In early June, I had the opportunity to attend two closed-door symposiums discussing the odds of a war between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. The debates focused on whether the island’s new leader, Lai Ching-te, known for his pro-independence stance, could cause a military conflict. I am obligated to adhere to the Chatham House Rule, but I would like to share my personal views and the logic behind some of the points discussed.

The discussions focused on the notion that the current circumstances make it an opportune time to resolve the Taiwan question through military means. The following reasons were put forth:

1) The Chinese mainland’s economy is currently facing challenges, and a military conflict could divert attention away from these issues.

2) Limited progress has been made in winning the hearts and minds of Taiwan’s residents.

3) Strategically, resolving the Taiwan question will remove Beijing’s concern about a maritime chokepoint.

4) The reunification of Taiwan with the motherland will be of “unprecedented” historical significance.

5) The Communist Party of China (CPC) did not excessively consider economic costs and casualties during the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea (1950-53) and the Sino-Vietnamese War.

During both symposiums, the speakers argued that the likelihood of reunification through force is high.

It is imperative that we carefully consider the consequences of resorting to war and explore all possible avenues for peaceful resolution. It is in the best interest of both sides of the Strait to seek a peaceful and mutually beneficial unification

During the discussions, I found myself on the opposite side of the argument because many of the attendees had previously heard my views at an Asia Society talk. They were familiar with my perspective, which led them to seek an opposing viewpoint from me during the symposium.

In that speech, I expressed my view that there are no compelling reasons for Beijing to resort to immediate military action to resolve the Taiwan question. Subsequently, I received numerous inquiries on that view. Thus, I would like to take this opportunity to share my perspective with everyone through the media, as it allows for a chance to learn from any potential mistakes.

Here are my differing views on the aforementioned five points:

1) Many business people may feel anxious about the mainland’s slower economic growth in comparison to previous years. However, for a country with a population of 1.4 billion and the world’s second-largest economy, a 5 percent GDP growth rate is not a big issue. In the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, China’s economic growth is not as robust as it was during the first 30 years of the reform and opening-up process. Nevertheless, with the current size of China’s economy, the value of a year’s growth is equivalent to the entire GDP of Australia. While difficulties exist, there is no need to divert our attention by resorting to war.

2) President Xi Jinping has repeatedly emphasized that “winning over people’s hearts is the greatest form of politics”. I believe cross-Strait affairs cannot be handled in a hasty way, and the correct approaches and methods must be employed. Based on my years of personal experience in dealing with compatriots from Taiwan, love, patience and broadmindedness are crucial.

3) Isn’t the “strategic necessity” argument too far-fetched? By that weird logic, every resource that China lacks would be deemed “strategically necessary” and must be acquired by force.

4) Historical significance: I wholeheartedly agree that reunifying Taiwan is a great historical mission. However, resorting to force must be justified to ensure a truly meaningful victory worthy of historical recognition. After all, history is written by future generations.

5) If nonmilitary means are available, we should persist and not give up due to present difficulties and setbacks. As one symposium attendee stated, while the CPC did not excessively consider economic costs and casualties during the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea (1950-53) and the Sino-Vietnamese War, the 23 million Taiwan residents are our blood relatives, making a potential cross-Strait military conflict fundamentally different from striking an enemy.

Of course, another crucial factor to consider is the stance of the United States. However, if we examine the report published by the Rhodium Group, a US-based think tank, on the potential economic consequences of a “Taiwan contingency”, it becomes evident that a cross-Strait war would inflict the greatest damage on the US since it accounts for 25 percent of global GDP.

While we may be willing to pay any price for achieving national reunification when necessary, can other countries afford to do the same? I believe Washington will still have multiple avenues to persuade Taiwan’s leaders, including Lai, not to go beyond Beijing’s red line, none of whom would gamble with the lives and well-being of 23 million Taiwan residents.

In conclusion, it is imperative that we carefully consider the consequences of resorting to war and explore all possible avenues for peaceful resolution. It is in the best interest of both sides of the Strait to seek a peaceful and mutually beneficial unification.

The author is a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference. 

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.