On July 1, China’s Law on the Promotion of Ethnic Unity and Progress took effect. Presented as an attempt to promote unity and harmony between the different ethnicities that compose China, the law carries serious implications for ethnic minorities’ cultural preservation.
For Taiwan itself, the risks are different but deserve to be closely evaluated. Indeed, the law is the latest building block to accomplish Xi Jinping’s goal of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese people –– a prosperous Chinese society with theCommunist Party as its backbone.
In order to successfully achieve the great rejuvenation, China has underlined several times the necessity of taking control of Taiwan.
In order to further isolate Taiwan, the law contains a transnational component. Article 63 stipulates that organizations and individuals outside the territory of China that undermine ethnic unity or incite ethnic division are to be pursued for legal responsibility in accordance with the Chinese law.
Hence, the law on ethnic unity is part of Beijing’s lawfare strategy, which uses domestic and international law as a tool that simultaneously creates the legal basis to justify coercive measures against Taiwan and shapes the public perception of cross-strait relations.
Given China’s scale of transnational repression, it is hard to believe that such a law does not aim to muzzle and constrain people labelled as “separatists” by China. These individuals could be foreign lawmakers that engage diplomatically with Taiwan, Taiwanese officials and citizens, and journalists and researchers whose work does not match Beijing’s perspectives.
As China seeks to extend its legal reach internationally, deconstructing its narrative is imperative.
China’s lawfare strategy
Through symbolic laws and reinterpretation of UN resolution 2758, China has constantly attempted to shape in its favor how cross-Strait relations are being legally reported and understood.
In parallel, China has established national laws, such as the 2005 Anti-Secession Law, whose article 8 aims to legitimize China’s use of force against Taiwan should Beijing evaluate that possibilities for a peaceful reunification are completely exhausted.
Based on the Anti-Secession Law, China promulgated, in 2024, guidelines stipulating which specific behaviors constitute a crime with regard to promoting Taiwan independence and secession, with no differentiation between Taiwanese and foreign nationals.
Transnational repression against Taiwan has since then continuously grown, with the number of Taiwanese reported missing, detained for questioning, or subject to restrictions on personal freedom in China reaching 221 in 2025, compared to 55 in 2024.
Through these actions, China seeks to shift Taiwan’s status quo in its favor by coercively establishing its narrative internationally through lawfare and raising the costs for those willing to engage with Taiwan.
While Taiwanese did not wait for this law of ethnic unity to be threatened by China, the law formalizes the risks.
The ethnic unity law sends a precise message: whoever supports Taiwan is a criminal. This simplistic manner of framing Taiwan’s sovereignty seeks to increase pressure on Taiwanese, discourage diplomatic engagement with the island, and support united front activities.
What does law mean for Taiwan?
The law on ethnic unity has three major implications for Taiwan.
The first one is that the law represents a deliberate attempt to silence any voices supporting Taiwan and to constrain any individuals, companies, and organizations engaging with the island.
Lawmakers could feel discouraged and scared to engage diplomatically with Taiwan, further reinforcing Taipei’s international isolation. It could also deter people from engaging critically with China, in turn lowering the international coverage of China’s actions in the Asia-Pacific and ultimately making less visible facts that do not fit within Beijing’s narrative.
Second, extending its legal reach overseas serves China’s hybrid warfare strategy by increasing pressure on Taiwan and its citizens. Taiwan’s government has already warned that Taiwanese could be targeted and detained. The constant threats aim to break Taiwan’s resolve to resist and to intimidate Taiwanese into complying with Beijing.
Lastly, the law could also signal that China is ready to accelerate its united front activities. Instilling a sense of belonging and common identity among Taiwanese is a central element of China’s united front strategy. Article 21, and to some extent the 44 as well, is directed at “Taiwan compatriots” and calls to “enhance the sense that of all belonging to the Chinese people and all being Chinese.”
Put together, these points highlight how Beijing is strengthening a framework that complements the pressures it already exercises on states and governmental organizations. By targeting individuals, be they Taiwanese or foreign nationals, China seeks to legitimize its claim over Taiwan’s sovereignty by erasing opposition voices and forcing people into self-censorship.
While it remains unclear how China seeks to enforce the law abroad, it may not need to do it and instead rely on the deterrent effect.
The less salient Taiwan is internationally, the more
China will be able to reinforce its coercive actions over Taiwan. Without a swift reaction from the international community, the risk is that in the future Taiwan will be isolated on all possible fronts.
The need for an international response
The law on ethnic unity is an attack on Taiwan and democratic free speech around the world.
What we see here is an attempt to muzzle any form of support for Taiwan or critical thinking about China. Beijing alone is setting the limit to what form of criticism represents support for separatism.
Coordinated and long-term measures are necessary.
President Lai Ching-te (賴清德)’s approach has been correct: opposing the Chinese narrative by upholding Taiwan’s uniqueness. In addition, future countermeasures are being envisioned.
Previous measures notably covered stricter control of capital flows from China in order to hinder funding directed to united front groups.
Public awareness campaigns and counter-narrative initiatives are also essential to ensure that the reality of Taiwan prevails.
However, this requires national cohesion. The KMT and TPP blocking a DPP motion condemning the law is a very bad start to this.
Taiwan alone cannot address China’s lawfare strategy and the range of pressuring tools that Beijing has at its disposal.
There is a real need for the international community to stand up and protect the values it promotes.
The US and the EU already condemned the law –– but this is not enough. Taiwan’s voice must be heard internationally and concrete measures to support the island must be taken by the Western powers.
The path being taken here is the large-scale criminalization of everything that constitutes Taiwan: its democracy, its national identity, and its right to self-determination. Without concrete measures, the international community risks watching a democratic nation be erased from history one law at a time.
