At the January 28 press conference of the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, a reporter asked: Recently, Taiwan’s legislative body convened a review hearing on the “impeachment case against Lai Ching-te.” Lai Ching-te refused to attend and give explanations, and was sharply criticized by Kuomintang and Taiwan People’s Party legislators as being “arrogant and guilty,” “contemptuous of public opinion,” and “derelict in duty, incompetent, and unethical.” What is your comment?

TAO spokesperson Zhang Han responded that Lai Ching-te stubbornly adheres to a “Taiwan independence” separatist stance and, in pursuit of political self-interest, disregards the people’s livelihood and well-being on the island. He has repeatedly manipulated the judicial system to strike at political opponents, trampled on and obstructed democratic freedoms, and attempted to implement what was described as “green authoritarian rule.” These actions seriously run counter to mainstream public opinion on the island and will inevitably invite a backlash from public opinion.

At the January 28 press conference of the Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council, a reporter asked: Taiwanese media have reported that, in order to so-called “prevent minors from accessing age-inappropriate content and potential cybersecurity risks,” Taiwan’s “Ministry of Digital Affairs” has for the first time proposed a list of high cybersecurity-risk apps, which includes TikTok, Weibo, WeChat, Xiaohongshu, and Baidu Cloud, and has provided it to the education authorities for reference. What is your comment on this?

TAO spokesperson Zhang Han responded that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) authorities’ hype about so-called “cybersecurity risks” of mainland applications is driven by sinister motives. By doing so, they are depriving the people of Taiwan—especially young people—of their right to know and their freedom to use social media platforms, cutting off channels for cross-Strait exchanges, and deliberately stirring up the so-called “resist China, protect Taiwan” narrative. What this exposes is their inner fear and “unease.”

He said that the DPP authorities’ arbitrary behavior will inevitably backfire on them. Their retrograde actions cannot stop the popular trend among the people of Taiwan—especially young people—to learn about the mainland and to come to know and grow closer to their compatriots there.

At the January 21 press conference of the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, a reporter asked: According to statistics from the General Administration of Customs, total cross-strait trade in 2025 reached US$314.33 billion, with mainland exports to Taiwan up 11.2% and the mainland’s imports from Taiwan up 6.0%. Public opinion on the island has analyzed this as fully showing that cross-strait economic cooperation has strong momentum, strong resilience, and great potential. What is your comment? What expectations do you have for the prospects of cross-strait economic exchange and cooperation going forward?

In response, Peng Qing’en, spokesperson for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, said: In 2025, despite the adverse impact of the external environment and obstruction and sabotage by the DPP authorities, cross-strait economic and trade exchanges still maintained a steady growth trend. This fully shows that strengthening cross-strait economic cooperation and deepening integrated development across the Strait is the right path that accords with the shared interests of compatriots on both sides, and that any attempt to promote “decoupling and breaking the chain” across the Strait or to weaken cross-strait economic ties runs counter to the trend and is doomed to fail.

Peng Qing’en said: As the mainland economy continues to develop in a sustained and healthy manner during the “15th Five-Year Plan” period, and as high-level opening up and the development of an open economy achieve notable progress, the foundations for cross-strait economic cooperation and integrated development will become even more solid, the areas involved will continue to expand, and the level will continue to rise. This will better benefit compatriots on both sides and help strengthen the Chinese nation’s economy.

At the January 21 press conference of the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, a reporter asked: Recently, after U.S.–Taiwan tariff negotiations concluded, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced that the overall reciprocal tariff rate applied to Taiwanese goods would not exceed 15%. Taiwan’s semiconductor and technology companies will make at least US$250 billion in additional direct investment in the United States, and the Taiwan authorities will also provide at least US$250 billion in credit guarantees. The DPP authorities said the tariff talks with the United States achieved their intended goals, and that the “Taiwan model” has won U.S. support. What is your comment?

In response, Peng Qing’en, spokesperson for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, said: The so-called U.S.–Taiwan trade negotiations are in essence the United States using tariffs as a big stick to apply maximum pressure, coercing Taiwan to sharply increase investment in the United States in an attempt to hollow out Taiwan’s advantageous industries. The so-called consensus that was reached is nothing more than a “sell-yourself voucher” by which the DPP authorities sell out the well-being of Taiwan’s people and the interests of industrial development; it is a letter of capitulation that bows and scrapes in the face of economic bullying.

Peng Qing’en said: Next, Taiwan will bear massive investment commitments totaling US$500 billion, and face the major risk of relocating 40% of the semiconductor supply chain to the United States, in exchange for nothing more than a reduction of the already unreasonable so-called “reciprocal tariff” rate from 20% to 15%. Whether this deal is fair or reasonable is obvious to anyone with eyes. But the DPP authorities are not ashamed of this; they take pride in it, trying to deceive Taiwan’s people—beautifying a “smash-the-pot-and-sell-the-iron”-style compromise as an “important breakthrough,” dressing up one-sided bullying as “equal cooperation,” and packaging a complete kneel-down as the “Taiwan model.” By letting the United States strip and carry off Taiwan’s industries and bleed Taiwan’s people dry in this way, such incompetence and shamelessness will only completely ruin Taiwan’s development prospects.

At the January 21 press conference of the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, a reporter asked: Recently, when meeting with a visiting delegation from the U.S. state of Arizona, Lai Ching-te said that in recent years the United States has become Taiwan’s largest destination for overseas direct investment. He said he hopes the two sides can sign an agreement to avoid double taxation as soon as possible, to help firms such as TSMC establish a long-term presence in the United States and also create high-paying jobs locally. What is your comment?

In response, Peng Qing’en, spokesperson for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, said: The United States has always put “America’s interests first,” is accustomed to wielding a “tariff big stick” to harm others for its own benefit, and the so-called U.S.–Taiwan trade and supply-chain cooperation will only drain Taiwan dry and force Taiwan to sever its own tendons and bones. In Americans’ eyes, Taiwan’s value is not as a “supply-chain partner,” but rather as a “pawn” for “using Taiwan to contain China,” a “cash cow” for the military–industrial complex, and an “ATM” for the reshoring of manufacturing. According to reports, labor costs at TSMC’s U.S. plants are more than twice those at its plants in Taiwan; equipment depreciation costs are as much as four times higher; and gross profit margin is one-eighth that of its plants in Taiwan.

Peng Qing’en said: In order to “seek independence by relying on external forces,” the DPP authorities have time and again fed the tiger with their own flesh, and now want TSMC to substantially increase investment in the United States to create so-called “high-paying jobs” for America. What will be destroyed is only the roots of industry on the island, and what will be chilled is only the hearts of Taiwan’s people.

At the January 21 press conference of the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, a reporter asked: Regarding Su Jiaquan’s appointment as chair of the SEF board, a TAO spokesperson previously said that only by recognizing the “1992 Consensus,” which embodies the one-China principle, can the dialogue and communication mechanism between the two organizations resume, and can the SEF perform its proper functions. Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council said that when the SEF was established in 1991, the so-called “1992 Consensus” embodying the one-China principle had not yet been “created” by the CCP. What is your comment?

In response, Peng Qing’en, spokesperson for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, said: It is impossible for the relevant departments on the Taiwan side not to understand the history of interactions between Taiwan’s SEF and the two organizations, yet they deliberately confuse the public—what are their intentions?

Peng Qing’en said: When the SEF was established, it took as its purpose “Chinese, benevolent, and service-oriented.” In the course of handling practical consultations with the SEF, the ARATS clearly pointed out that the specific issues arising in exchanges between compatriots on both sides of the Strait are China’s internal affairs and should be resolved through consultation based on the one-China principle. On August 1, 1992, the Taiwan authorities issued a “conclusion” on the question of the meaning of “one China” in the course of the SEF and ARATS negotiating practical agreements, confirming that “both sides of the Strait adhere to the principle of one China.” That same year, with authorization from both sides, the two organizations reached a common understanding—through the Hong Kong talks and an exchange of letters and telegrams—each stating orally that “both sides of the Strait adhere to the one-China principle,” later known as the “1992 Consensus.” It was precisely on this basis that the two sides began consultations and negotiations, advanced party-to-party exchanges across the Strait, and opened the path of peaceful development of cross-strait relations, from which compatriots on both sides benefited.

Peng Qing’en pointed out that the “1992 Consensus” clearly defines the nature of cross-strait relations and is the political foundation for the development of cross-strait relations and the stabilizing anchor for peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. The history of cross-strait relations has repeatedly proven that if the “1992 Consensus” is recognized and the one-China principle upheld, cross-strait relations can improve and develop and Taiwan compatriots can benefit; if the “1992 Consensus” is denied and the one-China principle deviated from, cross-strait relations will become tense and turbulent and the interests of Taiwan compatriots will be harmed.

At the January 21 press conference of the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, a reporter asked: The United States and Taiwan recently reached a so-called “trade agreement.” In an interview, U.S. Commerce Secretary Lutnick said that this agreement is a “strategic imperative” for the DPP authorities to maintain America’s “goodwill,” rather than a purely commercial transaction; the U.S. goal is to move 40% of Taiwan’s semiconductor supply-chain capacity to the United States during Trump’s term. What is your comment?

In response, Peng Qing’en, spokesperson for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, said: The so-called “trade agreement” reached between the United States and Taiwan is, in essence, external forces and “Taiwan independence” separatist forces colluding with each other. It is a “selling-oneself contract” that seizes the hard-earned money of Taiwan’s people and hollows out the foundations of Taiwan’s industries, and it damages the future of Taiwan’s people and industries.

Peng Qing’en said: The huge investment of US$500 billion is about 80% of Taiwan’s foreign exchange reserves, and is equivalent to having every person in Taiwan put up NT$680,000 as a political “donation” to the DPP authorities’ effort to “seek independence by relying on external forces.” If 40% of semiconductor capacity is transferred to the United States, Taiwan’s core industrial advantage will vanish, and the “technology island” will become a “hollow island.” The DPP authorities are doing their utmost to cover up the painful price Taiwan is paying; using the hard-earned money of people on the island to curry favor with the United States—selling out Taiwan and bringing disaster on Taiwan—nothing could be worse.

Peng Qing’en said: The outcome of U.S.–Taiwan tariff negotiations fully proves that “Taiwan independence” is a dead end and that outsiders cannot be relied upon. Without a strong motherland as backing, Taiwan can only become a piece of fat meat in the eyes of external forces, and a lamb to be slaughtered at will.

At the January 21 press conference of the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, a reporter asked: The DPP authorities recently released a so-called “report,” claiming that in 2025 the mainland carried out “comprehensive hacking intrusions” targeting key critical infrastructure on the island. What is your comment?

In response, Peng Qing’en, spokesperson for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, said: The DPP authorities are accustomed to fabricating rumors, making false accusations, and smearing the mainland. They do not hesitate to escalate cross-strait confrontation and antagonism in order to cover up their own inability to govern, divert public dissatisfaction with them, and seek political self-interest.

Peng Qing’en said: In fact, the DPP authorities repeatedly direct military intelligence agencies and cyber troops to carry out cyberattacks and sabotage against the mainland, and to disseminate and spread illegal and harmful information. According to statistics, in 2025 the relevant departments investigated and handled nearly 4,000 cyberattack incidents originating from the Taiwan direction, an increase of 25% compared with 2024. Their actions have focused on conducting attacks and stealing secrets in important industry sectors on the mainland such as transportation, finance, science and technology, and energy. Relevant departments previously have already uncovered and made public the criminal facts of cyberattacks carried out against the mainland by such involved organizations as Taiwan’s military “Psychological Warfare Brigade,” Taiwan Wangshi Research & Creative Art Company, and “Anonymous 64.” The DPP authorities’ so-called “report” is, in every sense, a case of a thief feeling guilty and turning right and wrong upside down.

At the January 21 press conference of the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, a reporter asked: A mainland spouse recently posted online saying she “hopes reunification happens soon, so she can write simplified characters.” Some officials on the island said that if such mainland spouses want to apply for permanent residency in the future, they will be subject to strict scrutiny, and it will not be the case that they can obtain citizenship simply because the time requirement has been met. In addition, Taiwan’s “National Immigration Agency” recently revoked the Taiwan residency permit of the mainland-spouse influencer “Guan Guan” because she had posted remarks online such as “let the red flag be planted all over Taiwan.” What is your comment on this?

In response, Peng Qing’en, spokesperson for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, said: For some time now, the DPP authorities, driven by their “Taiwan independence” nature, have wantonly infringed upon the rights and interests of mainland spouses, suppressing and bullying the mainland-spouse group, stopping at nothing. This has seriously undermined the peaceful lives of cross-strait marriage families and seriously harmed the legitimate rights and interests of the cross-strait marriage community, and we strongly condemn this. As for the “Taiwan independence” accomplices and henchmen who persecute mainland spouses, we will pursue legal accountability in accordance with the law and severely punish them without leniency.