Who is Li Yi? Inflammatory Commentator on Cross-Strait Relations

In the summer of 1995, Taiwanese President Lee Teng-hui visited his alma mater, Cornell University, to visit ‘old friends’ and deliver a speech on Taiwan’s democratization. Having ended the Republic of China’s diplomatic recognition in 1979, the Clinton administration was reticent to provide a visa for Lee’s trip. Only after near-unanimous votes in the House and Senate did the White House relent.  

Drawing severe condemnation from Chinese leaders, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) fired a series of missiles off the coast between 1995-96 following Lee’s visit. Seen as a challenge to the PRC’s ‘One-China Principle,’ the show of force from Beijing sent a clear message to leaders in both Taipei and Washington—China was willing to use force if Taiwan moved towards independence. This was eventually known as the Third Taiwan Strait Crisis.   

Over seven thousand miles away from the strait, the crisis inspired the curiosity of a Chinese international exchange student by the name of Li Yi, who was studying for a master’s in sociology at the University of Missouri and was carefully following the changes occurring in cross-strait relations. Li came to realize, and was shocked, that a pro-independence ideology was taking hold in Taiwan. His response to the crisis—a seventy-page report on the Taiwan Issue, that was allegedly read by Lee Teng-hui himself. The U.S.-China Perception Monitor was unable to locate a copy. 

Work in the Chinese government 

In the Fall of 1977, China reinstated the gaokao (高考), and Li Yi was admitted into Northwest University in his hometown of Xi’an. According to Li Yi, not long after matriculating, a fellow classmate wrote a letter to the Shaanxi Provincial Committee’s Secretary stating that Li was the grandson of landlords, which resulted in his removal from the university. The following year, he retested and was once again admitted to the University. He graduated with a degree in Chinese Literature four years later.   

His first job out of university was with the Shaanxi Provincial Party Committee’s United Front Work Department as a cadre. He then went on to work on the Provincial CPPCC Secretariat. It was at this point that he listened to a speech given by Wang Feng (汪峰), the then Deputy Head of the Central Taiwan Work Leading Group. Inspired by Wang’s speech, he pivoted careers and instead started focusing on sociology and the Taiwan Issue. It is unclear what about Wang’s speech was inspiring to Li, and an online record of it was not found.  

In 1994, Li Yi enrolled in the University of Missouri to pursue a master’s in Sociology. It was during this time that Li supposedly wrote his seventy-page report on the Taiwan Issue in reaction to Lee Teng-hui’s 1995 visit. Li remarked in a video that he realized that the situation in Taiwan had changed completely—Li Yi realized that Lee’s ascension to power and his speech during his visit marked a significant shift in Taiwan’s policy.  

He went on to continue researching the Taiwan Issue for a decade and graduated from the University of Illinois Chicago in 2005 with a PhD in sociology. His dissertation was titled “The Structure and Evolution of Chinese Social Stratification.” An online post claims that this dissertation, along with Mao Zedong’s writings, are ranked-first in the English language world for texts about Chinese social stratification—this post was published by Li Yi himself. His dissertation is also available on Amazon, where one can see the only five-star review which is written by himself.  

Return to China 

According to his LinkedIn profile, Li is a full professor at Renmin University and has claimed in his videos to be the Director of Fuzhou University’s Taiwan Research Institute. There are no search results for a Taiwan Research Institute at Fuzhou University

After Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and Tsai Ing-wen’s 2016 general election victory, Li Yi published what would become his most well-known and widely read work—Li Yi Concludes that Peaceful Reunification is No Longer Possible After Taiwan’s Election (李毅台湾观选总结和平统一已无可能). So notable is this work that Li claims every representative at the CPPCC in 2016 had read it.  

Li’s publishing of the paper without the consent or editing of Wang resulted in his firing in 2017 from Renmin University’s Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies where Li was supposedly a research fellow. After his firing, he published a short piece criticizing Wang Wen (王文), the Director of the Chongyang Institute, calling him a sibu wenren (四不文人), a term referring to an academic whose beliefs are not in line with Communist Party doctrine. Wang had also previously been an Editorial writer and Chief Op-Eds Editor at the Global Times.

Weibo and YouTube Fame 

Since 2017, Li has been publishing videos on his YouTube channel, The World According to Li Yi (李毅看世界), and has amassed a following of over 47,000 subscribers. Although he almost always introduces himself as an American-based scholar, he publishes his videos out of China—he was most recently seen horse-riding in Inner Mongolia. The content of his videos mostly deals with Taiwan, hot-button domestic issues, and popular topics in the news. He has discussed the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, where he claims that the West is not allowing Ukraine to negotiate with Russia and is pressuring them to keep fighting.  

Early in 2020 he released a four-video series titled “Production First, Combatting Disease Second” (生产第一，抗疫第二), that encouraged the government to prioritize economic productivity over controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a point in time when cities across China were imposing strict lockdowns and restrictions on movement. In addition, China was dealing with nearly 12,000 COVID cases in critical condition. His comments were met with sharp criticism and furor.  

“4,000 deaths out of 1.4 billion people, that’s simply the same as no one getting the disease.” – Li Yi 

Li’s statement above was made during a speech he gave at Shenzhenwan Forum in 2020. It was widely circulated on Chinese social media and Li once again suffered intense backlash for his blunt remarks on the lives of Chinese citizens.  

In another multi-video series, Li offered his perspective on the news that India would soon become the world’s third-largest economy, and at one point surpass the United States to become the second. In his version of events, the economy of the United States would be sheerly eclipsed by those of China and India.  

A large portion of his online content is devoted to analyzing the Taiwan Issue. Some of his videos try to answer whether the U.S. and Japan would intervene on behalf of Taiwan, while others have focused on comparing American and Chinese military capabilities in the event of a reunification attempt.  

Li Yi’s expulsion from Taiwan 

On April 9, 2019, Li Yi entered Taiwan as a tourist. However, on April 11, Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council and National Immigration Agency revoked his entry permit and forced him to leave Taiwan on the same day. This is because the China Council for the Promotion of Peaceful National Reunification (CCPPNR) advertised that Li would deliver a speech about unification by force on April 13, which was an activity inconsistent with the purpose of the visa and would endanger Taiwan’s security and social stability. Moreover, Taiwan’s Ministry of the Interior said Li would be classified as a persona non grata and that his entry would also be limited in the future. Although Li denied that he would speak at an event organized by CCPPNR, he was forcibly repatriated to Hong Kong on the morning of April 12th. In addition, Li Yi’s expulsion from Taiwan to mainland China also shows that he never naturalized as a U.S. citizen. 

Views and remarks on the Taiwan Issue 

There are three popular approaches to unifying Taiwan in mainland China: “Tianjin approach”, “Beiping approach” and “Suiyuan approach”. These three approaches derive from the different roles played by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in the occupation of the cities and regions of Tianjin, Beiping, and Suiyuan during the Chinese Civil War. These three approaches have sparked heated discussions among Chinese civil society who study the issue of Taiwan’s unification. Li Yi’s remarks on Taiwan are closely linked to these three approaches. 

In the battle to liberate Tianjin in January 1949, the PLA successfully occupied the city by wiping out 130,000 Kuomintang troops in only 29 hours. Proponents of “Tianjin approach” believe that the rapid occupation of Taiwan by force is the only way to achieve reunification. 

After occupying Tianjin, the PLA continued to surround Beiping with a large army, ready to attack the city at any time. The previous battles in Tianjin had convinced the defenders of Beiping that the PLA was capable and determined to defeat them. Under these circumstances, the Kuomintang troops in Beiping eventually accepted the PLA’s persuasion to surrender, and Beiping was peacefully liberated. “Beiping approach” would force Taiwan to accept reunification peacefully through strong military pressure and a credible threat of the use of force from the Chinese mainland. Those who support this approach can be seen as a middle ground between supporting unification by force and supporting peaceful unification. But their position is more inclined toward the use of force.   

After the successful liberation of Tianjin and Beiping, the PLA made concessions to the Kuomintang forces guarding Suiyuan province, reducing the military pressure on them. And then the two sides went through repeated negotiations, eventually reaching a peace agreement. “Suiyuan approach” would make Taiwan accept peaceful reunification voluntarily through continuous communication and negotiation. Proponents of this approach believe that the two sides of the Strait should abandon force and achieve peaceful reunification through compromise and negotiation. 

Regarding the “Suiyuan approach”, Li Yi believes that for reasons such as the gradual change in the national identity of young people in Taiwan and the differences in the systems and development levels between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, it is no longer a possible path to reunification. It is worth noting that, although Li is known by the Chinese mainland public as the earliest scholar who believes that it is necessary to unify Taiwan by force, he does not believe that the “Tianjin approach” is the inevitable choice for unification. He has repeatedly said, “It is better for China’s reunification that no one die, and we should strive for peaceful reunification.”  

Li therefore believes that a peaceful reunification may be possible through the “Beiping approach”. He advocated “forcing unification by force and forcing peace by war,” meaning that mainland China should be prepared to take Taiwan within a few days of war and educate its people to be determined to fight to the death, to deter external forces such as the United States and Japan, and to force Taiwan to accept peaceful unification.  

At the end of May 2023, Li posted on his social media account the statement he made at a public forum. In his speech, he expressed remarks more radical than ever: 

“We hope that not a single person will die, but if 140 million people die in China because of the reunification of Taiwan, this is simply a piece of cake in the history of mankind.” – Li Yi 

According to the percentage of the total population killed and wounded in the American and Vietnam civil wars he presented, he considered this level of sacrifice to be the “norm” and “not much at all”. Li further added that: 

“There should be some people on the mainland who are ready to die, 140 million and 70 million in the war for unification. Or with a little education, young people would agree that the Chinese mainland is willing to sacrifice 140 million or 70 million for the unification of Taiwan.” – Li Yi

In addition, he also declared that in the event of a potential nuclear war between China and the United States, mainland China “will not hesitate to sacrifice 500 cities east of Xi’an”. Videos of the statements circulated on social media in mainland China for at least a week before being censored, sparking great controversy among Chinese netizens, many of whom expressed outrage and criticized his disregard for life. 

 “There are 1.4 billion people in China, half are dead and 700 million remain.” – Li Yi 

After the uproar, Li Yi himself took to social media to clarify. He said the figures were extrapolated from the proportion of casualties in the U.S. and Vietnam civil wars, and that the estimates, including the “sacrifice of 500 cities east of Xi’an,” assumed that a conflict in the Taiwan Strait would lead to an all-out war between the West and China. Li Yi stated that he “hopes that this will not happen” and admitted that such a scenario is unlikely. The reason for Li Yi’s remarks in a public forum may be to serve his passion for the “Beiping approach”. In his clarification video, he also drew on Mao Zedong’s tough remarks in 1957 under the threat of a global nuclear war, saying, “There are 1.4 billion people in China, half are dead and 700 million remain,” to show that China should not be afraid of war and sacrifice for the sake of unification. Li believes that his remarks, like those of Chairman Mao back then, can serve to deter the enemy and maintain peace or, at least, promote peaceful reunification. 

Whatever the purpose of Li Yi’s remarks, this disdain for life reflects great recklessness and irresponsibility. Times are changing, civilization is progressing, and the painful lessons learned in the long history of mankind will no longer allow innocent lives to pass away as easily as they did hundreds or even decades ago. Studying an area as sensitive as the Taiwan Issue, one would expect any scholar to tread carefully, rather than making sensational statements and trivializing the lives of hundreds of millions of people. Even if he wants to promote the so-called “Beiping approach”, Li should work toward proposing a logical and possible solution through rigorous argumentation. 

Censorship and the government’s response 

There has been no official statement from the Chinese government or news outlet regarding Li’s censoring. However, we believe there are several possible reasons as to why the central government waited a whole week to censor Li Yi’s inflammatory comments regarding a war over Taiwan. One theory is that the government may be using Li to assess the public’s response to the idea of using military force against Taiwan, and what opinions they may have regarding the costs they are willing to incur for reunification. Successive Chinese leaders, and particularly Xi Jinping, have consistently espoused rhetoric claiming that nothing is off the table when it comes to the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. At no point, however, has any government official outright supported a military solution or directly addressed the associated human cost. Thus, Li Yi could be a convenient way for the government to understand how the public might react to such information, or to such a solution to the Taiwan Issue.  

In other words, the government may see Li Yi as a useful conduit for channeling frustration and perhaps anger that many Chinese may feel after decades of hoping for Taiwan to reunite with mainland China. Amidst the shock caused by his recent comments, it is easy to forget that a brief scan of his online videos and publications can reveal that he has a significant following.  

Finally, the government’s relative lenience regarding Li Yi may be due to a recognition that the “Beiping approach” of reunification could be reasonable. The hope for peaceful reunification is getting slimmer and slimmer, and the real use of force for reunification as central government’s bottom card would require a huge risk to implement. So, mainland China may be willing to try an intermediate strategy that may lead to a change in the situation in the Taiwan Strait, if not ultimate reunification.