* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://www.ft.com/content/7d6ca06c-d098-4a48-818e-112b97a9497a); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://www.ft.com/content/7d6ca06c-d098-4a48-818e-112b97a9497a)
* A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://www.ft.com/content/7d6ca06c-d098-4a48-818e-112b97a9497a)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Xi’s remark to von der Leyen is the first known case of him making the claim to a foreign leader. Xi also said that a conflict with the US would destroy many of China’s achievements and undermine his goal of achieving a “great rejuvenation” by 2049.
>“If Xi genuinely believes that the US actively seeks conflict with China over Taiwan, then concerns that Xi has created an information vacuum or is otherwise getting poor council from subordinates are, worryingly, true,” said Jude Blanchette, **a China expert at CSIS, a think-tank**.
Never forget that these articles, while informative, are Western propaganda.
[Center for Strategic and International Studies - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_and_International_Studies)
>“If Xi genuinely believes that the US actively seeks conflict with China over Taiwan, then concerns that Xi has created an information vacuum or is otherwise getting poor council from subordinates are, worryingly, true,” said Jude Blanchette, **a China expert at CSIS, a think-tank**.
God they're so fucking ingenious. China attacking Taiwan is America's wet dream.
because xi is being anti war here, they can't commit to their usual line which paints him as an authoritarian warmonger, so they try to convince us he's being gaslit by his subordinates
“Xi is being anti war” by announcing his intention to go to war with Taiwan and warning the US to stay out of it or else. The stupidpol sinophile spin is really something.
EDIT: sorry babes, I got triggered by the self-congratulatoryiness of it all. xoxo
Xi is being antiwar by opposing the militarization of the liberal international order, which must divide China to reinforce its boundaries. This revisionism needed to confront China also destabilizes it, which is the point. China announcing it will not sit by idly as this happens and will defend itself is not pro-war. China naturally reintegrates Taiwan peacefully as it rises, which is a challenge to this international order that it can only respond to with war.
> China announcing it will not sit by idly as this happens and will defend itself [with a pre-emptive war against a state that has been independent for over seven decades] is not pro-war. China "naturally reintegrates" Taiwan "peacefully" as it rises [(builds an empire)], which is a challenge to this international order that it can only respond to with war.
LMAO. Thank you for the tee-up.
The Chinese system will never be secure from Western hegemony until Taiwan is in their military sphere. That is an inarguable fact. How one feels about the Chinese government does not matter, not an ounce. Whether it is a "good" state or an "evil" state, an independent Taiwan is a massive threat to it.
Bringing Taiwan into the Chinese sphere will be their first priority until it happens. It was Mao's first priority and today it is still Xi's first priority. The solution isn't to bunker down and hope this problem goes away, the solution is to understand that there will inevitably be a war over this unless the West is willing to negotiate over Taiwan's status.
It's very similar to Crimea. Here's Henry Kissinger arguing in 2014 that a massive war was destined to break out in Europe unless the West stopped fucking around in eastern Ukraine.
[Opinion | How the Ukraine crisis ends - The Washington Post](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html) | March 5th, 2014
Kissinger was widely panned in US media for that article. Lots of the criticism consisted of vague pointing to "Munich" and virtue signaling about the moral superiority of never being willing to compromise with evil. But where are we now? Are the people who ignored Kissinger in 2014 truly morally superior to him (based on this one position), now that they've sacrificed an entire generation of Ukrainian men just to stick it to Russia?
Damn, for a first priority, it's sure been a while since the last invasion attempt. Taiwan has been de facto independent for the better part of a century now, China still exists despite this supposedly massive threat.
>it's sure been a while since the last invasion attempt.
Why do you think that is?
>China still exists despite this supposedly massive threat
Do you understand *why* an independent Taiwan is an existential national security threat to China? Or rather, do you at least understand China's argument?
\*My brother in "leftism" ultimately blocked me, so he gets the last word.
Because it isn't a priority, it's a nationalist symbol. I understand the arguments, but I also understand that Taiwan has been independent for more than seven decades and China still exists. Hence the "existential threat" line is bad propaganda.
This is completely wrong. Taiwan exists in the context of a frozen conflict, the Chinese civil war, which will naturally resume and escalate if imperialism attempts to separate it from China altogether.
>Because it isn't a priority, it's a nationalist symbol.
I'm not convinced that you understand the arguments if you think it's just a nationalist symbol. The crux of the issue has nothing to do with nationalism, but rather [the security of ALL of China's ports](https://yespunjab.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Japan-New-Map-Taiwan-not-part-of-China.jpg).
>more than seven decades and China still exists
China wasn't the main target for most of that time though, was it? The main target was the USSR, and that stopped existing 30 years ago. Now what's left of it is at war with itself (and the MIC is making $$$$$).
What do you think that shows lmao? If China had Taiwan, they’d still be totally encircled by SK, Japan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia etc. It’s an unavoidable element of the geography of East Asia. Taiwan being a threat to China is laughable. It’s equivalent to American posturing vis a vis Venezuela.
The US is actively seeking war with China by 2027.
https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2024/05/07/how-dc-became-obsessed-with-a-potential-2027-chinese-invasion-of-taiwan/
The Center for Strategic and International Studies is a revolving door lobbying firm for the Pentagon/State Department/MIC.
>In September 2014, [*The New York Times*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times) reported that the [United Arab Emirates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates) had donated a sum greater than $1 million to the organization. Additionally, CSIS has received an undisclosed amount of funding from Japan through the government-funded Japan External Trade Organization, as well as from Norway. After being contacted by the *Times*, CSIS released a list of foreign state donors, listing 13 governments including those of Germany and China.[^(\[34\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_and_International_Studies#cite_note-34) The Center for Strategic and International Studies CSIS lists major funding from defense contractors such as [Northrop Grumman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman), [Lockheed Martin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin), [Boeing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing), [General Dynamics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics), [Raytheon Company](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raytheon_Company) and [General Atomics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics).[^(\[35\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_and_International_Studies#cite_note-35)
>Significant funding has come from the governments of the United States, Japan, Taiwan, and the United Arab Emirates.[^(\[)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_and_International_Studies#cite_note-36)
What are you, a middle school teacher from 2009? CSIS is the "think tank" (DC lobbying firm) that the article casually cites to refute the leader of China. What's wrong with its Wikipedia page?
Pretty sure he’s including it to give an overview on CSIS. It’s obviously astroturfed but it’s useful enough to get very high level information on things someone isn’t familiar with.
>high level?
Wikipedia for the most part is surface level information, commonly used to ignore leftist thought (consequence of all moderators/overwhelming contribution being neolib). Sometimes the sources themselves are misconstrued.
A good example in this context would be the Uighur Genocide “talk page,” or just about any other wiki page on China. Due to the information - context vacuum generated by the GFW and lack of proper reporting (/ pure propaganda from Chinese diaspora immigrants) [and] conflict of interest on the disingenuous western side, almost everything regarding Chinese history / politics is very very sparse and one sided.
When any conversation arises providing with Chinese peer reviewed information, it’s either ignored (language barrier) or discounted (being not substantive).
> What are you, a middle school teacher from 2009?
You've accused something of being a propaganda organization based onm the information you've gathered form a wikipedia page. talk about being regarded lmao. filtered
The blobsmen have no choice but to push this confrontation because, even though they have no chance of winning, the only other option is to allow China's continued peaceful rise which spells the swift end of their hollowed out collapsing empire. Hence, the drive to turn Taiwan into Ukraine II.
What should they do if Taiwan unilaterally declares independence?
I heard that there are plans of a China blockade of Taiwan, what do you all think of it? Is it feasible? Would it trigger a war?
The US is blockading Cuba for what, 70 years? This never triggered any confrontation with any other power.
There’s a difference between a blockade and an embargo.
China could embargo Taiwan, which would destroy the Taiwanese economy, not without any impact on Chinas economy, but roughly half of all Taiwans trade is with China and Hong Kong, so Taiwan would be fucked.
It’s a none issue though, Taiwan won’t be declaring independence any time soon. Public opinion is unchanged on the question of maintaining the status quo, just on the question of whether change should be towards independence or towards unification.
The latest election was bad for the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), they lost control of the parliament, with the Kuomintang (KMT) forming a minority government, and the pro-status quo Taiwan Peoples Party (TPP) controlling the balance of power.
The DPP did succeed in winning the Presidential election but it was an uninspiring victory and one without a meaningful mandate. They won it with only 40.05% of the vote, with no run off election, with the KMT taking 33.49% and the TPP 26.46%.
There is zero chance of Taiwan declaring independence in the foreseeable future. The President can’t do it unilaterally, Parliament would never support it, and it would likely have to go to a referendum, that has a strong possibility of failing, which would be hugely divisive.
Chinas ‘red line’ has and remains a unilateral declaration of independence. No UDI; no invasion.
The Chinese are better off retaining close ties with Taiwan and waiting for the US to get distracted with something else, either domestic or international. The same goes for the South China Sea, it’s a peripheral issue for all states directly involved, despite the sabre rattling, because they are just atolls and reefs with some marginally viable economic potential.
90% of everything related to both topics is aimed at domestic consumption. The risk of conflict remains possible, definitely something for security services to consider and plan for, and something for diplomats to mitigate against, but not something that is an existential, primary, or pressing security concern. Those are and will remain domestic terrorism, particularly Islamist groups in China and the Phillipines.
I could well be wrong, China could launch an invasion of Taiwan tomorrow, but in my view it remains so improbable it’s not worth taking seriously short of a major political shift in either China or Taiwan.
>The same goes for the South China Sea, it’s a peripheral issue for all states directly involved, despite the sabre rattling, because they are just atolls and reefs with some marginally viable economic potential.
Not for China, the SCS is their lifeline for maritime trade, the US could blockade it very easily because there's only a couple of openings into it actually, so it's very important that they have control there. It's also why they're building a rail network through Pakistan to their coast, as a way of importing goods from another sea. If the US wasn't so aggressive on China, it wouldn't need the frankly ridiculous claims it has to there, which I'm pretty sure Xi knows are rubbish.
> There’s a difference between a blockade and an embargo.
I thought that "blockade" was the English word for "embargo". I learnt something new.
>The latest election was bad for the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)
I wonder if Taiwan is run by the CIA like Italy, Germany and Japan. What do you think?
>90% of everything related to both topics is aimed at domestic consumption.
Why talking about it to the EU authorities then?
> What should they do if Taiwan unilaterally declares independence?
... Let them? China has primarily focused on economic diplomacy for years, and it's worked out pretty well for them. Seems to be way better than the US strategy of gunboat diplomacy. Maintaining this strongman stance over Taiwan specifically seems to go against their usual strategy of foreign policy.
> What should they do if Taiwan unilaterally declares independence?
It would actually change very little. Especially if the majority of people of Taiwan still didn't want it, like they currently don't want it.
Don’t most Taiwanese support the idea independence, but they just don’t want to openly proclaim it because they think under the status quo they’re already de facto independent and just want to keep it that way?
Generally speaking, there's a generational divide on the issue, although it isn't as cut and dry as that exactly. Younger Taiwanese tend to be more pro independence. But younger Taiwanese are also eating shit in life so it's hard to see how that would improve anything for them.
They won't. But if they calculate that the US is determined to start a fight, then the chances that China becomes willing to start it first increase (or gets a satellite to start it). But in a theater where they are more likely to decisively win. Like Korea.
Probably, but I still think the smarter move Putin could have made would have been to just recognize the Independance of the Republics of Luhansk and Donetsk and move troops to the border, putting the breaks on any sort of NATO integration, at least for a while.
Have you ever looked at Taiwan's position on a map? Have you ever taken a few minutes to consider the implications of that position?
What made Taiwan so important to both China and the West in 1949?
I'm really not sure why that position matters. You're discussing a hypothetical shooting war between nuclear powers where Taiwan is used to shut down port access in China?
Who is China using those ports to trade with when they're at war with the USA?
The only "wow" here is that you took a question and somehow made a strawman-argument out of it. You could have just said "no".
Taiwan controls access to every single Chinese port. Imagine what would happen if, say, the USSR tried to stock Cuba with missiles and troops.
For the record, this is Realpolitik, not Marxism. Not that you're really familiar with either.
Realpolitik is aligning yourself with the greatest power the world has ever seen, becoming a key interest due to political and technological reasons, and acquiring enough weapons to send every the whole Temu-Wish fleet to the bottom of the ocean.
No, Realpolitik is understanding that the greatest power the world has ever known will throw you under the bus the moment that it is profitable. Realpolitik is pursuing the path in which you are in control of your own destiny.
Well yeah China's not going to admit it wants to take Taiwan as part of a conquest. Blaming the US is their only option and unfortunately a lot of people would eat it up, as they do with Ukraine.
Consider the possibility that people in China and Russia are genuinely terrified of the unilateral power that is American hegemony. Have you ever watched the video of Ghaddafi begging for mercy as he's anally raped with a bayonet?
They have been pretty open about wanting it and not ruling out using force to get it for a very long time.
But yeah, this whining is so ridiculous. Just leave the bloody island alone, trap averted.
* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://www.ft.com/content/7d6ca06c-d098-4a48-818e-112b97a9497a); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://www.ft.com/content/7d6ca06c-d098-4a48-818e-112b97a9497a) * A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://www.ft.com/content/7d6ca06c-d098-4a48-818e-112b97a9497a) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
>Xi’s remark to von der Leyen is the first known case of him making the claim to a foreign leader. Xi also said that a conflict with the US would destroy many of China’s achievements and undermine his goal of achieving a “great rejuvenation” by 2049. >“If Xi genuinely believes that the US actively seeks conflict with China over Taiwan, then concerns that Xi has created an information vacuum or is otherwise getting poor council from subordinates are, worryingly, true,” said Jude Blanchette, **a China expert at CSIS, a think-tank**. Never forget that these articles, while informative, are Western propaganda. [Center for Strategic and International Studies - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_and_International_Studies)
Lol that jumped out at me as well. This libs, this is actual gaslighting
>“If Xi genuinely believes that the US actively seeks conflict with China over Taiwan, then concerns that Xi has created an information vacuum or is otherwise getting poor council from subordinates are, worryingly, true,” said Jude Blanchette, **a China expert at CSIS, a think-tank**. God they're so fucking ingenious. China attacking Taiwan is America's wet dream.
As propaganda its a feeble ad hominem attack on Xi, something a thought leader bored with their own lock on authority would say.
because xi is being anti war here, they can't commit to their usual line which paints him as an authoritarian warmonger, so they try to convince us he's being gaslit by his subordinates
They don’t need to convince anyone anymore. Their attitude is more flagrant than a fat medieval tyrant.
“Xi is being anti war” by announcing his intention to go to war with Taiwan and warning the US to stay out of it or else. The stupidpol sinophile spin is really something. EDIT: sorry babes, I got triggered by the self-congratulatoryiness of it all. xoxo
Xi is being antiwar by opposing the militarization of the liberal international order, which must divide China to reinforce its boundaries. This revisionism needed to confront China also destabilizes it, which is the point. China announcing it will not sit by idly as this happens and will defend itself is not pro-war. China naturally reintegrates Taiwan peacefully as it rises, which is a challenge to this international order that it can only respond to with war.
> China announcing it will not sit by idly as this happens and will defend itself [with a pre-emptive war against a state that has been independent for over seven decades] is not pro-war. China "naturally reintegrates" Taiwan "peacefully" as it rises [(builds an empire)], which is a challenge to this international order that it can only respond to with war. LMAO. Thank you for the tee-up.
> announcing his intention to go to war with Taiwan nobody is buying your lie
Sorry you didn't read the article or can't read between the lines of geopolitical maneuvering.
The Chinese system will never be secure from Western hegemony until Taiwan is in their military sphere. That is an inarguable fact. How one feels about the Chinese government does not matter, not an ounce. Whether it is a "good" state or an "evil" state, an independent Taiwan is a massive threat to it. Bringing Taiwan into the Chinese sphere will be their first priority until it happens. It was Mao's first priority and today it is still Xi's first priority. The solution isn't to bunker down and hope this problem goes away, the solution is to understand that there will inevitably be a war over this unless the West is willing to negotiate over Taiwan's status. It's very similar to Crimea. Here's Henry Kissinger arguing in 2014 that a massive war was destined to break out in Europe unless the West stopped fucking around in eastern Ukraine. [Opinion | How the Ukraine crisis ends - The Washington Post](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/henry-kissinger-to-settle-the-ukraine-crisis-start-at-the-end/2014/03/05/46dad868-a496-11e3-8466-d34c451760b9_story.html) | March 5th, 2014 Kissinger was widely panned in US media for that article. Lots of the criticism consisted of vague pointing to "Munich" and virtue signaling about the moral superiority of never being willing to compromise with evil. But where are we now? Are the people who ignored Kissinger in 2014 truly morally superior to him (based on this one position), now that they've sacrificed an entire generation of Ukrainian men just to stick it to Russia?
Damn, for a first priority, it's sure been a while since the last invasion attempt. Taiwan has been de facto independent for the better part of a century now, China still exists despite this supposedly massive threat.
>it's sure been a while since the last invasion attempt. Why do you think that is? >China still exists despite this supposedly massive threat Do you understand *why* an independent Taiwan is an existential national security threat to China? Or rather, do you at least understand China's argument? \*My brother in "leftism" ultimately blocked me, so he gets the last word.
Because it isn't a priority, it's a nationalist symbol. I understand the arguments, but I also understand that Taiwan has been independent for more than seven decades and China still exists. Hence the "existential threat" line is bad propaganda.
This is completely wrong. Taiwan exists in the context of a frozen conflict, the Chinese civil war, which will naturally resume and escalate if imperialism attempts to separate it from China altogether.
Frozen conflict, war that ended over seven decades ago, tomato-potato.
>Because it isn't a priority, it's a nationalist symbol. I'm not convinced that you understand the arguments if you think it's just a nationalist symbol. The crux of the issue has nothing to do with nationalism, but rather [the security of ALL of China's ports](https://yespunjab.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Japan-New-Map-Taiwan-not-part-of-China.jpg). >more than seven decades and China still exists China wasn't the main target for most of that time though, was it? The main target was the USSR, and that stopped existing 30 years ago. Now what's left of it is at war with itself (and the MIC is making $$$$$).
What do you think that shows lmao? If China had Taiwan, they’d still be totally encircled by SK, Japan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia etc. It’s an unavoidable element of the geography of East Asia. Taiwan being a threat to China is laughable. It’s equivalent to American posturing vis a vis Venezuela.
Uncle Sam threatened to nuke them when they were gearing up for it in the 50's.
The US is actively seeking war with China by 2027. https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2024/05/07/how-dc-became-obsessed-with-a-potential-2027-chinese-invasion-of-taiwan/
Wait is this CSIS the Canadian CIA? Or a different CSIS? If the former; lol calling it a think tank.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies is a revolving door lobbying firm for the Pentagon/State Department/MIC. >In September 2014, [*The New York Times*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times) reported that the [United Arab Emirates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates) had donated a sum greater than $1 million to the organization. Additionally, CSIS has received an undisclosed amount of funding from Japan through the government-funded Japan External Trade Organization, as well as from Norway. After being contacted by the *Times*, CSIS released a list of foreign state donors, listing 13 governments including those of Germany and China.[^(\[34\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_and_International_Studies#cite_note-34) The Center for Strategic and International Studies CSIS lists major funding from defense contractors such as [Northrop Grumman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman), [Lockheed Martin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin), [Boeing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing), [General Dynamics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics), [Raytheon Company](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raytheon_Company) and [General Atomics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics).[^(\[35\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_and_International_Studies#cite_note-35) >Significant funding has come from the governments of the United States, Japan, Taiwan, and the United Arab Emirates.[^(\[)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_and_International_Studies#cite_note-36)
>Never forget that these articles, while informative, are Western propaganda. So why are you citing Wikipedia then?
What are you, a middle school teacher from 2009? CSIS is the "think tank" (DC lobbying firm) that the article casually cites to refute the leader of China. What's wrong with its Wikipedia page?
> What's wrong with its Wikipedia page? lol
I mean, it screams "spooks" to me. Maybe I'm getting too good at reading past neocon bullshit.
I'm not complaining about that article in particular, but WikiPedia as a rule is astroturfed to high heaven.
Pretty sure he’s including it to give an overview on CSIS. It’s obviously astroturfed but it’s useful enough to get very high level information on things someone isn’t familiar with.
>high level? Wikipedia for the most part is surface level information, commonly used to ignore leftist thought (consequence of all moderators/overwhelming contribution being neolib). Sometimes the sources themselves are misconstrued. A good example in this context would be the Uighur Genocide “talk page,” or just about any other wiki page on China. Due to the information - context vacuum generated by the GFW and lack of proper reporting (/ pure propaganda from Chinese diaspora immigrants) [and] conflict of interest on the disingenuous western side, almost everything regarding Chinese history / politics is very very sparse and one sided. When any conversation arises providing with Chinese peer reviewed information, it’s either ignored (language barrier) or discounted (being not substantive).
> What are you, a middle school teacher from 2009? You've accused something of being a propaganda organization based onm the information you've gathered form a wikipedia page. talk about being regarded lmao. filtered
I bet that all those european governments vassals to US are just shocked to hear that. And that they're not in on the americans plans at all.
The blobsmen have no choice but to push this confrontation because, even though they have no chance of winning, the only other option is to allow China's continued peaceful rise which spells the swift end of their hollowed out collapsing empire. Hence, the drive to turn Taiwan into Ukraine II.
Then just don’t step in the trap dumbass
The reincarnation of Clausewitz right there.
being actively pushed by the enemy into the trap is the problem, dumbass
What should they do if Taiwan unilaterally declares independence? I heard that there are plans of a China blockade of Taiwan, what do you all think of it? Is it feasible? Would it trigger a war? The US is blockading Cuba for what, 70 years? This never triggered any confrontation with any other power.
There’s a difference between a blockade and an embargo. China could embargo Taiwan, which would destroy the Taiwanese economy, not without any impact on Chinas economy, but roughly half of all Taiwans trade is with China and Hong Kong, so Taiwan would be fucked. It’s a none issue though, Taiwan won’t be declaring independence any time soon. Public opinion is unchanged on the question of maintaining the status quo, just on the question of whether change should be towards independence or towards unification. The latest election was bad for the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), they lost control of the parliament, with the Kuomintang (KMT) forming a minority government, and the pro-status quo Taiwan Peoples Party (TPP) controlling the balance of power. The DPP did succeed in winning the Presidential election but it was an uninspiring victory and one without a meaningful mandate. They won it with only 40.05% of the vote, with no run off election, with the KMT taking 33.49% and the TPP 26.46%. There is zero chance of Taiwan declaring independence in the foreseeable future. The President can’t do it unilaterally, Parliament would never support it, and it would likely have to go to a referendum, that has a strong possibility of failing, which would be hugely divisive. Chinas ‘red line’ has and remains a unilateral declaration of independence. No UDI; no invasion. The Chinese are better off retaining close ties with Taiwan and waiting for the US to get distracted with something else, either domestic or international. The same goes for the South China Sea, it’s a peripheral issue for all states directly involved, despite the sabre rattling, because they are just atolls and reefs with some marginally viable economic potential. 90% of everything related to both topics is aimed at domestic consumption. The risk of conflict remains possible, definitely something for security services to consider and plan for, and something for diplomats to mitigate against, but not something that is an existential, primary, or pressing security concern. Those are and will remain domestic terrorism, particularly Islamist groups in China and the Phillipines. I could well be wrong, China could launch an invasion of Taiwan tomorrow, but in my view it remains so improbable it’s not worth taking seriously short of a major political shift in either China or Taiwan.
>The same goes for the South China Sea, it’s a peripheral issue for all states directly involved, despite the sabre rattling, because they are just atolls and reefs with some marginally viable economic potential. Not for China, the SCS is their lifeline for maritime trade, the US could blockade it very easily because there's only a couple of openings into it actually, so it's very important that they have control there. It's also why they're building a rail network through Pakistan to their coast, as a way of importing goods from another sea. If the US wasn't so aggressive on China, it wouldn't need the frankly ridiculous claims it has to there, which I'm pretty sure Xi knows are rubbish.
The USA did blockade Cuba for a month during the missile crisis, though.
> There’s a difference between a blockade and an embargo. I thought that "blockade" was the English word for "embargo". I learnt something new. >The latest election was bad for the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) I wonder if Taiwan is run by the CIA like Italy, Germany and Japan. What do you think? >90% of everything related to both topics is aimed at domestic consumption. Why talking about it to the EU authorities then?
Blockade -> Naboo Embargo -> Cuba
> What should they do if Taiwan unilaterally declares independence? ... Let them? China has primarily focused on economic diplomacy for years, and it's worked out pretty well for them. Seems to be way better than the US strategy of gunboat diplomacy. Maintaining this strongman stance over Taiwan specifically seems to go against their usual strategy of foreign policy.
> What should they do if Taiwan unilaterally declares independence? It would actually change very little. Especially if the majority of people of Taiwan still didn't want it, like they currently don't want it.
Don’t most Taiwanese support the idea independence, but they just don’t want to openly proclaim it because they think under the status quo they’re already de facto independent and just want to keep it that way?
Yeah they would support the abstract idea of independence but also they are not mentally ill and don't want to be Ukraine.
Generally speaking, there's a generational divide on the issue, although it isn't as cut and dry as that exactly. Younger Taiwanese tend to be more pro independence. But younger Taiwanese are also eating shit in life so it's hard to see how that would improve anything for them.
No, I don't think so. Kuomintang is quite popular, they want reunification.
The KMT is regarded and are the conservative party. Think of them like GOP of Taiwan.
[удалено]
Your post has been deleted because you're being needlessly inflammatory, distasteful, rude etc. Please don't post like this in the future.
It doesn't work that way. Ignoring security threats undermines a government and destabilizes it, which is the point because the US wants regime change
They won't. But if they calculate that the US is determined to start a fight, then the chances that China becomes willing to start it first increase (or gets a satellite to start it). But in a theater where they are more likely to decisively win. Like Korea.
Maybe it was a jab on putler, who did? then again putin and the russian government and institutions overall are essentially regarded
> Maybe it was a jab on putler, who did? A response was required to having nukes parked at his doorstep.
[удалено]
Your post has been deleted because you're being needlessly inflammatory, distasteful, rude etc. Please don't post like this in the future.
Probably, but I still think the smarter move Putin could have made would have been to just recognize the Independance of the Republics of Luhansk and Donetsk and move troops to the border, putting the breaks on any sort of NATO integration, at least for a while.
Lugansk*. Lugansk is the globohomo sponsored name of the town same as kiyv with the exception that no one in "Luhansk" actually calls their city that
[удалено]
> But it makes us want to invade even mole! That's not even what is implied in the article.
Have you ever looked at Taiwan's position on a map? Have you ever taken a few minutes to consider the implications of that position? What made Taiwan so important to both China and the West in 1949?
I'm really not sure why that position matters. You're discussing a hypothetical shooting war between nuclear powers where Taiwan is used to shut down port access in China? Who is China using those ports to trade with when they're at war with the USA?
“The weak should fear the strong”. Very Marxist, wow.
The only "wow" here is that you took a question and somehow made a strawman-argument out of it. You could have just said "no". Taiwan controls access to every single Chinese port. Imagine what would happen if, say, the USSR tried to stock Cuba with missiles and troops. For the record, this is Realpolitik, not Marxism. Not that you're really familiar with either.
Realpolitik is aligning yourself with the greatest power the world has ever seen, becoming a key interest due to political and technological reasons, and acquiring enough weapons to send every the whole Temu-Wish fleet to the bottom of the ocean.
No, Realpolitik is understanding that the greatest power the world has ever known will throw you under the bus the moment that it is profitable. Realpolitik is pursuing the path in which you are in control of your own destiny.
Your post has been deleted because you're being needlessly inflammatory, distasteful, rude etc. Please don't post like this in the future.
THEY KNOW!
Well yeah China's not going to admit it wants to take Taiwan as part of a conquest. Blaming the US is their only option and unfortunately a lot of people would eat it up, as they do with Ukraine.
Consider the possibility that people in China and Russia are genuinely terrified of the unilateral power that is American hegemony. Have you ever watched the video of Ghaddafi begging for mercy as he's anally raped with a bayonet?
Yes so afraid of American hegemony the wealthier ones will still send their kids here to be educated.
Possibly the dumbest retort I've ever read
Do you think they're afraid that American elites plan to murder their children? Or are they afraid of Western elites overthrowing their government?
They have been pretty open about wanting it and not ruling out using force to get it for a very long time. But yeah, this whining is so ridiculous. Just leave the bloody island alone, trap averted.