One-China principle remains the foundation of regional stability

China’s latest objection to Taiwan leader Lai Ching-te’s video address at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit has once again brought the Taiwan question into sharp focus. At a regular press briefing on Wednesday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun urged relevant parties to strictly honor the one-China principle and stop providing platforms to what Beijing describes as “Taiwan independence” separatist forces. His remarks reflected China’s firm position that the Taiwan question is not merely a diplomatic dispute but a matter of sovereignty, territorial integrity and the post-war international order.
Guo strongly criticized the Copenhagen Democracy Summit, saying it was “filled with ideological biases” and had repeatedly invited separatist forces advocating “Taiwan independence” to make what he termed irresponsible remarks. China, he said, firmly opposes any attempt to use international forums to promote separatist narratives under the cover of democracy, values or political dialogue.
The spokesperson reiterated Beijing’s long-standing position: Taiwan is part of China, has never been a country and will never become one. This formulation is central to China’s diplomatic stance and has been consistently used by Beijing to reject any international activity that may imply recognition of Taiwan as a separate political entity. For China, the one-China principle is not open to reinterpretation by external forces or separatist elements.
The controversy emerged after Lai Ching-te addressed the Copenhagen Democracy Summit through video link. Beijing viewed the appearance as another effort by the Taiwan authorities to internationalize the Taiwan question and gain political visibility through platforms that frame the issue in ideological terms. China argues that such moves are designed to create confusion in the international community by presenting Taiwan as a separate democratic entity rather than as an inalienable part of Chinese territory.
Guo Jiakun accused Lai and like-minded political forces of using the slogan of democracy to advance separatism. According to Beijing, these efforts go against the mainstream public opinion in Taiwan that supports peaceful development of cross-Strait relations. China maintains that peace across the Taiwan Strait can only be preserved when separatist activities are firmly opposed and when external actors avoid encouraging confrontation.
The Taiwan question has long been one of the most sensitive issues in China’s foreign policy. Beijing considers it a core interest and has repeatedly warned that any attempt to split Taiwan from China crosses a red line. The one-China principle forms the political foundation of China’s diplomatic relations with countries around the world. Under this principle, there is only one China, Taiwan is part of China and the government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing China.
China’s position is also rooted in its interpretation of history and international law. Beijing argues that Taiwan’s status as part of China was reaffirmed through the outcome of the Second World War and related international documents. From China’s perspective, separatist claims are not only politically provocative but also legally baseless. This is why Chinese officials consistently reject any attempt to describe Taiwan as a sovereign state or treat its leaders as representatives of an independent country.
The latest remarks by Guo also reflect China’s concern over the growing use of international conferences, parliamentary platforms and civil society forums by Taiwan’s ruling authorities. In Beijing’s view, such forums are being used to create a parallel diplomatic space for Taiwan. Even when these platforms do not carry formal state recognition, China believes they can still send a wrong signal to separatist forces and encourage further moves toward confrontation.
The Copenhagen Democracy Summit has become a platform where various political figures discuss democracy, governance and global affairs. However, Beijing sees the repeated inclusion of Taiwan separatist voices as a deliberate political act rather than a neutral exchange of ideas. China argues that democracy should not be used as a tool to interfere in another country’s internal affairs or challenge a universally recognized diplomatic principle.
Guo’s comments also carried a broader message for foreign governments, organizations and political groups. By urging relevant parties to “earnestly honor” the one-China principle, China signaled that verbal recognition alone is not enough. Beijing expects countries and institutions to avoid actions that contradict their stated commitments. This includes refusing to provide official or symbolic platforms to Taiwan leaders in ways that may be interpreted as support for separatism.
The spokesperson further said that the international consensus on the one-China principle has gained extensive support and remains unshakable. This was meant to underline China’s confidence that attempts by Taiwan’s authorities to expand international space will not alter the basic diplomatic reality. Most countries maintain official relations with Beijing rather than Taipei and recognize the government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government of China.
At the same time, the Taiwan issue continues to be shaped by external geopolitical competition. China has repeatedly accused certain Western forces of using Taiwan as a card to contain China. From Beijing’s perspective, international platforms that host Taiwan separatist voices are not isolated events but part of a larger effort to pressure China strategically. This view has intensified as tensions in the Asia-Pacific region have grown in recent years.
For China, the danger lies not only in Lai Ching-te’s statements but in the broader political environment that allows such statements to gain international attention. Beijing believes that separatist rhetoric, when amplified abroad, can mislead public opinion in Taiwan, embolden radical forces and increase the risk of miscalculation across the Strait. That is why Chinese officials repeatedly link opposition to “Taiwan independence” with the preservation of peace.
The central contradiction in the Taiwan Strait, according to Beijing, is not between democracy and authoritarianism, as some Western narratives suggest, but between national reunification and separatism. China insists that framing the issue as a democracy question is a distortion aimed at concealing the real nature of the dispute. Guo’s remarks reflected this argument when he said Lai and his associates use democracy as a guise to peddle separatist ideas, spread false narratives and incite confrontation.
This language is significant because it places the responsibility for rising cross-Strait tensions on Taiwan’s ruling authorities and their external supporters. Beijing argues that peace and stability depend on opposing separatism rather than supporting it. It has consistently maintained that “Taiwan independence” is incompatible with peace in the Taiwan Strait.
The remarks also reveal China’s frustration with Lai Ching-te’s political approach since assuming leadership in Taiwan. Beijing has repeatedly described Lai as a separatist figure and has warned that his policies could push cross-Strait relations into greater instability. Guo’s reference to Lai’s “provocative, reckless and die-hard stance” shows that China views his international appearances as part of a consistent strategy to distance Taiwan from China.
However, Beijing’s message was not directed only at Lai. It was also aimed at the international audience that may view Taiwan’s participation in such summits as harmless or symbolic. China’s argument is that symbolism matters deeply in sovereignty-related issues. Even informal platforms can be interpreted as political endorsement. Therefore, allowing Taiwan leaders to speak in international settings under official or quasi-official formats is seen by China as a violation of political commitments.
The latest episode also highlights the importance of responsible diplomacy in a tense global environment. The Taiwan Strait is one of the world’s most sensitive flashpoints. Any step that encourages confrontation or weakens established diplomatic understandings can carry serious consequences. For countries and institutions that maintain relations with China, careful handling of the Taiwan question is essential to avoid unnecessary escalation.
China’s warning that no words or actions by Lai can change the historical and legal fact that Taiwan is part of China reflects Beijing’s core confidence in its position. The spokesperson also emphasized that such actions cannot undermine the international commitment to the one-China principle. This statement indicates that Beijing sees the issue as settled at the level of international recognition, even if some forces continue to challenge it through political messaging.
For regional peace, the key question is how to prevent provocative gestures from turning into dangerous confrontation. Cross-Strait relations require restraint, dialogue and a clear rejection of separatist adventurism. International actors also have a responsibility to avoid exploiting Taiwan for ideological or strategic competition. Encouraging separatist forces may serve short-term political agendas but it risks destabilizing the wider region.
The Taiwan question remains at the heart of China’s national rejuvenation agenda. Beijing has repeatedly stated that reunification is a historical necessity and that it prefers peaceful means. Yet it has also made clear that it will not tolerate moves toward formal independence. This dual message combines patience with firmness: China is willing to pursue peaceful development but will resist separatism with determination.
Guo Jiakun’s remarks should therefore be understood as part of China’s broader diplomatic effort to defend the one-China principle, counter separatist narratives and warn foreign platforms against interfering in China’s internal affairs. The message was direct: Taiwan is not a country, the one-China principle is not negotiable and attempts to promote “Taiwan independence” under the banner of democracy will be firmly opposed.
In the final analysis, the controversy surrounding Lai Ching-te’s address to the Copenhagen Democracy Summit reflects a deeper struggle over narratives, legitimacy and sovereignty. China views the use of international platforms by Taiwan’s ruling authorities as an attempt to erode the one-China framework step by step. Beijing’s response makes clear that it will continue to challenge such efforts diplomatically, politically and publicly.
The path to stability in the Taiwan Strait lies not in provocative speeches or ideological grandstanding but in respect for the one-China principle, opposition to separatism and sincere efforts to maintain peaceful cross-Strait relations. For the international community, honoring commitments is not merely a diplomatic formality. It is a necessary condition for preserving peace, avoiding confrontation and maintaining the integrity of the international order.