dialogue with Taiwanese leaders, the CCP seeks to deflect criticism of its military provocations and argue that “peaceful reunification” remains possible. This narrative complicates international efforts to build deterrence, as it muddies the waters between coercion and diplomacy.
Policy Recommendations
Democracies should highlight the asymmetry of these meetings, making clear that they serve Beijing’s propaganda rather than genuine dialogue. Strengthen Deterrence. The U.S. and allies must continue to bolster Taiwan’s defense capabilities, ensuring that Beijing cannot translate political theater into military fait accompli. Support Taiwan’s Unity. International partners should encourage dialogue across Taiwan’s political spectrum, reducing the CCP’s ability to exploit partisan divides. Legal and Normative Pressure. Beijing’s campaign against Taiwan should be challenged as coercive and contrary to the principle that the future of peoples should not be determined by force or intimidation.
Cheng Li-wun’s meeting with Xi Jinping is not a breakthrough but a trap. The CCP’s intent is not compromise but conquest, and dialogue with opposition figures serves only to legitimize that ambition. For Taiwan, the mission is futile because it mistakes propaganda for progress, gestures for guarantees, and optics for sovereignty. The international community must recognize this for what it is, a performance staged by Beijing, designed to weaken Taiwan’s unity and advance its campaign of absorption.
Written by: Khedroob Thondup (The author is the son of Gyalo Thondup, elder brother of the Dalai Lama. Educated at St. Stephens College Delhi University and the University of San Francisco. He was a personal assistant to the Dalai Lama and accompanied him on his first trip to the U.S. in 1979)
>> Source: European Times
