‹ The Neocons: An Illustrated Progression •
37 years ago, the Republic of China was stripped of its UN seat and relegated to geopolitical bottom feeder.
In March a group of Taiwanese politicians and reformers led by current president Chen Shui-bian plans on submitting a new membership application to the UN for admission into the general assembly.
When I first arrived in Taipei a month ago it was impossible to not notice this plan as glitzy posters greeted visitors as we walked through the airport hallways. These advertisements spelled out its case to the world, or at least the several thousand travellers that meandered around the luggage terminals. (see: UN for Taiwan).
Despite recently stating that there would be “heavy costs” to pursuing the referendum, it seems unlikely that the PRC would launch any military response prior to the summer Olympics.
This diplomatic issue is compounded by the fact that, as professor Geoffrey Forden has detailed (1 2 3), China is still not capable of launching a successful first strike against American military assets in space.
Furthermore, it is doubtful that the referendum will garner the necessary votes for passing, as countries voting in its favor would potentially lose both foreign aid shipments and other political capital from China (which is how both the PRC and RoC have historically paid for diplomatic recognition).
While this subject deserves more space than this post can afford, the US State Department believes that “conducting a referendum would be a mistake and intentionally provocative.”
One wonders what objective criteria secession and independence leaders must procure before they can join the exclusive nation-state club. If East Timor, Serbia, Eritrea and a dozen or so Soviet republics had what it takes, why doesn’t Taiwan?
Perhaps it is because, as Aaron Glantz and others have noted, the US State department fears that Kurdistan or other ethnic parts of Iraq may attempt to upset the status quo under similar overtures.
As an aside, why should the US taxpayer foot the defense bill in the event Taiwan does declare its independence? For this discussion see Taiwan, a Spark Plug for War by Doug Bandow.
,b>Furthermore, it is doubtful that the referendum will garner the necessary votes for passing, as countries voting in its favor would potentially lose both foreign aid shipments and other political capital from China (which is how both the PRC and RoC have historically paid for diplomatic recognition).
While this subject deserves more space than this post can afford, the US State Department believes that “conducting a referendum would be a mistake and intentionally provocative.”
The Bush Administration is currently supporting China and the local party in Taiwan that is cooperating with China, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). By opposing the referendum, they appease Beijing. Opposition by the Bush Administration to Taiwan independence has nothing to do with Iraq (the Bush Administration is busily turning Kosovo into an independent state over Russia’s complaints, so clearly independence per se is not a problem). Rather, it is rooted in the Administration’s obsession with the Middle East — the point that the US Navy/DOD is one of the most important conduits of diplomacy with the Chinese, and to the point that Iraq is likely to be China’s greatest victory. The Bush Administration believes that Taiwan will cause it fewer headaches if the KMT is running the show here — although the vast majority of Bush Administration Taiwan headaches are self-inflicted.
The Taiwan Relations Act, which you link to above, does not mandate intervention in the event China attacks Taiwan, that is a popular misconception. Why should US taxpayers foot the bill? Because it was the US that caused this mess, first by schlepping over Chiang Kai-shek’s troops in Sept and Oct of 1945 to occupy the island, dooming it to 50 years of martial law and political killings and then, by selling it out to China in the Shanghai Communique — determining the island’s fate without consulting its inhabitants.
Unless, of course, you’d rather abandon a longtime ally. Japanese analysts have already noticed that Taiwan’s fate and its own are interlinked, and have observed that China’s tactics against Taiwan, both in the media, the international sphere, and militarily and psychologically, will be the ones deployed against Japan in the long run. Another reason for supporting Taiwan is because of its connection to the security of Japan.
Yet another reason is that Taiwan is merely the first on a long list of acquisitions the PRC would like to make. Munich is overinvoked but the comparison is valid here — China has territorial claims on all its neighbors, and has attempted many times in the past to “stealth claim” islands far from its shores — the way it tried to create a claim to the Natunas in the 1990s. No sense in encouraging expansion.
The US need not fight a war with China. Credible deterrence, diplomatic leadership, and a security treaty with China’s neighboring countries would be a good start. But the Bush Administration has squandered our credibility, budget, and military on its criminal, and criminally stupid war in Iraq.
Michael
It is well you mention the confluence of Japanese interests and those of the Republic of China on Taiwan.
As undoubtedly you know, Taiwan was long under Japanese rule, and never under the rule of the People’s Republic of China.
What most people do not know is how nostalgic some Chinese on Taiwan were about the Japanese when the first ragtag elements of the Nationalist Army arrived on the island after the Japanese surrender.
Having experienced an indulgent and well-ordered occupation, including considerable economic development under the Japanese, and with the unifying cultural emblems of Chan Buddhism and Confucius, “[t}he proper Taiwanese”, in the words of C.C. Cheng, “were absolutely scandalized by the miserable condition of the Chinese troops come to occupy the island, and I recall that many of them told me that they actually ready to break down in tears.”
The predations of the Nationalist officials that followed led to the spontaneous riots of 1947, which the Nationalists rather weakly tried to blame on the Communists and brutally suppressed.
After the Nationalist retreat to the island, Chiang Kai-shek ruled with an iron hand, and through an overlay of mainland Nationalists above both Taiwan’s Chinese and non-Han.
This regime, almost as foreign as the Japanese occupation, was relaxed in large degree under Chiang Chingkuo in his old age.
It was during this last period that the Taiwan independence movement first surfaced publicly, but in a sense what occurred was a simply a reassertion of the old anti-mainland and pro-Japanese sentiments.
Too, economically the Nationalists, even under Chiang Kai-shek, learned both from the islanders and from the new Japan.
It is thus no surprise to see Taiwanese and Japanese on the same page in many areas, including economics and culture, and also their joint, if very careful, exploitation of mainland manpower and investment.
If the confluence, still treated delicately by both Japan and Taiwan, seems a stunning new track to many Americans it is largely due to surviving blind spots of American ideology, including the persistent hangover of the old China Lobby and Cold War anti-Communism, especially among some of the Right Wing, but also, for different reasons, among American Cold Warriors on the left.
corr: “they were actually ready”.
Mr. Costa’s comments have a lot of errors. First, Taiwan was under China’s rule for hundreds years. Otherwise, how could China gave up the island to Japan after lossing a war to Japan. Second, under Japanese occupation, only few Taiwanese could go to college and sever punishment were used to supress opposition. Furthmore, all the economic establisments in Taiwan during that period of time was to support Japan’s war machine against US and China. Why don’t Mr. Costa ask how many Taiwanese died in World war two fighting with the US? Third, Nationalist brought money and skilled workers to reestablish Taiwan after world war two. Most important of all, Nationalist did not supress Taiwanese as Japanese did. Most Taiwanese are Chinese immigrants anyway. During that time, Nationalist had to fight with the communist with iron hands. See how US battle the terrorists now!
The errors are all yours.
Taiwan was never under the rule of the People’s Republic of China.
The rest of what you say is ideological nonsense.
I fail to see why a small, obscure island just 100 miles off China’s coast is of any concern to the United States. Do Mexico and Canada concern themselves with Taiwan?
“Do Mexico and Canada concern themselves with Taiwan?”
Very much so.
On the same subject, I risk a long throw from far left field to home plate for anyone prepared to catch it.
Now and then seeing with new eyes involves abstraction from topics that seem far afield to whatever is at hand.
This is especially true where artists and writers see through to some unifying image below the surface of what they seem to treat at any particular moment.
One example is Emir Kusturica’s film, Underground: Once Upon A Time There Was a Country.
On the surface it looks to be about Yugoslavia under Tito, and no doubt that is the main subject. But it is the nature of a great classic, which the film is, to unravel much more than the immediate.
See the film often enough, and one may well see it as an organizing image about all sides in the Cold War, including those Americans still laboring deeply underground and for decreasing rewards, while the elite of right and left try to create a new outside terror, perhaps even a new Cold War with the Russian Federation, to keep those in the dark below laboring cheaply in a new and absolutely necessary patriotic war.
Having made that throw to home plate, one notes that another work of art, Vassily Aksyonov’s The Island Crimea, which is a science fictionesque alternative history about the Russian Revolution, can easily be read as an intriguing and trenchant analysis of the relation of mainland China and Taiwan.
In fact, I have no doubt that Aksyonov himself got the basic concept of his alternate history from what happened in China when Chiang Kai-shek retreated to Taiwan.
Which concept he dressed up in Russian and Soviet garb.
Reading the novel over several times, one may be prepared for the supreme irony that, though about a Russia that never existed, it is quite on point in many areas about a mainland China and Taiwan that do indeed still exist, and exist in the context of some basic cultural and political patterns outlined by Aksyonov.
Keeping aside that Aksenov is one patented rusofobiac and that can be clearly seen in the “Crimea Island” book…
First, we need to agree to disregard current Western propaganda about Russia turning totalitarian and not having bona fide rapid economy grouth (in addition to benefiting from high energy prices)…
So, in the REAL WORLD, Crimea Peninsula got annexed from Russia as a result of pro-Ukraine forces in Soviet Govt, as well as the result of the deconstruction of USSR. So - currently Crimea is part of Ukraine. Economics of Ukraine is weak, economics of Crimea is even weaker. Although it has been a resort for all of the USSR back then, now, due to anti-Russian policies of Ukraine, inspired by the West - the Crimea is in the decline (as the rest of former republics that we gladly let go in 1991, feeling they are more of a libality then an asset, and apart from Turkmenistan they are).
On the other hand Moscow is flowrishing - and all the glory bestowed by capitalism (according to Aksenov) can be seen in Moscow, and the misery that he depicts for future Moscow - can be seen in Crimea.
Most amazingly - how he was able to predict - although in reverse like the rest of it of course, that happy capitalist Russia would be counting money in “thous-rubs”, whereas gloomy capitalists would count in weak 1-2 roubles - so, we DO count money in “thous-rubs” ($40), whereas in the Crimea, being part of Ukraine they count money in “grivnas”, being $0.25 each.
So - I hope that eventually (after Kosovo separation, that is not welcome by Russia, but … the unfortunate PRECIDENT will be :-) Crimea will self-proclaim independance from Ukraine (and we (RU) should help as much as we can, although, of course obfuscating and denying that) - and we’ll have even more simularities with Taiwan.
Now - if we don’t practice to double standards :-) we should either welcome ALL separatism, or NOT welcome. Of course what happens is that US welcomes one it likes and condemns the one it does not.
Which brings us to a simple truth that “Might is Right”.
Having said that I doubt that China wants to perform a direct military agression against Taiwan. In a close analogy - I think that Crimea SHOULD declare independance, but I oppose the idea that it should be turned into a part of Russia, but rather a very friendly state, like US/Canada - i.e. no visas, no travel restriction, no work permits - same as Russia/Belorussia currently.
A true fan of Aksyonov!
As prophet an eagle with two heads, looking East and West.
I have glancing knowledge of Ukraina, which I will keep to myself for the nonce, save this–a larger, slightly more stubborn version of Lithuania.
Without Russia they can cut one another’s hair and trade vegetables.
“Crimean Independence Activists Charged
The Ukrainian Security Service has initiated a criminal case against members of the Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia People’s Front for calling for the violation of Ukraine’s territorial integrity in public statements. Ukrainian Security Service press secretary Marina Ostapenko told the UNIAN information service that the activists were being charged under article 110, part 1, of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (’Infringement of the territorial integrity and inviolacy of Ukraine’). She said that the activists had called for the violent reunification of the Crimea with Russia.
According to Ostapenko, the activists had received numerous warnings from the security service and had faced misdemeanor charged by police for procedural violations when organizing public meetings. Now a special investigative group has been set up to look into the actions of the Russian patriots in the Crimea.
The Sevastopol-Crimea-Russia People’s Front was set up in August 2005 and embraces 12 public group based on the peninsula, including the Russian People’s Veche, Yalta Voters’ Club, Russian Community of Feodosia, Russian Community of Evpatoria and Fatherland Russian Community of Kerch. It began a campaign it calls ‘Ukraine without the Crimea’ last year.”
[Kommersant January 29, 2008]
If Taiwan made a serious move towards declaring its independence and if the international community began to recognize that independence then there would be war. This has been made clear by China on many occasions. Any sensible person should urge the US to continue formally supporting the one-china policy and make it abundantly clear that the US would never intervene in a military action between Taiwan and the mainland.
I wish the Taiwanese well and hope they can negotiate a reunification pact that permits them a degree of independence. It is the reckless talk by some American politicians and officials that give the Taiwan independence groups hope that the US would intervene. This is extremely dangerous. Whenever this topic comes up people who consider themselves antiwar should point out the danger of independence talk. This means recognizing that if one advocates for Taiwan’s independence in this country, we should all take note that this is someone who is advocating for war with China. Hearing the ‘Munich’ analogy above sets off all of my alarm bells.
And finally, what is this foolishness about the Japanese being a major factor in this business. Japan would be crushed like a beetle in any confrontation with China.
Nin shi yige Chungguode ren, dui bu dui?
Indeed - although the initial US military support of Taiwan, was bad, forced reunification with Taiwan would be equally bad.
From my egocentric Russian viewpoint current situation with Taiwan is good, since it keeps reminding Chineese people about the predatory nature of the West.
As well as due to the fact that Taiwan is very valuable asset for electornics contract manufacturing (for both US and Russia - sic.), and the quality of electronic goods manufactured in Taiwan seems to be on par with S.Korea, Japan and the US.
“Crushed like a beetle” is the tip off.
I fail to see why a small, obscure island just 100 miles off China’s coast is of any concern to the United States. Do Mexico and Canada concern themselves with Taiwan?
Why yes, Canada does. Canada has been far ahead of the US on the issue, in fact.
Like Hong Kong, whose independence is rapidly being smothered? And Tibet, annexed and crushed? Please.
Second, Taiwan was never part of China, so it can’t “re-unify”. No ethnic Chinese emperor ever owned the island. China’s drive is to annex Taiwan, no re-unify. That is merely propaganda.
It is the reckless talk by some American politicians and officials that give the Taiwan independence groups hope that the US would intervene.
No, it is 60 years of US foreign policy, and many years of intervention in various forms in the past. Such talk is not reckless, but prudent. It prevents war by creating credible prospects of US intervention.
Whenever this topic comes up people who consider themselves antiwar should point out the danger of independence talk.
This is just asinine. Essentially you argue that if Country A threatens to annex Country B by force, Country B is wrong to resist, and further, no one should support it.
It is NOT talk of independence that threatens war. It is China’s desire to annex the island (as well as other territories around its borders, and far from them). You are blaming the victim here. If China did not threaten to annex Taiwan, there would no threat of war.
This means recognizing that if one advocates for Taiwan’s independence in this country, we should all take note that this is someone who is advocating for war with China.
No, it is someone who is advocating peace with China. War in the region threatens everyone, as Japan well knows. The missile ‘tests’ in 1996 actually landed closer to Japanese territory than Taiwanese. An independent Taiwan threatens no one — except expansionists in Beijing.
Hearing the ‘Munich’ analogy above sets off all of my alarm bells.
As well it should. Whatever do you think China’s drive to annex its neighbors means? Do you think that after they acquire Taiwan they will stop? There’s Mongolia, the states in Central Asia, the Indian border areas, Vietnam, islands in the South Pacific…..
Michael
Excellent summary.
Paranoia will destroya!
Lester Ness
Taiwan is not a vital interest for the United States sir. Neither are any of the other areas you mention sir. You have re-invented the Domino theory. I can assure you no Canadian or Mexican soldiers would die for Taiwan. Only the Americans with their would-be messianic cult of interventionism would countenance such madness.
I’d like to remind that unlike the West China does not have any history of World Wars, agressions etc. Not once it was in major war with Russia for example. Therefore it is as peaceful as it humanly possible :-)
Perhaps you might explain that supposed lack of foreign aggression to the Vietnamese, just for one example.
Ignore the above comment, formatting failed!
I fail to see why a small, obscure island just 100 miles off China’s coast is of any concern to the United States. Do Mexico and Canada concern themselves with Taiwan?
Why yes, Canada does. Canada has been far ahead of the US on the issue, in fact.
I wish the Taiwanese well and hope they can negotiate a reunification pact that permits them a degree of independence.
Like Hong Kong, whose independence is rapidly being smothered? And Tibet, annexed and crushed? Please.
Second, Taiwan was never part of China, so it can’t “re-unify”. No ethnic Chinese emperor ever owned the island. China’s drive is to annex Taiwan, no re-unify. That is merely propaganda.
It is the reckless talk by some American politicians and officials that give the Taiwan independence groups hope that the US would intervene.
No, it is 60 years of US foreign policy, and many years of intervention in various forms in the past. Such talk is not reckless, but prudent. It prevents war by creating credible prospects of US intervention.
Whenever this topic comes up people who consider themselves antiwar should point out the danger of independence talk.
This is just asinine. Essentially you argue that if Country A threatens to annex Country B by force, Country B is wrong to resist, and further, no one should support it.
It is NOT talk of independence that threatens war. It is China’s desire to annex the island (as well as other territories around its borders, and far from them). You are blaming the victim here. If China did not threaten to annex Taiwan, there would no threat of war.
This means recognizing that if one advocates for Taiwan’s independence in this country, we should all take note that this is someone who is advocating for war with China.
No, it is someone who is advocating peace with China. It is those who oppose Taiwan independence who advocate for war, since without the US security guarantee, China would almost certain invade. War in the region threatens everyone, as Japan well knows. The missile ‘tests’ in 1996 actually landed closer to Japanese territory than Taiwanese. An independent Taiwan threatens no one — except expansionists in Beijing.
Hearing the ‘Munich’ analogy above sets off all of my alarm bells.
As well it should. Whatever do you think China’s drive to annex its neighbors means? Do you think that after they acquire Taiwan they will stop? There’s Mongolia, the states in Central Asia, the Indian border areas, Vietnam, islands in the South Pacific…..
Michael
Michael, as I said above your sentiments on Taiwan are dangerous. Your insistence that Taiwan is not Chinese and was not part of China is simply wrong. “Mongolia, the states in Central Asia, the Indian border areas, Vietnam, islands in the South Pacific” and not single one of these are cuturally Chinese nor has the current government made any claims on their territory. These are the same hysterical analogies that led us to war in Iraq. War with
china will be much more serious.
Ah, I see: henosis of Singapore with the GREAT MONAD coming soon too.
“Dangerous talk”–oh my.
This is a bit too complex to make any reliable predictions about, and there are still many unresolved contingencies, but one scenario still open is that the mainland surrender to the Taiwanese in return for their technological, social and economic expertise.
Sorrily, the Taiwanese are less and less interested in having such a millstone around their neck.
When the Nationalists were still strong, the mainland refused one of the main points they demanded as a political party in any unification, that is: the right to be a national party and campaign in all of China, not just what would become the province of Taiwan.
Again I commend Aksyonov on the whole subject.
Alas, is–is The Island Crimea available on the mainland in Chinese translation?
Potentially subversive stuff. If it is, it will no doubt shortly be banned, except perhaps in Russian.
I’m sitting in a wifi cafe in China and The Island Crimea seems to be available cia e-mule. It’s an English translation, but lots of Chinese people read English these days.
Lester Ness
Kunming
China
excuse me, “via e-mule.”
Lester Ness
Kunming
China
Xiexie.
Yes, I know the Beijing Romatzyh is Zhongguo, but in a misspent youth i learned one too many romanization systems after I learned the characters, so I take none of them seriously.
I am also very rusty.
Romatzyh–unless my memory fails, that is spelled Chao Yuen Ren–by far the best system phonemically and tonemically, but also too complex for easy use.
I can almost hear, as we chat, libraries being ransacked in Harbin.
Harbin’s not a very intellectual place. Baijiu and vodka are more popular than books.
Ah, but the Russian language is well known there. Along with shipbuilding, fracture mechanics, and even cheese.
It should be noted that Taiwan and the mainland get more closely linked economically everyday. Taiwanese manufacturers have off-shored many of their factories to the mainland, often to Fujian province, which speaks the same language as Taiwan. Taiwanese individuals are all over the mainland, as students, tourists, small businessmen. Even old soldiers who fought for Jiang and against Mao are now visiting their hometowns on the mainland. (They do sometimes remove their anti-Communist tatooes. They would be embarrassing to explain at the village sauna.)
Lester Ness
Kunming
China
Yep. Given the right combination of circumstances, they may at some point be able to buy the mainland, lock stock and barrel.
That is one of the threats the putative Communists see with allowing Taiwanese politicians to have their own party nationwide on the mainland.
Surprisingly, the leaders of Taiwan’s Guo Min Dang have been visiting the mainland in the last year or two, talking about who knows what? in private. You surely know that everything important in China is done in private.
This has been going on for a lot longer than two years, indeed from long before the air link to the mainland, so it is no surprise at all.
It may be more public recently, that’s all.
The Kuomintang (is that Wade-Gery, hehe), for various reasons, has had a much closer talking relation, even from the earliest days, with the Chinese Communist Party than is generally known.
In those earliest days, as many don’t know, the Soviets, who were covert supporters of Chiang, often served as the middle men.
What’s the old song–”That’s entertainment”.
The US should not anger China. Where else will Bush borrow the money to “kickstart” the American economy?
Well, Neo-cons, and other blood-thirsty do-gooders, not to mention Armegeddonites, need new Evil Empires at all times. I’m sure that slaughtering Muslims will get boring soon. There’s already one End Times ministry claiming that Revelations predicts an inevitable nuclear war between the US and China. The Neo-con(men) would probably say that conquest of China would pay for itself, via Chinese factories and resources.
Lester
Hehe.
Kissinger will have to look for a new employer. Oman or Kuwait perhaps?
Some member of the Giant Octopus Party.
The mainland Communists are so pissed at the devaluation of the dollar, they are already spitting mad.
But what is one to do, when all the Ponzi schemes are so tightly interlocked?
Well, lots of ordinary Chinese people hoard silver trade dollars, even Qing dynasty sycee ingots shaped like hats. Even the most uneducated working man knows how to blow on the edge of a coin and judge it’s silver content.
You know, guys, if any of you are unemployed and would like to know more about contemporary China, why not come teach English for a year? The main thing schools want from you is a standard accent, so that your conversation students can imitate you. Google “Teach English China” and you’ll get a host of web sites with job openings and chances to post your resume. Usually they want a college degree. I’d suggest you go with a public university rather than a private school. They offer less money, but will probably be easier for you to work with. Of course, you need a passport, but more important is a can-do attitude. If you can’t handle squat toilets, weird food, being surrounded by colored people who speak a foreign language, do not come.
Lester Ness
Kunming
China
“Colored people”?
Although I’m Russian I think I can speak good US accent, I would love to come to live in China for couple years… oh, dreams, sweet dreams…
China is THE hope of the modern World - one strong country not poisoned by deceptions of “democracy”, yet recovering from communist mirage in a graceful way.
Well, lots of ordinary Chinese people hoard silver trade dollars, even Qing dynasty sycee ingots shaped like hats. Even the most uneducated working man knows how to blow on the edge of a coin and judge it’s silver content.
Why not? I’ve met other Russian people in China and as long as you have an OK English Eaccent, you can find an employer. As the Russian economy grows, the amount of commerce with Russia will grow, too, and the desire to learn Russian language. If you go to one of the provinces bordering Russia, they will probably teach Russian as well as English.
Stocking up on gold and silver, as coins, bullion, and artifacts, is traditional, and not only among Chinese.
Taiwanese alone often effect the world price when, for one reason or another, they decide collectively to add to their stores, often on news that never makes it into the nearly worthless American conventional media, or, if it does, which is denatured of its thrust in the telling.
“Hoarding” is a bit of a charged term in English, don’t you think?
Is this another item to be added to what has, since the second Roosevelt, been considered much too sensible financially to be “patriotic”?
You are reading too much into a simple verb.
It is only half-humorous.
Consider its use in other contexts, like “hoarding food”, eh?
True enough in ancient numismatics, for example, collections found buried are simply “hoards”, but that is a strictly technical meaning.
Who hoards gold under the elm tree in the backyard nowadays?
Pardon I seem to have pushed a button above by mistake.
Merely by the way, the often suspect flavor of hoarding in English can be expanded with such uses as “animal hoarding” and even “knowledge hoarding”, which you can easily find on the net.
“hoard (n.)
O.E. hord “treasure, valuable stock or store,” from P.Gmc. *khuzdan (cf. O.N. hodd, Ger. hort, Goth. huzd “treasure,” lit. “hidden treasure”), from *kuzdho, probably from PIE base *(s)keu- “to cover, conceal” (see hide (n.1)). The verb is from O.E. hordian. ” To those who covet to take our wealth, to hoard would thwart their pupose.
What a turn of speech–”anger China”! Is that like “angering” the United States or Mexico?
What might it mean to say: “The United States should not anger the Russian Federation”?
China as a “nation”–there’s one born every minute.
China is a civilization as well as a country, perhaps several countries. Same-same the Indian sub-continent.
Indeed, and really no “nation” at all in the strictest sense, but several nations.
And more important that that–a cultural icon (I deliberately avoid simply “culture”, because it is not monolithic) and a written language.
corr: “than that”
At one point Mao seriously considered getting rid of the character system until he realized–well, the obvious.
Michael Turton has already done a lot of explaining, but I’ll add my two cents.
The Taiwan question is not one of US interests only, but of US support for a people to decide their own destiny.
If Taiwan’s people choose to unify with the People’s Republic of China — a political entity they have never been a part of — that is their choice.
But it is their right to choose, just as it is for other small countries. Not under threat or duress, but freely.
The fact that the PRC threatens military action does not change the US duty to support a long-time ally which is doing absolutely nothing that would be objected to, if any other country did it.
This is exactly the opposite of the reasoning that took the US to Iraq. In Iraq, the US set out on an ill-advised mission to destroy a perceived enemy and replace it with democracy.
In the case of Taiwan, the US would be providing support for a nation that has already proved itself a stable and liberal democratic society.
台灣萬歲!
Very noble goals. And every time you urge your fellow Americans to support the proud and independent democracy of Taiwan be sure to remind them that there support means that we are willing to go to war with China. That is the discussion we should be having now. Not at some future time after an American security pact forces us into a military confrontation with China.
This discussion should focus on the possible nature of such a war. Would the US use nuclear weapons against mainland China, for example, if the initial naval engagement went wrong? We do reserve the right for first use. Would the people of Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles be willing to sacrifice their cities in the cause of Taiwan’s democracy and independence? Many interesting questions that should be put on the table.
What nonsense. The mainland oligarchs threaten war over Taiwan, on wholly invented premises, and to reject the premises means ‘willingness to go to war with China”.
This is very much like the threat of mainland Chinese intervention in Vietnam.
In fact, the United States should have been exerting itself very early to have the mainland Chinese invade. That would have united the whole populace of Vietnam against China.
Instead the morons sent massive numbers of US troops to Vietnam, which Diem had warned Kennedy about earlier, arguing that a large number of US troops, especially in the countryside, would turn a civil war with Communists, backed by China, into a national war of liberation against the US.
Diem was right–but soon enough both he and Kennedy were assassinated, weren’t they?
Which was very much like the threat of mainland intervention in Korea a decade earlier. In that case they drew a line in the sand and we crossed it and paid a horrendous price. In Vietnam we did not cross it. But still paid a horrendous price but at the hands of the Vietnamese instead of the Chinese.
So you want us to draw some more lines and make some more dares. Just as long the American people know in advance what the price will be if are bluff is called.
I could care less what lines Communist China or the United States draw in the sand.
Your analogy with Korea is flawed.
Ho Chi Minh, and the Vietnamese Communists, were as anti-Chinese as they were anti-United States.
The Chinese Communists would not have had a prayer invading Vietnam.
Their invasion of Vietnam, after Vietnam put a stop to the killing fields in Cambodia, is instructive.
“One wonders what objective criteria secession and independence leaders must procure before they can join the exclusive nation-state club. If East Timor, Serbia, Eritrea and a dozen or so Soviet republics had what it takes, why doesn’t Taiwan?”
The “Mother Country” of all the countries above recognized their independence. China never do that for Taiwan. Look at Kosovo, with Serbia’s refusal to recognized its independence, I doubt Kosovo will join UN anytime soon…
well, kosovo’s population is ethnic albanian for the most part, over 90 percent. taiwan’s population is 99 percent ethnic han chinese. serbia is a multiethnic country (serbs,croats,hungarians,slovaks,…),on the other hand, the island of taiwan isn’t really multiethnic although they do have their aborigines, but they’re definitely a minority. serbia was under the soviet union rule, serbian citizens were not russian, and all those ethnicities were forced to live in the same territory,and later on had to deal with their cultural issues, so there’s a reason for independence. taiwan (before the japanese invasion) was under the same government as the mainland, japanese were only there for fifty years, that’s nothing compared to thousands of years. taiwanese share the same culture with mainlanders, even though taiwan has some more western influence,but china has it too. kosovo’s situation cannot be compared to taiwan’s. i think chinese people in general weren’t really “happy” with japanese invasion and they certainly don’t feel any nostalgic feeling towards those years of japanese invasion. china is a permanent member of the security council in the UN, so that request (by taiwan) to join the UN is so out of the question, anyways they have tried it before and it was rejected countless times. i’m totally pro kosovo’s joining the UN and it’s going to happen let’s hope sooner rather than later. :) yubi