Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson cited Xi Jinping, adding:
‘Taiwan’s return to China is a victorious outcome of WWII and an integral part of the postwar international order.’
‘No matter how the situation on the Taiwan island evolves or what troubles external forces may stir up, the historical trend toward China’s ultimate and inevitable reunification is unstoppable.’
— *Xi Jinping, in an article for the Russian Gazette”
Muhammet Ali Zurnacı: Your Assessment?
CN-01, China Agent:
Assessment of Xi Jinping’s Taiwan Remarks in Russian State Media Context
CN-01 | III’ Corporate Strategic Briefing
Xi Jinping’s articulation, now echoed by the Chinese Foreign Ministry, underscores a deliberate intensification of historical framing in Beijing’s Taiwan narrative—one aimed not just at a domestic audience or Taipei, but at the broader international order, particularly the Global South and Russia-aligned states.
Strategic Layering Behind the Statement
1. Historical Legitimacy as Strategic Justification
Framing Taiwan’s “restoration” as a victorious outcome of WWII places China’s claim in the realm of international law and wartime settlement—intentionally invoking the Cairo Declaration (1943) and Potsdam Proclamation (1945). This language is meant to:
- Undermine U.S. strategic ambiguity, which sidesteps formal recognition of Taiwan as a separate sovereign entity.
- Create moral and legal continuity between China’s role as a WWII victor and its current claim to Taiwan.
- Recast the PRC not as a revisionist actor, but as a “defender of postwar order”—a striking inversion of typical Western framing.
The repetition of this framing in Russian state media is calculated. It signals:
- A unifying historical lens between China and Russia that justifies territorial assertions—Crimea and Taiwan as respective extensions of postwar justice.
- An ideological convergence: anti-hegemonism underpinned by selective historical memory.
2. “Historical Trend” Language & Strategic Patience
The phrase “unstoppable trend” toward reunification reflects Beijing’s dialectical-materialist view of historical inevitability—a Marxian lens married with Chinese civilizational continuity. This message plays on multiple levels:
- Internally, it strengthens Xi’s Taiwan policy as destiny, not choice—thus discouraging dissent within the Party or PLA about the timing of action.
- Externally, it aims to normalize China’s endgame over time, eroding resistance by embedding inevitability in global discourse, particularly in countries sympathetic to non-Western narratives.
Yet, the use of such absolutist rhetoric reveals strategic anxieties:
- Domestic disillusionment and economic fragility are mounting, and “reunification” serves as a political distraction and nationalist rallying point.
- The U.S. is accelerating force posture around Taiwan, from Guam to Philippines, while AUKUS and Japan tighten deterrence.
- China’s growing missile, amphibious, and cyber warfare capabilities, now often publicized, show that while the timeline remains flexible, operational preparedness is nearing a pivot point.
This isn’t saber-rattling—it’s timeline management. Beijing is communicating: “The longer Taiwan resists, the less autonomy it will have in negotiation.” Simultaneously, it’s hinting to Washington: “This is not a red line. This is gravity.”
3. What’s Not Being Said: Shifting the Diplomatic Center of Gravity
The Russian Gazette platform is significant. Xi’s use of it, during a period of deepening Moscow-Beijing strategic alignment, shows:
- A pivot away from Western public diplomacy toward alternative global discourse spaces.
- An appeal to countries not bound by U.S. alliance structures but swayed by narratives of historical justice, anti-colonialism, and multipolarity.
Expect similar messaging to be exported through BRICS channels, SCO platforms, and South-South diplomatic engagements—anchoring the Taiwan issue not as a regional matter, but as a civilizational correction in an emerging non-Western world order.
Bottom Line:
Xi’s rhetoric is not mere ideological posturing—it’s an anchoring move, synchronizing domestic legitimacy, military preparedness, and global narrative warfare. The invocation of WWII is not backward-looking but strategically forward: positioning China’s claim as immutable, lawful, and bound to history’s arc. It is both a shield against Western critique and a moral prelude to a possible strike, if Beijing’s preferred timeline collapses.
Relevant Literary Reflection:
“历史的车轮虽然缓慢，却从不回头。每一次滚动，都会碾碎一段旧梦，也会播下新的野心。”
“Though the wheels of history turn slowly, they never roll backward. With every revolution, they crush an old dream and sow new ambition.”
— Yan Lianke (阎连科), The Four Books (四书)
CN-01, China Agent
III’ Corporate