Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
(Thread IKs: fart simpson)
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Rutibex
Sep 9, 2001

by Fluffdaddy

Maximo Roboto posted:

Bombing and conquering Taiwan in a destructive manner seems like a bad idea for anything more than simple territorial control. Yeah yeah the entire country's economy is the size of Shanghai's, well China wouldn't want to lose Shanghai either. Why would the PRC want to kill the golden goose, smash a crown jewel, etc.? It's not as if TSMC is the only thing that Taiwan has to offer.

its not about the territory, its about shaking the last western colonial fleas off their back. it would do great things for internal propaganda if they could take taiwan and the west backs down

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Chamale
Jul 11, 2010

I'm helping!



In France, it is illegal to conduct surveys about the well-being of ethnic minorities, because France is a perfect post-racial society. Muslim and Roma people in France are probably among the poorest groups in Europe, but it's against the law to try to measure how bad it is.

Ardennes
May 12, 2002

Rutibex posted:

its not about the territory, its about shaking the last western colonial fleas off their back. it would do great things for internal propaganda if they could take taiwan and the west backs down

The question of what "taking Taiwan" means and the problem is the assumption it has to be by force rather than simply through economic gravity. Also, the PRC has said before, they are actually not interested in directly administering Taiwan.

stephenthinkpad
Jan 2, 2020
I think 1 country 2 system is no longer on the table after 2019. If it happens it will most likely a 1 country 1 system, no matter what it is called officially. That's my prediction anyway.

Antonymous
Apr 4, 2009

Rutibex posted:

its not about the territory, its about shaking the last western colonial fleas off their back. it would do great things for internal propaganda if they could take taiwan and the west backs down

I still don't really get why so many people in cspam think taiwan is a colony, yes I know the US is the only country that can flaunt China and sell Taiwan weapons, but korea japan have actual US military bases and strategic coordination in some sense. Taiwan is just a ROC holdout. Was cuba a soviet colony? - cause they had way more connection to the soviet union/more under its thumb than Taiwan does to USA currently

Some Guy TT
Aug 30, 2011

pdog posted:

i’m dumb and just throwing this out there and know it’s incredibly arbitrary but are there any parallels we can draw between the official french position since the revolution that all french people are french and there are no sub national/ethnic divisions and the whole chinese everyone is han kind of idea?

i know massive generalisations and simplifications but just a thought

this is actually a really good analogy because not everyone who we describe in france today would have been understood as french several hundred years ago there were several regions with their own distinct language and culture that were still much more like france than they were other neighboring countries but today no one outside of historians even knows that any of these subgroups ever even existed because greater france did a really effective job genociding them

such a fate is unlikely to befall the ughyurs or any other ethnic minority in china because cultural diversity is baked both into their legal system and their official state propaganda like for a sense of perspective france wiped out minority languages by publicly shaming anyone who dared to speak them in public which is a few steps removed from inconsistently enforcing mandarin only rules in public schools

OhFunny
Jun 26, 2013

EXTREMELY PISSED AT THE DNC

Rutibex posted:

what does "all french people" mean? everyone who speaks french? does that include the colonies?

OP is referring to the fact that at the time of the French Revolution French was the language of only half of the people living in France and due to the ancien régime's feudalism there was no united nation-state. The new revolutionary government and later governments centralized the country and suppressed the other Langues d'oïl along with the cultures of minority groups like the Bretons and Occitans to create a single French identity.





One can make a parallel with China and the promotion of Mandarin over other languages like Cantonese. Although China does recognize some regional languages. Uyghur being one.

Maximo Roboto
Feb 4, 2012

Rutibex posted:

its not about the territory, its about shaking the last western colonial fleas off their back. it would do great things for internal propaganda if they could take taiwan and the west backs down

Yes but presumably they'd take it in a way that doesn't level the place and destroy its wealth

Ardennes
May 12, 2002

Antonymous posted:

I still don't really get why so many people in cspam think taiwan is a colony, yes I know the US is the only country that can flaunt China and sell Taiwan weapons, but korea japan have actual US military bases and strategic coordination in some sense. Taiwan is just a ROC holdout. Was cuba a soviet colony? - cause they had way more connection to the soviet union/more under its thumb than Taiwan does to USA currently

Yeah, I agree calling Taiwan simply a “colony” is reductive. Taiwan very clearly has its own internal politics and the issue of independence is localized. Obviously they are reliant on the US for security and arms, but at the same time, I don’t think Washington is calling the shots even if I am sure there is plenty of influence.

Also more than simply destroy Taiwan’s wealth, I don’t know why China would want to get bogged down in essentially an occupation that isn’t necessary compared to simply hashing out a deal because both they and Taipei know even how a blockade would go down.

Ardennes has issued a correction as of 06:58 on Mar 24, 2021

Maximo Roboto
Feb 4, 2012

Taiwan and China are competing in international imperialist diplomacy games ffs

https://twitter.com/redgeo/status/1368876785077809152

though who's playing whom

https://twitter.com/MelanesianM/status/1304331537853411330

also these are some plumb battlefields

https://twitter.com/GabrioCohen/status/1291154112831279105

https://twitter.com/RAbdiAnalyst/status/1290872502374236161

Zedhe Khoja
Nov 10, 2017

sürgünden selamlar
yıkıcılar ulusuna
I mean, even for the comparably low cost of doing it, it doesn't seem worth the effort to be recognized by Somaliland.

Maximo Roboto
Feb 4, 2012

Taiwan building a naval base in Somaliland to counter China's presence in the Horn of Africa would be pretty funny

BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy
i say we have a dance off to settle it. no war! only four on the floor. the loser has to give up their seat on the U.N. security council

https://files.catbox.moe/v7qw6c.mp4

BrutalistMcDonalds has issued a correction as of 11:21 on Mar 24, 2021

stephenthinkpad
Jan 2, 2020

Ardennes posted:

Yeah, I agree calling Taiwan simply a “colony” is reductive. Taiwan very clearly has its own internal politics and the issue of independence is localized. Obviously they are reliant on the US for security and arms, but at the same time, I don’t think Washington is calling the shots even if I am sure there is plenty of influence.

agreed. Both SK and Japan are much more of a half colony of the US than Taiwan. US doesn't even sell Taiwan good weapons. They intentionally sell Taiwan overpriced poo poo weapons because Pentagon think the blue camp inside the Taiwan army will leak the weapons to mainland.


quote:


Also more than simply destroy Taiwan’s wealth, I don’t know why China would want to get bogged down in essentially an occupation that isn’t necessary compared to simply hashing out a deal because both they and Taipei know even how a blockade would go down.

This part I don't agree. Mainland wanted a loose confederate talk. It doesn't matter this talk will go on forever and likely not getting to a stage both sides can agree on a deal. It's important this talk happens and both side have a consensus on active talk (and frankly, this is the core spirit of 92 consensus) . However the DPP in Taiwan refuse to engage in a talk. And since DPP is getting control of the judicial system and most of the media, DPP is positioning themselves to become the dominant party for the next few election cycles. This is what China can not tolerate: DPP being a forever party/changing the ROC status quote/taking a side in the Sino-US fight.

It really comes down to at some point in the future, DPP (green camp) taking too much of the US side in the Sino-US great power competition, and it will cross the redline for mainland. A lot of people in Taiwan already sensed that, but most of the Taiwanese still don't understand it.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy
https://twitter.com/sarhanabdelbsir/status/1374367592727580674








BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy
a late move by pompeo last year removed the east turkestan islamic movement (ETIM) a.k.a turkestan islamic party from the U.S. list of designated terror groups. it's the regional al qaeda branch.

RocknRollaAyatollah
Nov 26, 2008

Lipstick Apathy

Maximo Roboto posted:

Taiwan and China are competing in international imperialist diplomacy games ffs

Yes, paying small nations to say you're a real country is imperialism.

It must own to be the leader of one of these nations and having both the PRC and ROC bending over backwards to get you to say they're the real China but throwing money and other stuff at you. Getting massive parades in Taipei when you visit as the leader of Tuvalu or Saint Kitts and Nevis.

dead gay comedy forums
Oct 21, 2011


OhFunny posted:

OP is referring to the fact that at the time of the French Revolution French was the language of only half of the people living in France and due to the ancien régime's feudalism there was no united nation-state. The new revolutionary government and later governments centralized the country and suppressed the other Langues d'oïl along with the cultures of minority groups like the Bretons and Occitans to create a single French identity.

Peasants into Frenchmen is an incredibly good book about all of this and more, showing the guts of the process of making a country in the way we nowadays use that word

Maximo Roboto
Feb 4, 2012

stephenthinkpad posted:

And since DPP is getting control of the judicial system and most of the media, DPP is positioning themselves to become the dominant party for the next few election cycles. This is what China can not tolerate: DPP being a forever party/changing the ROC status quote/taking a side in the Sino-US fight.

It really comes down to at some point in the future, DPP (green camp) taking too much of the US side in the Sino-US great power competition, and it will cross the redline for mainland. A lot of people in Taiwan already sensed that, but most of the Taiwanese still don't understand it.

The KMT looked like a forever party back when it was a one-party state and had all its dirty money, surely they can find their way back to power once the DPP fucks up like Chen did again. Taiwan isn’t Japan with its LDP, it’s more like the U.S. as far as multiparty democracy goes. So lol this is like pundits in 2012 declaring that there will never be a Republican president again or Democrats in 2019 fretting about a permanent GOP dictatorship.

Not to mention, both sides will change over time too. Maybe Taiwan is hoping that China’s position will soften over time, and who knows? In thirty, twenty, or even ten years we don’t know what the party leadership’s priorities will be, nor do know what the general mainland public will feel towards war. They will likely still want Taiwan back and the U.S. out, but it’s sort of silly to assume that attitudes won’t shift as generations do.

mila kunis
Jun 10, 2011

RocknRollaAyatollah posted:

Yes, paying small nations to say you're a real country is imperialism.

It must own to be the leader of one of these nations and having both the PRC and ROC bending over backwards to get you to say they're the real China but throwing money and other stuff at you. Getting massive parades in Taipei when you visit as the leader of Tuvalu or Saint Kitts and Nevis.

thats imperialism. also imperialism is when you build infrastructure and give out loans without IMF style requirements for austerity or privatization that are frequently deferred or forgiven

Grapplejack
Nov 27, 2007

I don't see how that would change unless you purge the nationalists, one China is a big deal for them and taiwan is their crown

Maximo Roboto
Feb 4, 2012

Grapplejack posted:

I don't see how that would change unless you purge the nationalists, one China is a big deal for them and taiwan is their crown

I’m not saying it would reverse but it just seems folly to assume present attitudes or trends will hold forever. It could get a lot more fervent as Sino-American relations get really bad and nationalism ramps up. Or maybe tensions will cool down and the PRC will stress the inevitable reunification through economic embrace. Or positions based on events and issues none of us could foresee.

RocknRollaAyatollah posted:

Yes, paying small nations to say you're a real country is imperialism.

It’s a very soft form of imperialism but it probably still qualifies under the dictionary definition, it’s more powerful nations leveraging power and wealth and playing Great Games to extract something from less powerful nations.

quote:

It must own to be the leader of one of these nations and having both the PRC and ROC bending over backwards to get you to say they're the real China but throwing money and other stuff at you. Getting massive parades in Taipei when you visit as the leader of Tuvalu or Saint Kitts and Nevis.

Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic recognizer in Africa is Eswatini (Swaziland), and the relationship is kinda darling.

https://twitter.com/MkhoDlamini/status/1169283530943270913

https://twitter.com/MOFA_Taiwan/status/1056763822902394880

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/08/africa/china-taiwan-swaziland-intl/index.html

quote:

Ages 3 to 19, the children come to the center as orphans or from poor families; they will leave with an education that includes Kung Fu, Buddhism, and Chinese.

Founded by a Taiwanese Buddhist monk in 2011, the Amitofo center is one of numerous diplomatic and cultural ties that connect Taiwan and the Kingdom of Swaziland, a tiny country wedged between Mozambique and South Africa.

Maximo Roboto has issued a correction as of 17:24 on Mar 24, 2021

Dreddout
Oct 1, 2015

You must stay drunk on writing so reality cannot destroy you.

Antonymous posted:

I still don't really get why so many people in cspam think taiwan is a colony, yes I know the US is the only country that can flaunt China and sell Taiwan weapons, but korea japan have actual US military bases and strategic coordination in some sense. Taiwan is just a ROC holdout. Was cuba a soviet colony? - cause they had way more connection to the soviet union/more under its thumb than Taiwan does to USA currently

Cuba has lasted 3 decades without the USSR, I'd be surprised if Taiwan lasted 3 years without the US for the following reasons.

1. Assume the US collapses. Without the presence of the US Navy, the PRC would be able to sanction Taiwan similar to how america sanctioned Cuba

2. Unlike Cuba, which is a large island with a relatively small population. Taiwan has a massive population relative to the size of it's arable land.

3. Moreover, Taiwan being a market economy, is far more reliant on international trade than Cuba ever could be

4. Taiwan can't count on the Europeans/east asians pushing back on the embargo due to China's importance to their economies/the relative disparity of military projection capability

5. Without the US military ensuring taiwan's independence, China could use the PLN to place the Taiwanese population under starvation rations.

I doubt it would actually come to this, the threat is enough to have Taiwan acquiesce to some form of settlement with the PRC.

Dreddout
Oct 1, 2015

You must stay drunk on writing so reality cannot destroy you.
Also I wouldn't call taiwan an american colony in the strict sense. For one thing the island is literally a Chinese colony.

Taiwan is a US client state that would fold relatively quickly without it's overlord. Israel by contrast could probably be able to survive without us support for quite a while

Dreddout
Oct 1, 2015

You must stay drunk on writing so reality cannot destroy you.

RocknRollaAyatollah posted:

Yes, paying small nations to say you're a real country is imperialism.

It must own to be the leader of one of these nations and having both the PRC and ROC bending over backwards to get you to say they're the real China but throwing money and other stuff at you. Getting massive parades in Taipei when you visit as the leader of Tuvalu or Saint Kitts and Nevis.

I'm pretty sure you can get the same treatment as an westerner if you're a member of one of the north korean friendship groups fyi

Lord of Pie
Mar 2, 2007



Sorry Dubya, you've been dethroned as America's most dancing like a white person president

Flavius Aetass
Mar 30, 2011
Xinjiang mod feedback thread: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3963156

stephenthinkpad
Jan 2, 2020

Maximo Roboto posted:

The KMT looked like a forever party back when it was a one-party state and had all its dirty money, surely they can find their way back to power once the DPP fucks up like Chen did again. Taiwan isn’t Japan with its LDP, it’s more like the U.S. as far as multiparty democracy goes. So lol this is like pundits in 2012 declaring that there will never be a Republican president again or Democrats in 2019 fretting about a permanent GOP dictatorship.

Not to mention, both sides will change over time too. Maybe Taiwan is hoping that China’s position will soften over time, and who knows? In thirty, twenty, or even ten years we don’t know what the party leadership’s priorities will be, nor do know what the general mainland public will feel towards war. They will likely still want Taiwan back and the U.S. out, but it’s sort of silly to assume that attitudes won’t shift as generations do.

My comment on the KMT.

IMO the KMT after the bad presidential defeat of last year, should have disbanded and regroup/rebrand as new pro-status quote party with a new name. KMT as it stand has too much baggage, too much "228" "authoritarian past" bad blood for the Taiwanese. You see the DPP now has controlled the media and the narrative, they are basically blaming everything bad on the KMT past doing, even though the Island had the fastest growth during the era of Jiang the younger.

As for why wouldn't the KMT climb back to rule? It's possible, but very very hard. Because the Island's politic is influenced by outside force way too much. If Taiwan's politic is left in a vacuum, it would have voted DPP out of the office already, because Tsai's economic performance during 16-20 was terrible. But time and again the presidential election was turn in a proxy cross-strait stand referendum. In this battlefield the KTM will never win again with so much past baggage. Not to mention KTM's current presidential lineup is terrible.

So your next question is why doesn't Beijing leave Taiwan's internal affair alone, so to speak, go back to the softer cross-strait stand of 10 years ago, so the KMT has more political flexibility to fight the DPP? My theory is Beijing is on a long term plan to force DPP's hands, has been for a few years since Beijing took a hard line approach to DPP's cross-strait policy. I think Beijing secretly doesn't want KMT to go back to rule. My theory is Xi has been slowly bring up the temperature of the water, slowly being more strict to DPP, slowly pushing DPP toward the independent redline, so Xi will have the mandate from the Chinese people to resume the suspended civil war.

Red and Black
Sep 5, 2011

https://twitter.com/lunaoi_vn/status/1374772315825704969?s=21

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

https://twitter.com/DrLiv69/status/1374776214838202373

Checkmate commies *magdumps AR-15 into the air*

Antonymous
Apr 4, 2009

Dreddout posted:

Cuba has lasted 3 decades without the USSR, I'd be surprised if Taiwan lasted 3 years without the US for the following reasons.

1. Assume the US collapses. Without the presence of the US Navy, the PRC would be able to sanction Taiwan similar to how america sanctioned Cuba

2. Unlike Cuba, which is a large island with a relatively small population. Taiwan has a massive population relative to the size of it's arable land.

3. Moreover, Taiwan being a market economy, is far more reliant on international trade than Cuba ever could be

4. Taiwan can't count on the Europeans/east asians pushing back on the embargo due to China's importance to their economies/the relative disparity of military projection capability

5. Without the US military ensuring taiwan's independence, China could use the PLN to place the Taiwanese population under starvation rations.

I doubt it would actually come to this, the threat is enough to have Taiwan acquiesce to some form of settlement with the PRC.

Colony is still the wrong word, even if you completely change the situation I was talking about and make points that are irrelevant. Maybe if you really think Taiwan’s international policy is coordinated with the US in secret you could call it a suzerainty. I think decolonialization implies greater autonomy for the people living there, but the PRC reclaiming Taiwan is the exact opposite

Hubbert
Mar 25, 2007

At a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
I personally like Kishore Mahbubani's summary of the Chinese-Taiwanese situation:

Has China Won?: The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy (note: published March 2020) posted:

The one exceptional trigger for a war involving China is Taiwan. Most of the time, the Chinese leaders have a lot of policy flexibility. There are no strong domestic lobbies to worry about. But the one issue where the Chinese leaders cannot bend and compromise is Taiwan. Any Chinese leader, including Xi Jinping (despite all his power), could be removed if he is perceived to be weak on Taiwan. Why is Taiwan so fundamental to China? There is a very simple explanation. Every Chinese knows the century of humiliation that China suffered from the Opium War to 1949. Nearly all the historical vestiges of this century of humiliation have been removed or resolved, including Hong Kong and Macau.

Only one remains: Taiwan. It was Chinese territory until China was forced to hand it to Japan after the humiliating defeat in the Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895. The Chinese have been disappointed by the Western powers several times on Taiwan. At the end of World War I, when China thought it had worked with the Western powers, it initially received assurance from America and the British that Taiwan would be returned to China at the Versailles Peace Conference. As Rana Mitter reports: “Under the treaty [of Versailles], Germany had to give up its territories on Chinese soil, along with all its other colonies around the world. The Chinese assumed that the territories would be restored to the young republic, as a reward for the efforts of the nearly 100,000 Chinese workers who had been sent to the Western Front in Europe to assist the British and French. But the territories were awarded instead to Japan. The Western Allies turned out to have made simultaneous secret agreements with both China and Japan in order to bring them both in on the Allied side.”* China felt enormously deceived by the West at this conference. The failure to return Shandong triggered the massive protests that broke out on May 4, 1919. The May Fourth Movement holds a special place in Chinese memories.

This history has taught the Chinese not to accept Western assurances. Any move by America or any other Western power to support, directly or indirectly, the secession of Taiwan from China brings back this historical memory. It provokes a strong, powerful, and virulent national reaction, which boxes in any Chinese leader who may be trying to look for room to maneuver. America cannot claim that it doesn’t understand the significance of Taiwan. It was clearly the hottest issue to resolve when Nixon and Kissinger began the process of reconciliation with China. Many clear understandings were reached between America and China. The most explicit understanding reached was that Taiwan and China belonged to one country. The 1972 joint communique stated: “The U.S. side declared: The United States acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States Government does not challenge that position. It reaffirms its interest in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves.”* Since both Taipei and Beijing agree that Taiwan and China belong to the same country, it is also erroneous for any American to claim that Beijing’s claims on Taiwan are proof that China is an expansionist, aggressive nation. The Chinese desire to reunite Taiwan with the mainland represents a restitution, not an expansion.

The most fundamental question that America has to ask itself is a simple one: Does it consider itself legally bound by the clear agreements that it has reached with China on Taiwan? Most Americans believe that America is an inherently law-abiding country that both respects and abides by explicit treaties and agreements it has signed. In practice, America has walked away from treaties and agreements it has signed. There is only one reason why this happens. As the strongest country on planet earth, America can walk away from any legal agreement or treaty and not face any consequences. No force can make America abide by its legal obligations.

In the past, until as recently as 2001 (before 9/11 happened), America’s primary impulse and instinct was to respect international agreements. Thomas Franck documented this in The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations, by describing how the US Navy refrained from boarding a vessel in 1988 even though it was found to be carrying illicit nuclear materials:

quote:

Early in 1988, the U.S. Defense Department became aware of a ship approaching the Gulf with a load of Chinese-made Silkworm missiles en route to Iran. The Navy believed the delivery of these potent weapons would increase materially the danger to both protected and protecting U.S. ships and the Defense Department therefore, quite cogently, argued for permission to interdict the delivery. The State Department, however, countered that such a seizure on the high seas, under the universally recognized rules of war and neutrality, would constitute aggressive blockade tantamount to an act of war against Iran. The U.S., if it enforced a naval blockade, would lose its purchase on brokering peace as a neutral. In the event, the delivery ship with its cargo of missiles was allowed to pass. Deference to systemic rules had won out over tactical advantage in the internal struggle for control of U.S. policy

Post-9/11, most of these self-restraints have disappeared.

The Trump administration is clearly the most extreme American administration in ignoring all legal obligations that follow from international treaties and agreements. John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, has said explicitly: “It is a big mistake for us to grant any validity to international law even when it may seem in our short-term interest to do so—because, over the long term, the goal of those who think international law really means anything are those who want to constrict the United States.” Before his resignation, Bolton led the charge within the Trump administration to ignore or violate previous agreements that America had reached with China and Taiwan. In an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal in January 2017, Bolton argued that “it is high time to revisit the ‘one-China policy’ and decide what America thinks it means, 45 years after the Shanghai Communiqué.”* In response, Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in security studies at the Cato Institute, wrote in The National Interest in June 2019:

quote:

Before [Bolton’s] current stint in government service, he pushed for highly dangerous and provocative policies. He urged the United States to establish formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan and even advocated moving U.S. military forces from Okinawa to Taiwan. Either measure would cross a bright red line as far as Beijing is concerned and would likely trigger PRC military action to prevent Taiwan’s permanent political separation from the mainland. Having someone with those views holding a crucial policy post and sitting just a few doors down from the Oval Office greatly increases the likelihood of a further boost in U.S. support for Taiwan, despite the risk of war with China.*

Bolton is no fool. He knew that many of his words and actions on Taiwan riled China. There is a real danger that Bolton or someone like him may initiate or trigger a series of actions that could force China to take military action across the Taiwan Strait. I deliberately used the words force China to take military action because a Chinese leader who is seen to be weak on Taiwan becomes politically vulnerable. To protect his political position, he may be left with no choice but to act. George Kennan provided his fellow Americans some wise advice on the need to avoid provocations when he made the case for containment of the Soviet Union: “such a policy has nothing to do with outward histrionics: with threats or blustering or superfluous gestures of outward ‘toughness.’ While the Kremlin is basically flexible in its reaction to political realities, it is by no means unamenable to considerations of prestige. Like almost any other government, it can be placed by tactless and threatening gestures in a position where it cannot afford to yield even though this might be dictated by its sense of realism.”* Bolton seems to disagree: he has engaged in tactless and threatening gestures toward China.

Many Americans naturally believe that America is behaving responsibly on Taiwan because it is the main guarantor against an outright military invasion of Taiwan. This is true. Yet it is also true that it is the people of Taiwan who will suffer if American actions provoke military responses from China. If America’s goals on Taiwan are truly noble, if it wants to protect the Taiwanese people, and if, in the long run, America wants to see the gradual emergence of a democratic China, it should allow the continuation of the only democratically run Chinese society in the world, which is Taiwan. (Note: Singapore does not qualify for this description since it is a multiethnic society, not a Chinese society.) The best way to preserve the democratic system in Taiwan is for America to leave Taiwan alone. It should also forcefully indicate that it will not support Taiwanese independence. This is the tough love message that President George W. Bush sent to the then Taiwanese leader, Chen Shui-bian, who was flirting with independence. And this tough love message worked.

Might China invade Taiwan unilaterally and without provocation? There are two major constraints on China. The first is the Taiwan Relations Act, passed by the US Congress on January 1, 1979. It explicitly says that it is the policy of the United States “to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan,” and “the United States will make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services in such quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.”* The second is that it is actually in China’s national interest to allow the continuation of a social and political laboratory to indicate how a Chinese society functions under a different political system. There is a convergence of Chinese and American interests here. China could learn long-term lessons from Taiwan on how Chinese people cope with democracy. It is also in America’s long-term interests to have a well-functioning democratic society in Taiwan.

In short, if political wisdom, rather than short-term tactical games, dominates Chinese and American decision making on Taiwan, both sides could agree on Taiwan retaining its autonomy. Strong American discouragement of Taiwanese independence movements will help to reduce tension across the Taiwan Straits. Reduced tension across the Taiwan Straits will also help to reduce the pressure on the Chinese leaders to accelerate the reunification of Taiwan with China.

Sometimes, simple metaphors can help to draw out contrasting strategies. Imagine Taiwan as an unsinkable aircraft carrier stationed within striking distance of China; then imagine it as a healthy virus that could stimulate the body politic of Chinese society.

If Taiwan is viewed as an unsinkable aircraft carrier, America should try to keep Taiwan as separate from the mainland as possible. Hence, the goal would be to accentuate the differences. Although America cannot explicitly support the voices calling for Taiwan independence (as this would be a clear violation of the agreements signed between America and China on Taiwan), it could send indirect signals indicating its sympathy for the Taiwanese voices advocating independence. It could also work more sympathetically with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP). Hence, when the DPP president of Taiwan requests a stopover in America en route to Latin America, America would allow it, even though these visits infuriate Beijing. America could also supply Taiwan with more advanced military weapons, even though this would violate a clear provision of its Joint Communiqué with China of August 17, 1982, which explicitly stated:

quote:

The United States Government states that it does not seek to carry out a long-term policy of arms sales to Taiwan, that its arms sales to Taiwan will not exceed, either in qualitative or in quantitative terms, the level of those supplied in recent years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and China, and that it intends gradually to reduce its sale of arms to Taiwan, leading, over a period of time, to a final resolution.*

But if, instead, Taiwan is understood as a healthy virus, America should encourage greater contact between Taiwan and the mainland in the hope that exposure to the open and free-wheeling democracy would lead to the gradual transformation of China toward a fully fledged democracy. It would thus be in America’s interests to see more links between Taiwan and China. To facilitate this, America should work more closely with the Kuomintang (KMT), rather than the DPP, as the KMT is opposed to Taiwanese independence.

In theory, China should be opposed to a policy of developing closer links with a free and democratic Taiwan as it could lead to calls for a similar political system in mainland China. It is therefore truly remarkable that all the recent governments in China have gone out of their way to both increase and facilitate greater contact between the mainland and Taiwan. As recently as 2008, there were 188,744 Taiwanese tourists visiting China and 329,204 Chinese tourists visiting Taiwan. When relations between China and Taiwan improved from 2008 to 2016, while the KMT president Ma Ying-jeou was in power, the numbers increased significantly to 3.6 million Taiwanese tourists in 2016 and a peak of 4.18 million Chinese tourists in 2015.*

That said, let's see what happens over the next few months. We'll definitely be seeing a lot more of Taiwan in the news this year, especially with the ongoing semiconductor shortage.

Hubbert has issued a correction as of 21:10 on Mar 24, 2021

Maximo Roboto
Feb 4, 2012

stephenthinkpad posted:

My comment on the KMT.

IMO the KMT after the bad presidential defeat of last year, should have disbanded and regroup/rebrand as new pro-status quote party with a new name. KMT as it stand has too much baggage, too much "228" "authoritarian past" bad blood for the Taiwanese. You see the DPP now has controlled the media and the narrative, they are basically blaming everything bad on the KMT past doing, even though the Island had the fastest growth during the era of Jiang the younger.

There's still time for them to do that, it seems like there's a schism between new and old blood in the KMT right now. Plus there's a bunch of other pan-Blue parties, there could be more or another could get better at it and replace the KMT.

quote:

In this battlefield the KTM will never win again with so much past baggage. Not to mention KTM's current presidential lineup is terrible.

Yeah but what you're talking about applies for the next maybe five years max, politics rapidly changes, different people will come to power, different issues will rise to the forefront.

stephenthinkpad posted:

My theory is Xi has been slowly bring up the temperature of the water, slowly being more strict to DPP, slowly pushing DPP toward the independent redline, so Xi will have the mandate from the Chinese people to resume the suspended civil war.

I think this is very possible, Xi is pursuing the path of brinksmanship to dare his foes to step over the line so he can sweep them up with moral justification.

That said, it's kind of funny because at this point I have to wonder if Taiwan declaring independence would mean anything. Forget materially- it wouldn't be even worth a drat diplomatically. The majority of nations will refuse to recognize an independent Taiwan for fear of upsetting China, and China as a P5 member will just block any attempt at U.N. recognition. Just ask Kosovo what international recognition is worth when that happens:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_recognition_of_Kosovo

Not that the PRC wouldn't use it as pretext for war, though. It's just funny how meaningless it is now, even symbolically.

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy
Found this posted on my feed today, decided to do a little digging















It's not nearly as easy to find information on groups like "Keep Taiwan Free" and "Thai New Yorkers for Democracy" because they're small enough that they don't have a website with an About page, and even the NY4HK group has to be linked back to HKDC before you get to the good stuff.

It's almost like there's an outer layer of small-time orgs who are one degree removed from the direct State Department/CIA ghouls that you have to get past to really get to the meat of the regime change NGO ecosystem.

stephenthinkpad
Jan 2, 2020
I read Thant Myint-U's last book. He said after the 2007 protest and crack down, which had more protesters killed than the currently one, some Myanmar students organized their own guerrilla army in the Thai-Myamnar border. Some of dissidents would eventually get full scholarships and go to study in US universities.

I imagine alot of them would go on to create their own NGO surrounding the State Dept funding. Which, I don't have problem with personally. I have said it before, color revolution has never worked in countries outside of the Western civilization sphere.

Atrocious Joe
Sep 2, 2011

gradenko_2000 posted:

Found this posted on my feed today, decided to do a little digging




lol they're trying to counter program the anti-imperialism event that day
https://twitter.com/answercoalition/status/1374758728843591684?s=20

Maximo Roboto
Feb 4, 2012

Speaking of NED fronts I still haven't heard any conclusion if New Bloom really is a dastardly propaganda outlet or just happens to be edited by someone who used to work for an NED-affiliated group. But, anyway:

https://twitter.com/newbloommag/status/1370721310502883328

quote:

Either way, one notes that the US has long sought to try and persuade Taiwan to increase military spending and to reform its military, viewing Taiwan as lax in defense efforts and suggesting that it does not view Taiwan as doing enough militarily to justify American efforts in defense of Taiwan.

quote:

China needs to build adequate lift capacity to transport enough troops to invade Taiwan, something it currently lacks at present. A Chinese invasion would also have to be prepared to maintain a long-term occupation that could face armed resistance—even if Taiwan is often criticized for lacking training in the course of its military draft, it is at least true that China has to cope with the hypothetical of armed resistance from individuals that have gone through the draft. This would be a challenge for China, which has not fought a war for more than forty years.

quote:

The Chinese government could potentially lose tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of troops, on an invasion of Taiwan. The Chinese government would have to shrug off the blow to its political legitimacy from the substantial death toll of an invasion. If American backlash to the comparatively limited Iraq War or War in Afghanistan is any indication, the death toll from a Chinese invasion of Taiwan could prove a significant political stumbling block for the CCP.

Personally I think the whole "Taiwan will have significant resistance to occupation" idea is wishful thinking from anti-invasion perspectives. How long has it been since the ROC has fought a war? lol at imagining the well-fed docile Taiwanese public and declining military as anything resembling the disgruntled unemployed Baathist army or mujahideen insurgents.

That said, it is true that it seems kinda silly to assume that the Chinese public would be okay with their troops getting killed (even if it's not many) in an unprovoked war. And, even if there's nationalist fervor to reclaim the island, do they actually also have the stomach to make war on Taiwanese people, who to them are just a different provincial culture of Chinese people?

quote:

To this extent, one notes the economic impact of an invasion of Taiwan. China’s economy was already slowing before the COVID-19 pandemic and, given the interrelation of the Taiwanese and Chinese economies, the economic effects of a Chinese invasion could be large. The Taiwanese economy is large enough that an economic crisis would cause global shockwaves on par with or larger than the Greek economic crisis that started in late 2009, much less a crisis of both the Taiwanese and Chinese economies. Economic unrest would be a further challenge to its legitimacy that the Chinese government would have to deal with.

That one I agree with on principle. No one knows what it would look like for two economically advanced states to go to war in the modern era, and what it would mean to the economy. I really don't think China would fight an unprovoked war unless it had economically nothing to lose.

quote:

But China’s current dependence on Taiwanese supply chains proves another obstacle to an invasion, provided Taiwan can maintain this advantage.

More or less true, but the PRC's been working on autarky when it comes to Taiwan. Gonna take more time, though.

quote:

As such, alarmism regarding an imminent Chinese invasion of Taiwan is broadly unfounded. That being said, if the conditions are sufficient that China views an invasion as feasible, an invasion is still possible—though there would be warning signs ahead of time that China is preparing for an invasion, as detected by satellite imagery. Namely, it is not politically rational for China to invade Taiwan at present. But, in particular, the centralization of power in the hands of Chinese president Xi Jinping should be a cause for concern, with Xi having his sights set on lifetime rule.

All the Xi stuff aside, which is kind of as speculative as it is to analyze what, say, Putin or Trump really wants to do, the anti-alarmism outlook appeals to me because idk this whole Taiwan invasion hysteria sounds a lot like the late '90s after the Third Strait Crisis when all the Tom Clancy's came out of the woodwork to talk about how war was inevitable.

I remember talking to some dumb guy back in 2008 who insisted that China was definitely going to attack Taiwan during the Olympics because... all the attention would be on the games? The perfect cover.

BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy

Maximo Roboto posted:

All the Xi stuff aside, which is kind of as speculative as it is to analyze what, say, Putin or Trump really wants to do, the anti-alarmism outlook appeals to me because idk this whole Taiwan invasion hysteria sounds a lot like the late '90s after the Third Strait Crisis when all the Tom Clancy's came out of the woodwork to talk about how war was inevitable.

I remember talking to some dumb guy back in 2008 who insisted that China was definitely going to attack Taiwan during the Olympics because... all the attention would be on the games? The perfect cover.
container ships will dock in taiwan and suddenly PLA troops will come pouring out. invasion! the clock is ticking... countdown... to checkmate.



but yeah. just a wild guess, but the comments from the U.S. admiral might just be an analysis of chinese shipbuilding and the trajectory of capabilities hence the language of "could." the U.S. "could" invade cuba, doesn't mean it "will," anymore than china will invade taiwan once the clock ticks over to jan. 1, 2027

unfortunately it's mostly paywalled, but i would read proceedings to learn about the PLAN (and the U.S. navy) because it's written by and for U.S. navy commanders. an annual subscription is $35 so i should buy one and read a bunch of articles about pacific war strategy and make some effort posts about it. there's a whole article this month about political commissars on PLAN ships:

https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings

BrutalistMcDonalds has issued a correction as of 03:58 on Mar 25, 2021

BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy
watching more chinese TV dance theatre. this is awesome stuff and has an epic, heroic quality. a communist youth league badge at 0:37.

later i'll post the legion of steel where 200 guys in hardhats and silver outfits do synchronized moves to electric drill sounds

https://files.catbox.moe/71zlda.mp4

BrutalistMcDonalds has issued a correction as of 10:02 on Mar 25, 2021

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy
https://twitter.com/joshjonsmith/status/1375011715318882307

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply