A20 – Ethnic sub-identity is the basis for national turmoil/division.

Ethnic sub-identity is the basis for national strife/division (research outline)

Ye Qiquan first announced: September 30, 2025

Foreword: Russia’s “post-imperial disintegration syndrome” (or “post-imperial pain”) will last at least 200 years. The greatest pain lies in the “identity entanglement among Russians, Belarusians, and Ukrainians.” This sub-identity entanglement under the larger identity will dominate the “pain syndrome” for the next 200 years. This entanglement will manifest not only in “cultural alienation and identity alienation” but also inevitably in border conflicts, economic depletion, mutual security losses, and even mutual warfare. The current friendly and cooperative relationship between Belarusians and Russians cannot last, nor can it be the norm for the long term. From a historical perspective, the history of ethnic integration in the Chinese Empire is the most successful case in the world. This case relies not only on the philosophical choices of the dominant ethnic group but also on the geographical environment in which the Chinese Empire was situated. Of course, the historical process of the Chinese Empire also included a period of accelerated ethnic identity alienation. This accelerated identity alienation was both a cause and a consequence of the empire’s decline and political chaos. Modern China also has many lessons to learn from the enormous political costs brought about by ethnic identity alienation. Ignoring these lessons may lead to even greater practical and historical costs. Addressing or correcting the issue of ethnic sub-identity alienation will become the biggest challenge in governing Taiwan.

In conclusion, given years of pro-independence maneuvering, it’s reasonable to expect Taiwanese people to harbor resentment towards “one country, two systems.” Taiwanese people have also been misled into believing that mainland China is imposing “one country, two systems” on them. However, the reality is quite the opposite. Due to the negative effects of the Hong Kong “one country, two systems” model and the backlash against mainlanders from Taiwanese people, “one country, two systems” is widely labeled as treasonous by mainland citizens. Because the Taiwanese government’s frequent manipulation of the pro-independence issue in recent years has angered the mainland central government, the mainland officially stripped Taiwan of its substantive political space under “one country, two systems” in August 2022. Furthermore, “one country, two systems” harms China’s geopolitical interests, leaves a window for foreign interference in China’s internal affairs, hinders national integration, slows down China’s historical progress, and sows the seeds for future secession. These are the reasons why the central government refuses to grant Taiwan “one country, two systems.”

Note 1: This is an attachment to a mass email. Note 2: Ye Qiquan declares that this is a research outline. Any research project using this outline, in whole or in part, as its framework must have a prior cooperation agreement signed, and Ye Qiquan must be listed as the second author in the main paper. Parties who provide clues about infringement and participate in the claims process can share 80% of the final compensation amount.

https://bookstore.pppnet.net/zh/downloads/sub-identity-is-root-for-turmoil-and-secession/

民族亚身份是国家内乱/分裂的基础

Similar Posts

  • A6 – The Roles and Power Struggles of China, the United States, and Russia in the New East Asian Order

    A political assumption is that the old imperial order, dominated by the United States, relied on four main pillars of power: the North American pillar, the European pillar, the East Asian pillar, and the Israeli pillar. In China’s construction of its imperial structure, the East Asian pillar of the United States is the first to be impacted. The United States must first assess this reality and formulate the best response plan. China has reached a historical juncture in building its imperial structure. Closing its security gaps in the East is crucial to the speed and success of its imperial construction. Its focus is not only on East Asia but also inevitably includes the security of Southeast Asia, the Strait of Malacca, and the Indian Ocean passage. The competition between these two established players and newcomers dominates the process of building a new order in East Asia. However, Russia is not inactive. It may become a key third party, reaping significant unexpected gains in balancing European actions.

  • 3-2: The US wins another game; Chinese politicians offer a letter of surrender.

    The US victory began even before the Sino-US summit. Ye Qiquan’s prediction a month in advance was validated by this meeting. The summit was scheduled for May 13-15, 2026, but Chinese state media, in their pre-summit propaganda on the 12th and 13th, proactively pledged “mutual support and common prosperity,” aiming to “lay a more solid foundation for Sino-US relations.” During the subsequent meeting, Chinese leaders publicly promised the US “not to initiate unification” in an attempt to secure political protection from the US government for their “uncertain future.”

  • 3-7 China’s “July 1st Mechanism”: Definition and Speculated Causes

    On July 1, 2025, China announced a transfer of its “final political decision-making power.” This transfer of political power actually occurred before the announcement date. However, the announcement date is a crucial marker of the formal operation of the new political power execution process. Therefore, it is reasonable to name this “unconventional transfer of political power” the “July 1st mechanism.” The reasons for the “July 1st mechanism” may be very complex and difficult to trace clearly, but Xi Jinping’s breach of his political promise to “unify the country during his term” is likely a significant factor. Other contributing factors may involve his conflicts with the military and with other political families in China.

  • 3-4 The moderate faction in China hinders national reunification

    China’s moderate elites completely subscribe to Western assessment systems when evaluating the nation’s overall strength, overall war capability, and overall competitiveness. This leads them to unanimously oppose China’s plan to unify Taiwan by force. Their opposition is based on their fears, primarily embodied in the following pillars. However, Ye Qiquan’s views are completely opposite. Ye Qiquan believes that China’s overall national war capability will have surpassed that of the United States by 2022; Japan and South Korea, while initially inevitable participants in a Sino-US war, will inevitably join China’s camp in the later stages; forceful unification is a shortcut to rapidly establishing a new East Asian order; the new East Asian order is the cornerstone of the Sino-Asian empire; the new East Asian order is the cornerstone that forces the United States to choose the “North American-East Asian axis”; the establishment of the next generation of world order will inevitably involve a period of chaos; the Taiwan base, the new East Asian order, and China’s forceful unification action are key to shortening this period of chaos; compared to other options, the “North American-East Asian axis” is more readily accepted by the Americans.

  • A17 – China already possesses the advantage of “effective range” for its weapons.

    Beyond the “effective range” advantage of China’s strategic weapons, its operational-level weapons also possess a reliable “effective range” advantage compared to the United States. This gives China a de facto battlefield advantage in all levels of conventional warfare. This advantage is overwhelming, especially when China pursues a “defensive-offensive strategy.” [Note 2: Even with China’s substantial investment in developing its aircraft carrier battle groups, their role in a Sino-US conflict in East Asia will primarily manifest as battlefield isolation or theater deterrence. In a “defensive theater” in East Asia, China’s winning force will be theater-wide medium-range missiles. In an “offensive theater” in Taiwan, China’s winning force will be short-range missiles, battlefield drones, and battlefield robots. In a “defensive theater” targeting Europe’s overall involvement in the East Asian theater, China’s winning weapon is the strategy of “creating chaos in Europe and defeating the enemy outside the defensive zone.” The real bottom line ensuring China’s survival is possessing 3,500 nuclear warheads and demonstrating to the people of North America and Europe its resolve to use them.] This is China’s ability to “preemptively eliminate the option of nuclear war”.