Illustration: Liu Xidan/GT

On October 14, China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) Eastern Theater Command dispatched its troops of army, navy, air force and rocket force to conduct joint military drills code-named "Joint Sword-2024B" in the Taiwan Straits and areas to the north, south and east of Taiwan island. This military exercise focuses on subjects of sea-air combat-readiness patrol, blockade on key ports and areas, assault on maritime and ground targets, as well as joint seizure of comprehensive superiority, so as to test the joint operations capabilities of the theater command's troops.

This is a strong deterrent to the separatist forces seeking "independence." It is a legitimate and necessary action to defend national sovereignty and unification, releasing a clear message that the more those forces seek "independence," the greater the stranglehold they will face. 

Taiwan regional leader Lai Ching-te is further pursuing the path of "seeking independence through military buildup" and constantly pushing the red line of war. Since taking office, Lai has engaged in increasingly provocative actions. He speculates about the so-called military threat from the Chinese mainland and seeks to transform the military forces on the island into "a military for Taiwan independence." He has recklessly expanded Taiwan's armaments and dramatically increased the defense budget. By stepping up the collusion with external forces, Lai intensifies his efforts in military equipment purchases. Moreover, he clamors for an "all-out defense" and mobilizes civil resources to "reject reunification and seek independence."

This shows that Lai is recklessly and proactively preparing for war out of his own selfish interests, pushing cross-Straits relations into a precarious state. He is a dangerous "pragmatic war instigator" in every sense of the word. The PLA is compelled to use "understandable language" to warn Lai and his ilk that secession means war.

Lai's "Double Ten" speech is a "Taiwan independence" separatist statement and an act of unilaterally changing the status quo that must be punished. Some foreign media commented that Lai's "Double Ten" speech was "moderate, restrained and expressed goodwill," suggesting that the PLA had no reason to take countermeasures. This precisely proves the deceptive nature of Lai's speech; even if his rhetoric appears milder and his attitude seems softer, the provocative implications are stronger and the potential harm is greater. This is mainly reflected in four aspects. 

First, Lai further strengthens the "new two states" theory, deliberately shaping a narrative in which he emphasizes that both sides of the Taiwan Straits "are not subordinate to each other," calling on both sides to share more international responsibilities together. Second, he further vilifies the mainland and heightens confrontation. He distorts and packages the struggle for national reunification and against separation as a confrontation between "democracy and authoritarianism." Third, he further caters to anti-mainland forces, seeks to rally international support and promotes the internationalization of the Taiwan question. Fourth, he further incites anti-mainland sentiment within the island, consolidating "Taiwan independence" forces. He uses "national resilience" to stimulate the resistance emotions of Taiwan residents, creating a so-called public opinion foundation for future "Taiwan independence" actions.

Former Taiwan regional leader Ma Ying-jeou condemned Lai's advocacy of the "two states" theory, which led Ma to decide not to attend an event celebrating Taiwan's "Double Ten" day. Ma claimed that Lai's pursuit of a separatist path could lead Taiwan's 23 million people into peril. This shows that both sides of the Taiwan Straits are clearly aware that no matter how many words of "peace" are used, Lai's speech is a blatant provocation. In response, the mainland has no choice but to impose strict punishment. This punitive action is the right course of action.

Lai's actions and remarks advocating for "Taiwan independence" are serious violations of the law. The "Joint Sword-2024B" exercise is both necessary and legitimate. Taiwan has historically belonged to China, supported by clear historical and legal facts. Both the mainland and Taiwan are part of one China; this is the true status quo in the Taiwan Straits. From both international and domestic legal perspectives, Taiwan's status as part of China is legally indisputable. This is supported by a series of international legal documents, including the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Declaration, and UN General Assembly Resolution 2758, as well as diplomatic communiqués and joint statements with over 180 countries. It is also confirmed by China's Constitution, State Security Law, Anti-Secession Law, Criminal Law, and the recently issued set of guidelines on imposing criminal punishments on diehard "Taiwan independence" separatists for conducting or inciting secession.

From whichever angle you look at it, Lai's blatant declaration that the two sides of the Taiwan Straits are "not subordinate to each other" constitutes a serious act of illegal provocation. Such open violations of the law must be met with a strong response. The "Joint Sword-2024B" exercise is intended to make the Lai authorities acutely aware that two swords hang over the "Taiwan independence" separatist forces: One is the sword of military punishment, and the other is the sword of judicial punishment. This exercise aligns with the responsibilities of a sovereign government to use all legal means to defend national unity and territorial integrity, as stipulated by international and domestic laws, as well as the international norm of using force to prevent secession.

The author is a research fellow of the PLA Academy of Military Sciences. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn