To paraphrase the best president in history, When the U.S. Government does it, that means it's not illegal.
Let's Discuss Taiwan
- Thread starter Commodore
- Start date
I don't know that Nauru fits "millions" of tourists given it's about 20 square km and 10,000 people
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
I suppose it could be a problem if they all showed up at once....
Of course. Everyone knows the Chinese like to play the long game. I'm just asking if there are still any realistic options left to counter China's eventual takeover of Taiwan or if Taiwan's fate as a province of the People's Republic is more or less sealed?
I've seen people on other sites suggest the US start building a massive naval base in Taiwan, but clearly that is a very unrealistic option. It would be interesting to see China's reaction though. Conventional wisdom would assume they would see that as an act of war and hostilities would commence, but would the Chinese really risk global war just to maintain their sphere of influence?
There was this congratulation phone call between Taiwan and the then President-elect Trump back in 2016.
There were people that attributed that as a blunder by Trump as novice in foreign policy.
The 1979 deal with China to replace US diplomatic relations of Taiwan with Beijing followed by ending in 1980 the US-Taiwan Defensive Pact, amidst the Vietnam ping pong smoke, and was according to many done to isolate the Soviet-Union from China. Russia the Cold War opponent with a big nuclear and China at that moment only a giant without military and economical teeth. A rural agricultural economy that had yet to start with its 1 child per family policy, but already a mighty partner potential for the Soviet-Union.
With the growing strenght of China minor steps were taken by US Presidencies to keep Taiwan in good economical order, but nothing that really did upset China and the world order.
China however did change the world order, by getting economical teeth, by its focussed trade economy and the Soviet union is replaced by a much smaller Russia that is economically only growing slowly.
I think the geopolitical move that Trump has in mind, since before his election, is to redirect the bulk of the geopolitical US attention from Russia to China.
Some sanctions on Russia, redirecting the EU towards Russia and vice versa, some actions towards the EU, should contain Russia and the EU. The Middle East the usual mess with various kinds of opportunities if needed.
China the main dish.
My guess has always been that Trump has a simple agenda he sticks to. What he said about that caused many Republican representitives to be critical.
He made also already during the elections and at the beginning of his presidency the promise that Republicans that would not follow him would face the wrath of his Trump voters base.
In the past 17 months he has meanwhile a team around him that is good enough in yes-nodding and most of the Republicans representatives are quieted.
Meaning that the traditional anti-Russia politics is somewhat contained and the anti-China politics has more room to pick up his simple agenda point on China that started with that Taiwan phone call in 2016.
Does a naval base in Taiwan fits that strategy ?
IDK about military vulnerability and implications. But it feels anyway as a bit drastic.
China promised already war on Taiwan (not on the US) , if the US would make further smaller moves with Taiwan. But to have military teeth China needs a lot more spending at defense than now, weakening economic growth to keep its people happy, especially if that is combined with US trade issues.
Will the Taiwanese people be comfortable with that war threat, or rather prefer to join China in 2 generations or so when the level of prosperity and personnal freedoms will likely be closer together. I think that will also depend on whether the US will renew the Defensive Pact ended in 1980, guaranteeing nuclear deterrence. But the way Trump handled South Korea is not really encouraging for the Taiwanese people to believe in a long standing reliability of that.
To the key question:
They cannot have war militarily any time soon..... they cannot have war because they need the sea passage through the South Chinese Sea for their maritime Silk Road.
The question is for me really: what does the US really gain by big Taiwan moves ?
Smaller reversible moves, as are already happening the last two decades and at higher rate since Trump, would fit good enough in the trading war ?
Taiwan as such is only a loss of face for China. Hindering the maritime Silk Road more effective.
There were people that attributed that as a blunder by Trump as novice in foreign policy.
The 1979 deal with China to replace US diplomatic relations of Taiwan with Beijing followed by ending in 1980 the US-Taiwan Defensive Pact, amidst the Vietnam ping pong smoke, and was according to many done to isolate the Soviet-Union from China. Russia the Cold War opponent with a big nuclear and China at that moment only a giant without military and economical teeth. A rural agricultural economy that had yet to start with its 1 child per family policy, but already a mighty partner potential for the Soviet-Union.
With the growing strenght of China minor steps were taken by US Presidencies to keep Taiwan in good economical order, but nothing that really did upset China and the world order.
China however did change the world order, by getting economical teeth, by its focussed trade economy and the Soviet union is replaced by a much smaller Russia that is economically only growing slowly.
I think the geopolitical move that Trump has in mind, since before his election, is to redirect the bulk of the geopolitical US attention from Russia to China.
Some sanctions on Russia, redirecting the EU towards Russia and vice versa, some actions towards the EU, should contain Russia and the EU. The Middle East the usual mess with various kinds of opportunities if needed.
China the main dish.
My guess has always been that Trump has a simple agenda he sticks to. What he said about that caused many Republican representitives to be critical.
He made also already during the elections and at the beginning of his presidency the promise that Republicans that would not follow him would face the wrath of his Trump voters base.
In the past 17 months he has meanwhile a team around him that is good enough in yes-nodding and most of the Republicans representatives are quieted.
Meaning that the traditional anti-Russia politics is somewhat contained and the anti-China politics has more room to pick up his simple agenda point on China that started with that Taiwan phone call in 2016.
Does a naval base in Taiwan fits that strategy ?
IDK about military vulnerability and implications. But it feels anyway as a bit drastic.
China promised already war on Taiwan (not on the US) , if the US would make further smaller moves with Taiwan. But to have military teeth China needs a lot more spending at defense than now, weakening economic growth to keep its people happy, especially if that is combined with US trade issues.
Will the Taiwanese people be comfortable with that war threat, or rather prefer to join China in 2 generations or so when the level of prosperity and personnal freedoms will likely be closer together. I think that will also depend on whether the US will renew the Defensive Pact ended in 1980, guaranteeing nuclear deterrence. But the way Trump handled South Korea is not really encouraging for the Taiwanese people to believe in a long standing reliability of that.
To the key question:
I don't think China will react on the short term with a real big war.
They cannot have war militarily any time soon..... they cannot have war because they need the sea passage through the South Chinese Sea for their maritime Silk Road.
The question is for me really: what does the US really gain by big Taiwan moves ?
Smaller reversible moves, as are already happening the last two decades and at higher rate since Trump, would fit good enough in the trading war ?
Taiwan as such is only a loss of face for China. Hindering the maritime Silk Road more effective.
China doesn't actually need to take over Taiwan if they make it a vassal state. If Taiwan wants to survive it must acknowledge (which I think it does) that (the People's Republic of) China will exterminate any sort of individuality and that any promises of ‘two systems’, suzerainty, internal autonomy are mere lies, as has been proven in Inner Mongolia, Manchuria, Tibet, Sinkiang, Hong Kong, and Macau just to start with.
They should try for a visit to/from the US President, as Kim Jong-un did. Of course, Trump is highly bribable and whatever the Party says is law in China, so if they want to bribe him again it's legal.
plarq
Crazy forever
Taiwan's situation is wedged between two extremes: a rising China would devour it, and a fallen China would try to annex it in the desperate attempt to maintain its government just like Argentina did in 1982.
First scenario would give us a Taiwan as province of China, the government would be eventually taken by pro-China Taiwanese politicians and democracy in Taiwan, as we know it, ends.
Second scenario would have scorched earth in Taiwan, burn it all to the ground, and then a free, independent Republic of Taiwan would be reborn out of ashes and dead bodies, and China, as we know it, would not exist for some time.
Between those situations is the status quo, and Taiwan walks on the tip of the spear. Furthermore, the fate of Taiwan is not even determined in Taiwan.
First scenario would give us a Taiwan as province of China, the government would be eventually taken by pro-China Taiwanese politicians and democracy in Taiwan, as we know it, ends.
Second scenario would have scorched earth in Taiwan, burn it all to the ground, and then a free, independent Republic of Taiwan would be reborn out of ashes and dead bodies, and China, as we know it, would not exist for some time.
Between those situations is the status quo, and Taiwan walks on the tip of the spear. Furthermore, the fate of Taiwan is not even determined in Taiwan.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,377
More the reason to force a settlement now, rather that keep the rotten situation for a few more years when either of those rising China/fallen China scenarios are present.
That the can kept getting kicked re Taiwan was something I never understood. Sure it is the easier policy, but the future danger of it is huge. Unless the people involved assumed all along that Taiwan is to be "devoured".
That the can kept getting kicked re Taiwan was something I never understood. Sure it is the easier policy, but the future danger of it is huge. Unless the people involved assumed all along that Taiwan is to be "devoured".
I've never heard it put quite that way... I've gotta give you props. China indeed defines "long game" in terms of dominance/longevity of nations/empires.
plarq
Crazy forever
China may plan for long term but she is incapable of managing such long term policies--it becomes a burden, rather an asset, of historical relics.
The more complex and higher level a economy, the more intertwined with global interactions, the more adaptable one should be.
But having a long term strategy is a more than a good guidance as long as there is so much to develop and so much will change along, to enable stakeholders to participate with actions that do allign with what is chosen and NOT to waste money and efforts on actions that would only allign with what is not chosen.
The whole purpose of a strategy is to avoid wasteful actions from stakeholders that are not controlled directly by a central topdown bureacracy.
China is not yet at the level where your strategy consists mainly out of frameworks.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,039
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this...
I was jokingly referring to the new Orwellian 1984 tripolar world order, where the America's have become one empire.
Trump behaving as it is already there. In such a "vision" the three empires will exchange dots of influence until there are nice (geographical) borders between them.
Trading Taiwan + non-interference in the South Chinese Sea against Canada would be a typical deal... and ofc Russia to get something of similar GDP.
The Climate change will scorch much of the US anyway and Canada will have the new arable soils needed for the strategic food security.
TBH I give Canada not that much of a chance to be a truly independent nation in 1-2 centuries.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,039
I don't know what weird memes and bad stereotypes you have of the rest of the world there in the Netherlands, no doubt from excessive hashish consumption in red light brothels and unaccounted for substances in your canals, but your posts often come across with an idiosyncratic slant on affairs.
I don't know what weird memes and bad stereotypes you have of the rest of the world there in the Netherlands, no doubt from excessive hashish consumption in red light brothels and unaccounted for substances in your canals, but your posts often come across with an idiosyncratic slant on affairs.
I just like to walk outside of the trodden path
Most people here are not that way BTW
