[HN Gopher] The leader who's standing up to China
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The leader who's standing up to China
        
       Author : acqbu
       Score  : 85 points
       Date   : 2021-12-24 16:50 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.reuters.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.reuters.com)
        
       | natded wrote:
       | The Taiwanese leader is hardly "standing up" to China. China's
       | calculus of attacking Taiwan is probably a more global in scale:
       | for example US submarines can end the maritime traffic in South
       | China Sea completely at any given point.
        
         | seanmcdirmid wrote:
         | SCS is not conducive to submarine operations, which is why
         | China wants to monopolize it so badly. Otherwise, they are
         | completely hemmed in by Korea, Russia, Japan, Taiwan.
         | Unfettered sea access for trade or military reasons is seen as
         | very important, right now it is easy to cut China off (and
         | Russia is still considered a frenemy despite how relations have
         | improved in the last 20 years).
        
       | jetsetgo wrote:
        
       | rectang wrote:
       | > _" With their lives, blood and tears, the young people in Hong
       | Kong have demonstrated for us that one country, two systems is
       | not feasible," Tsai said._
       | 
       | The saga of Hong Kong is so sad. They didn't take their freedom
       | for granted, they struggled mightily, but ultimately they have
       | been crushed.
       | 
       | The lesson for Taiwan could not be more stark. I can see why Tsai
       | said this, and why she has received such support from the
       | Taiwanese people in response.
       | 
       | It is hard to stand up to the CCP. If an individual with Chinese
       | ties did so on a forum such as HN, doubtless they would be
       | reported by omnipresent loyalists monitoring these exchanges,
       | just as the students were at various US universities.
       | 
       | https://www.propublica.org/article/even-on-us-campuses-china...
        
         | ngcc_hk wrote:
         | The game is asymmetric. Hongkonger cannot fight back with all
         | guns with chinese hands. Look at many countries and firms (say
         | intel lately), Taiwan is still in danger as we are not sure any
         | real consequences once the Dist settled down. And how many
         | insiders are there. In Taiwan.
         | 
         | Just ... we can hope in a not so hopeful scenario.
        
         | ssss11 wrote:
         | Not just US universities - those stories have been widely
         | reported in Australia too. I'd expect it's happening
         | everywhere...
        
       | mrobot wrote:
       | The constant onslaught of US "news" drumming up war on China and
       | Russia is very scary. The production value of this site and the
       | detail of its design are a problem. Reuters is a problem. This is
       | indeed war propaganda. I do think the United States is on the
       | offensive in this "cold war", and they they want it to be hot.
       | United States foreign policy has historically been, let's say,
       | less than helpful. I really do not believe China is a threat to
       | the world.
       | 
       | What exactly is there to stand up to? Why not cooperate with
       | China for mutual good? I believe Chinese leadership when they say
       | all they want is a more multilateral world. US simply can't stop
       | being world hegemon. Looking at the way people post both on this
       | site and on Reddit about China, it's all same old Yellow Peril
       | racism if you ask me. Really getting sick and tired of everyone
       | just uncritically taking in US war propaganda and jumping on the
       | war wagon.
        
         | rkk3 wrote:
         | Yep just another piece of the _Manufacturing Consent_
         | apparatus, this one seems more of just a puff piece though.
        
         | CountSessine wrote:
         | "Peace for our time", right?
        
         | philsnow wrote:
         | > Why not cooperate with China for mutual good?
         | 
         | This works until it doesn't. "American exceptionalism" is not
         | unique to Americans.
        
         | jonnybgood wrote:
         | > Why not cooperate with China for mutual good? I believe
         | Chinese leadership when they say all they want is a more
         | multilateral world.
         | 
         | China is attacking Lithuania economically for opening a
         | Taiwanese Representative Office. China is not cooperating for
         | mutual good.
        
         | monkeycantype wrote:
         | I would love to be able to work with the people of China and
         | Russia as you're suggesting, I think the great mass of people
         | in all these countries would, but you're blurring the
         | populations of the countries and the strategic plotting of the
         | national leaders. I wonder if you might be making the terrible
         | mistake that almost all of us seem to make, of seeing your
         | country from the intimate perspective of family, friends and
         | ordinary people living their lives, and others through the
         | words and actions of national politicians. I think the leaders
         | of all of these countries are threats to the world, and not
         | because they necessarily have plans of expanding their empire
         | across the globe, but because their primary goal is to hold
         | power in their own country which requires theatre to the
         | populace and flows of wealth to their core supporters. China
         | doesn't need to retake Taiwan, there are already Chinese people
         | there doing just fine, Russia doesn't need to threaten Ukraine,
         | US doesn't need its military practically everywhere, but the
         | leaders in each of those countries can't back down on any of
         | those things or their person hold on power is over
        
         | zepto wrote:
         | The build up of troops on the border of Ukraine, and the
         | Chinese military incursions into Taiwan's airspace have not
         | been drummed up by the US news.
        
           | justicezyx wrote:
           | So first, Taiwan is not sovereign nation. Under international
           | law, Taiwan and mainland is one nation. So there is no such
           | concept of Taiwan airspace per international law.
           | 
           | And, the so-called incursion is to Taiwan's air defence
           | identification zone. That zone covers majority of Fujian
           | province. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Defense_Identif
           | ication_Z... Literally, mainlanders are intrusion Taiwan adiz
           | constantly. That's how ridiculous the western media repotting
           | has been nowadays. They'll refuse to even acknowledge an
           | obviously physically impossible situation, and blame on
           | China...
        
             | zepto wrote:
             | > So first, Taiwan is not sovereign nation. Under
             | international law, Taiwan and mainland is one nation.
             | 
             | This is the CCP position, yes.
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=justicezyx
        
               | newbear1 wrote:
               | That's just what reconfigured by international laws. CCP
               | of course will proclaim rulings that are favorable to
               | China.
        
               | zepto wrote:
               | Not so: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29677497
               | 
               | Also, I see your account was created 3 years ago, but
               | only became active in the last hour to post defenses of
               | the CCP and China.
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=newbear1
        
               | newbear1 wrote:
               | So first, political topics related to China is sensitive.
               | And the ideological arguments are often non respectful
               | because of certain social and historical indoctrination
               | on the both sides.
               | 
               | I happen to be deeply in both parties, personally have
               | close observation of CCP local organisational activities,
               | and the American reporting and political treatment on
               | CCP. So I think it's useful to hide my identity and make
               | throw away account to just reflect a point. Otherwise,
               | people would start associate my comments to certain
               | ideology allegence.
               | 
               | Because I don't need to educate HN visitors about the
               | value of western freedom value, so naturally you'll not
               | see my comments to criticizing CCP. Because a lot of
               | others can do a better job.
               | 
               | I am just come to provide CCP's view on hot issues.
               | Because CCP wield great power. Dealing with powerful
               | entity requires rational thinking. Otherwise both sides
               | are running into conflicts carelessly, that's when the
               | war becomes most damaging to both parties.
               | 
               | Chas Freeman is a good source of similar perspective. He
               | is much better than my own writing or expression in
               | extending this view.
        
               | zepto wrote:
               | > So I think it's useful to hide my identity and make
               | throw away account to just reflect a point.
               | 
               | You made the throwaway account 3 years ago, and only
               | started to use it two hours ago.
               | 
               | > Otherwise, people would start associate my comments to
               | certain ideology allegence.
               | 
               | I think the converse is true. If your account had a
               | history of points of view on different topics people
               | would be _far less likely_ to see it as being driven by
               | ideological allegiance.
               | 
               | > I am just come to provide CCP's view on hot issues.
               | 
               | Thank you for being clear about what you are doing here.
               | That is much appreciated.
        
               | newbear1 wrote:
               | > your account had a history of points of view on
               | different topics people would be far less likely to see
               | it as being driven by ideological allegiance.
               | 
               | Well, if everyone is as open as you are showing here,
               | then it would already be diverse long ago.
               | 
               | And for as long as I can remember, contrarian views on
               | China is attacked blindly with passion. And regardless of
               | the views merits and backings, they were labeled as CCP
               | agent, buyouts, wumao.
               | 
               | I certainly have views critical CCP and a fairly balanced
               | and non ideological driven views on a lot of other
               | things. But of course, any contrarian political views on
               | China results me be labeled something that is
               | automatically non diverse, right?
               | 
               | So all in all, it's not that I have no diverse views, it
               | was just that they were viewed non diverse. Like a myopic
               | person cannot put much details on what they see. That's
               | not the problem of the subject.
        
             | diego_moita wrote:
             | > So first, Taiwan is not sovereign nation. Under
             | international law,
             | 
             | And who made that "international law"? The CCP? Taiwan is
             | sovereign because they want to be, overwhelmingly.
             | 
             | China's imperialism towards Taiwan is just imperialism,
             | like in Tibet and Hong Kong. And like Russia in Ukraine.
             | 
             | Nothing different than the U.S. did in Philippines, Iran
             | and Latin America during most of 20th century.
        
               | newbear1 wrote:
               | International laws are defined by international community
               | through some Democratic process.
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law
        
               | zepto wrote:
               | In the multilateral case, recognition of Taiwan by the UN
               | has long been something that China has had veto power
               | over.
               | 
               | In the unilateral case, China prevents individual
               | countries from recognizing Taiwan or even implying it's
               | independence through threats and retaliation.
               | 
               | A recent example: https://news.yahoo.com/china-
               | threatened-send-lithuania-garba...
               | 
               | The only reason Taiwan is not considered sovereign under
               | international law is because China has prevented it.
        
               | CogitoCogito wrote:
               | > The only reason Taiwan is not considered sovereign
               | under international law is because China has prevented
               | it.
               | 
               | Same question as here:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29677548
               | 
               | Which "international law" are you referring to that
               | doesn't consider Taiwan sovereign? Maybe you mean to say
               | that Taiwan/ROC is not a member of the UN? That is true,
               | but it doesn't mean that Taiwan isn't a sovereign
               | country. Switzerland didn't become a sovereign country
               | only in 2002.
        
               | zepto wrote:
               | Yes, this is a fair point. I was referring primarily to
               | the fact that the UN doesn't recognize Taiwan as a
               | separate entity and doesn't give it a seat independently
               | from the mainland - e.g. The WHO has been blocked from
               | doing so by the CCP.
               | 
               | But, you are right, this is not the same at all as an
               | 'international law' establishing that Taiwan is not a
               | sovereign country.
        
               | newbear1 wrote:
               | > In the multilateral case, recognition of Taiwan by the
               | UN has long been something that China has had veto power
               | over.
               | 
               | I think you are just stating that that is part of the
               | international law, right? Law is just law. It went to
               | effect for stakeholders agree that they can abide by bits
               | ruling.
               | 
               | Texas is not independent because US does not allow that.
               | Right? Because the law dictates that the sovereign power
               | is legally the care giver of a group of population on a
               | land.
               | 
               | You are mixing law and self conscience.
               | 
               | https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/would-war-
               | over....
               | 
               | This is relatively balanced description on the issue. One
               | can certainly see that the politics have made the matter
               | intentionally vague.
               | 
               | And nternational law is not necessarily written. It could
               | be some commonly agreed principles. For example, there is
               | no written law says US government can govern the land on
               | here. It's based a certain aggreed upon concepts in
               | people's mind.
        
               | zepto wrote:
               | No - see the other commenter. There is _no international
               | law stating that Taiwan is part of China._
               | 
               | If you can provide us with a link to the law in question,
               | we might be able to go into this question in more detail.
               | 
               | Until then I think it's fair to assume that you are
               | mistaken.
        
               | CogitoCogito wrote:
               | > International laws are defined by international
               | community through some Democratic process.
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law
               | 
               | Which "international law" exactly states that Taiwan is a
               | part of "China"? For example, the UN certainly has never
               | taken that position. (Many people mistakenly believe that
               | UN Resolution 2758 says that, but even a cursory reading
               | of the short resolution shows.)
        
               | newbear1 wrote:
               | That of course is political. Stake holders read that as
               | close enough to their own position, such that they are OK
               | to let the evtual showdown to come after certain time
               | point.
               | 
               | I am not saying UN resolution does not give ground to
               | Taiwan to be independent, I am just saying CCP reads that
               | ad accept to be considered Taiwan and mainland to be the
               | same China. And everyone in that decision process
               | understand that.
        
               | zepto wrote:
               | I think it's clear that there is nothing to support your
               | claim that there is any 'international law' that
               | establishes that Taiwan is part of the mainland.
               | 
               | It is literally only a position of the CCP and nothing
               | more.
               | 
               | As I have pointed out, your account was created three
               | years ago, but was silent until a couple of hours ago,
               | when you have used it only to support the claim that
               | Taiwan is part of mainland China, never commenting on
               | anything else.
        
           | devy wrote:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
        
             | zepto wrote:
             | Can you summarize that?
        
           | juanani wrote:
        
         | diego_moita wrote:
         | > I believe Chinese leadership when they say all they want is a
         | more multilateral world.
         | 
         | They say but don't do it. China's behaviour towards Canada,
         | Lithuania and most of Eastern Asia is anything but
         | multilateral. It is plain and simple imperialism.
        
         | mcswell wrote:
         | Repeat after me, Mr Robot: Premier Xi looks like Winnie the
         | Pooh. What? I can't hear you!
        
         | systemvoltage wrote:
         | Taiwanese Foreign Minister's interview is terrifying, the sheer
         | horror on his face: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3D0_Bhzbyo
         | 
         | It's also fair to push back on war hungry narratives, it is
         | equally as important to understand all scenarios. Nobody puts
         | this better than Gen. Mark Milley:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSBN5xBC1L4
        
         | rectang wrote:
         | > _Reuters is a problem._
         | 
         |  _Any_ independent news organization is a problem for the CCP.
        
           | justicezyx wrote:
           | Well, as a matter of fact, any independent news organization
           | is a problem for any modern government. CCP and US
           | establishment are equally fearful of independent news
           | organization. For example, Assange and wikileak.
        
             | mcswell wrote:
             | I guess you mean that President Trump closed down CNN
             | because it said so much against him, just like President
             | Biden has closed down Fox News.
             | 
             | What? They didn't?
        
             | mcswell wrote:
             | I guess you mean that President Trump closed down CNN
             | because it said so much against him, just like President
             | Biden has closed down Fox News.
             | 
             | What? They didn't?
        
         | analyst74 wrote:
         | I'm not old enough to read mainstream news during the 80s, but
         | learnt that there was a period of anti-Japanese fear mongering
         | due to Japan's rising economy. It caused riots, burning of
         | japanese products, and street violence to people who looked
         | like Japanese.
         | 
         | I'm not too worried about war between nuclear powers, but I do
         | fear for Chinese and Chinese-looking people living in the west.
        
           | monkeycantype wrote:
           | We should all worry about the kind of people who would harass
           | Chinese looking people in the west, but as someone in
           | Australia, I'd like to assure you that while it is definitely
           | very hard to move to a new country, a new language a new
           | culture, and there are racists everywhere who tend to be loud
           | and impulsive and hurtful, people here are deeply proud that
           | this is a place where people from around the world have been
           | able to come to make a life and contribute their culture.
           | With each wave of immigration there has been initial wariness
           | and eventual embrace. If you ever get the chance to come to
           | Melbourne, ask people about the post war Vietnamese
           | migration, if you read the media from the time you'd think
           | there was hostility towards Vietnamese, what you'll actually
           | encounter is pride that Vietnamese are here and a real love
           | for the Vietnamese people. Read about the visas given to
           | Chinese students after Tiananmen, and the pride people have
           | in the hybrid Indigenous/European/Asian culture of Broome
           | which was exempt from the White Australia Policy, and you'll
           | see the world people want is a very different place to the
           | fearful place our national leaders are dreaming for us
        
         | morpheos137 wrote:
         | Russophobia is omnipresent in the Western press too. It is
         | simply another form of racism.
        
           | diego_moita wrote:
           | Speaking as a Latin American, Russia is just another banana
           | republic with 100 million people and nukes.
           | 
           | > simply another form of racism.
           | 
           | That's just plain stupid. I fear their authoritarian and
           | murder leader, I don't fear their people.
        
           | throwway1234 wrote:
           | I'm a Russian language learner for many years. When you
           | listen to Putin what he tells his Babushkas, you now you
           | cannot trust him one word. BTW, I recommend to listen to him
           | as a learner: He speaks slowly, very articulate with clear
           | pronunciation, so he can tell Babushkas that foreign power
           | are threatening Russia.
        
           | coeneedell wrote:
           | I don't think it's racist to be worried about a nuclear power
           | colonizing its neighbors.
        
             | natded wrote:
             | Superpower logic is far too cold for terms like
             | _colonizing_. There is very little focus on such
             | _ideological by-products of power_ when the General Staff
             | makes its considerations and recommendations for the
             | security of the state. If you think in terms like these,
             | from some liberal shitlib university, against military
             | superpowers who can guarantee MAD with nuclear weapons you
             | are not going to make heads or tails any of it.
             | 
             | It is best to purify your mind and just read Thomas
             | Schelling.
        
         | yumraj wrote:
         | > I really do not believe China is a threat to the world.
         | 
         | Tibetans, Uighars, HKers and citizens of almost all the
         | countries that share a land or sea border with China will
         | disagree with you.
         | 
         | And so will all the countries, such as Lithuania, and private
         | companies who have been forced to toe CCP line.
         | 
         | I can keep going on...
        
         | natded wrote:
         | US isn't technically drumming up war on China and Russia; they
         | are promoting war to the last Ukrainian against Russia, and
         | probably the last Taiwanese against China. A difference, but
         | probably enough to help US hitch a long as superpower couple of
         | decades if either of these events take place.
         | 
         | Direct confrontation between Russia, China vs. US is not even
         | in the question. US couldn't defeat couple of goat herders and
         | they're going to level up to S-tier opponents? I wouldn't even
         | bet on US against Venezuela or Iran at this point.
        
           | systemvoltage wrote:
           | > US couldn't defeat couple of goat herders and they're going
           | to level up to S-tier opponents? I wouldn't even bet on US
           | against Venezuela or Iran at this point.
           | 
           | Operation Desert Storm was a success and completely
           | overwhelming. The amount of power projected was incalculable.
           | Here is an extremely detailed account of it:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxRgfBXn6Mg
        
             | natded wrote:
             | OTOH, US did just this year lose its longest war and it was
             | against Afghanistan. I rely on this closer event. Granted,
             | admitting the loss there was the first step in road to
             | recovery.
        
               | systemvoltage wrote:
               | It wasn't a conventional war. I don't think there is any
               | defense to the massive fuck up in the Afghanistan exit
               | strategy though. But, to say that US military is
               | incapable of doing anything is a pretty lousy argument.
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | What is conventional war? Do you think that the Chinese
               | or Russians will play nice and play war ship for ship,
               | plane for plane and tank for tank against the US like the
               | Iraqis did at the beginning?
               | 
               | The US military generally has a very "meh" track record.
        
               | xxpor wrote:
               | Otoh, the us was able to maintain the status quo with the
               | taliban being relegated to the mountains with 3500 troops
               | against ~75000 taliban. The DOD has over 1 million troops
               | at their disposal. If you seriously think Afganistan was
               | more about absolute power vs political willingness.. I
               | just don't know what to say.
        
               | sudosysgen wrote:
               | That isn't actually right. Yes there were 3500 actual
               | soldiers on the ground, but they also had tens of
               | thousands of afghans they would use for a lot of the
               | dirty work, and multiple thousands of other support
               | personnel necessary outside of Afghanistan. And that was
               | just during the drawdown, during surges there were even
               | more at various points in time.
               | 
               | As for sheer numbers of troops, the US doesn't have the
               | capability to actually outfit, support, and deploy
               | anywhere near a million troops in, for example, the
               | middle east.
        
       | moogleii wrote:
       | Curious, why do they describe her as a technocrat when her
       | background is in law?
        
         | mrec wrote:
         | "Technocrat" doesn't necessarily imply "technologist". It's
         | like the more colloquial "wonk", i.e. someone who's more
         | interested in the minutiae of policy rather than party
         | affiliation or personal aggrandizement.
         | 
         | Offtopic: dear god that article is a design trainwreck. I don't
         | think I've ever been more thankful for Firefox's reader view.
        
           | kodah wrote:
           | I thought it usually implies a Subject Matter Expert, rather
           | than someone who dabbled too much in policy
        
       | droopyEyelids wrote:
       | It is interesting how long a nearby territory/country can 'Stand
       | up to China'
       | 
       | When you look at _countries_ (not even territories!) that have
       | tried to 'stand up' to the USA, you only see a trail of
       | immiseration and coup d'etat. They don't even have to be _that_
       | close to us geographically, like Nicaragua or Chile. Cuba is the
       | closest to a success story, and look at their economic
       | indicators. https://tradingeconomics.com/cuba/gdp-per-capita-ppp
       | 
       | I don't know what conclusion to draw from this, but it's just
       | wild to me that China is a superpower, and not only has Taiwan
       | failed to have a revolution, but they're a financial success.
       | https://statisticstimes.com/economy/country/taiwan-gdp-per-c...
        
         | zepto wrote:
         | Taiwan has had the protection of and deep economic cooperation
         | with the USA.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | whodunnit wrote:
         | Superpower (from Google): A powerful and influential nation,
         | especially a nuclear power that dominates its allies or client
         | states in an international power bloc.
         | 
         | > I don't know what conclusion to draw from this, but it's just
         | wild to me that China is a superpower, and not only has Taiwan
         | failed to have a revolution, but they're a financial success.
         | 
         | It would seem that China doesn't meet the definition of a
         | superpower, but I think we should all be very wary of any
         | nation or individual who seeks power over others. Those who
         | seek power are those we don't want to have it.
        
         | trynumber9 wrote:
         | >territory/country
         | 
         | How telling.
        
         | CogitoCogito wrote:
         | Taiwan (ROC) has been a separate country on the doorstep of
         | China (PRC) for more than 70 years. This status quo could
         | certainly continue another 70 years. This status quo could even
         | outlast the PRC government.
         | 
         | I think the conclusion you should draw from this is the obvious
         | one: China is not all powerful.
        
           | riffic wrote:
           | by "separate country", Taiwan is governed by a group that
           | believes it is the true government of China in exile. It
           | might be helpful to be clear about this.
        
             | CogitoCogito wrote:
             | > by "separate country", Taiwan is governed by a group that
             | believes it is the true government of China in exile. It
             | might be helpful to be clear about this.
             | 
             | The overlapping (though not equal) border claims by the ROC
             | and the PRC don't change the fact that they are two
             | separate countries. No clarity is required because it
             | really isn't relevant. Border disputes between countries is
             | entirely normal.
        
               | riffic wrote:
               | you're muddying the waters and it's absolutely relevant
               | (History and historical context is always relevant). In
               | 1949, the Republic of China retreated to the island of
               | Taiwan and continues to this day to claim to be the
               | government (in exile) of China.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_the_government_o
               | f_t...
               | 
               | This isn't a simple border dispute between separate
               | countries. It's a _governance dispute_ between two
               | competing claims to a single country.
        
               | natded wrote:
               | This is pretty funny though, if I've understood this
               | correctly. People in the West always seem to think that
               | _a properly_ democratic government made by the chinese
               | people (be it those in Taiwan or those in China) would be
               | "peaceful", but to me if I look at a map and _observe_
               | the lands Taiwan claims for herself, it seems quite a lot
               | (if they do actually claim the rights to governing the
               | China-China too, and not just Taiwan the Island)
        
               | CogitoCogito wrote:
               | > This is pretty funny though, if I've understood this
               | correctly. People in the West always seem to think that a
               | properly democratic government made by the chinese people
               | (be it those in Taiwan or those in China) would be
               | "peaceful", but to me if I look at a map and observe the
               | lands Taiwan claims for herself, it seems quite a lot (if
               | they do actually claim the rights to governing the China-
               | China too, and not just Taiwan the Island)
               | 
               | Are you making the claim that Taiwan's official
               | historical claims somehow make the current country not
               | peaceful? How exactly? Exactly what belligerent actions
               | has Taiwan engaged in recently?
        
               | CogitoCogito wrote:
               | > This isn't a simple border dispute between separate
               | countries. It's a governance dispute between two
               | competing claims to a single country.
               | 
               | Actually it's not even theoretically a single country.
               | The "China" officially claimed officially by the ROC is
               | quite different than the "China" officially claimed by
               | the PRC. The difference between the claims it at least
               | Mongolia.
               | 
               | But you are correct it's not a simple border dispute. It
               | is a complicated border dispute that has gone on a couple
               | generations now. But it's also complicated dispute
               | between two separate countries. It is quite clearly you
               | who are trying to muddy the waters here.
        
         | rectang wrote:
         | This is pure, distilled whataboutism.
        
         | kube-system wrote:
         | Isolating yourself from the world's largest economy isn't a
         | winning economic policy.
        
           | CogitoCogito wrote:
           | > Isolating yourself from the world's largest economy isn't a
           | winning economic policy.
           | 
           | If you're saying that Taiwan is isolating itself from China,
           | then you are very wrong. Taiwan and China's economies are
           | very intertwined. Taiwanese companies have had a large hand
           | in the economic growth of China during the past generation.
           | 
           | It's a good reminder that countries can do quite well working
           | with one another even if they're rivals. Hopefully this
           | reality keeps hostilities in check.
        
             | kube-system wrote:
             | I'm not saying that -- I'm responding to:
             | 
             | >_countries_ (not even territories!) that have tried to
             | 'stand up' to the USA, you only see a trail of immiseration
             | and coup d'etat.
             | 
             | I think the situation demonstrates that China needs Taiwan
             | more than the US needs Cuba.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | trasz wrote:
         | I'm not sure it's a valid comparison, because no other country
         | is even remotely comparable in aggressiveness with USA. What if
         | you compared with eg India instead?
        
           | WillPostForFood wrote:
           | If you look at Russia's invasion of Georgia and Ukraine, they
           | are at least "remotely comparable".
        
             | trasz wrote:
             | Couple of thousands dead (Ukraine) vs one million dead
             | (Middle East); I'd say that's quite a difference.
        
               | adolph wrote:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
        
               | hourislate wrote:
               | What about the 7-14 million Ukrainians Russia starved to
               | death, do they count? Sure it happened a while ago but it
               | happened and it was Russian aggressiveness that still
               | reverberates today. Your attitude dismisses you from any
               | and all future discussions on this matter. You have
               | demonstrated that your are unfit to comment.
        
               | trasz wrote:
               | What about all the natives slain by Americans, and then
               | the slavery? How about racist laws designed to get the
               | black population into prisons (largely successfully)?
               | What about people dying, because money that would
               | normally be used to fund healthcare are being wasted on
               | invading other counties instead?
               | 
               | So, I'd say it makes sense to focus on the current state
               | of affairs, including recent history. War in Georgia is
               | recent history, as is the Middle East. Holodomor,
               | American concentration camps for Japanese, or apartheid -
               | not so much.
               | 
               | Not to mention that people responsible for Holodomor are
               | all dead. People responsible for killing million random
               | civilians in the Middle East are living very comfortable
               | lives, and their fellow citizens don't even consider them
               | criminals.
        
               | enaaem wrote:
               | You don't decide what is relevant. Ukraine has not
               | forgotten and it is clear which side they have chosen
               | now. No country in the world has such bad relations with
               | it's neighbours than Russia.
        
               | trasz wrote:
               | Oh, American natives didn't forget either, same way the
               | Chinese never forgot about Japan and Russians about
               | Nazis, but it doesn't change the fact it's all ancient
               | history.
               | 
               | Also, don't get me wrong, but Ukraine doesn't exactly
               | have good relations with USA either. Remember how twenty
               | years ago they promised you protection if you give up
               | your nuclear weapons? They screwed your over. Now they
               | are denying you NATO membership, for the same reason.
               | They are really good at propaganda though.
        
             | enaaem wrote:
             | The USSR was pretty much Russian imperialism. Russia is
             | still very unpopular in eastern Europe.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor
        
               | juanani wrote:
        
           | srvmshr wrote:
           | If we are talking about China-India equations, they are
           | troubled too. China claims vast swathes of land all along the
           | Himalayas, including two Indian states (as being part of
           | ancient Southern Tibet). It is interesting that China
           | recognizes claims only unilaterally, as any territory in
           | dispute on Chinese side is immediately shut off from the
           | discussion.
           | 
           | India & China are in middle of a military standoff, which
           | began in 2020 summer, about border lines [1]. It has seen one
           | of the most massive buildups since 1962 Sino-Indian war
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020%E2%80%932021_China%E2%
           | 80%...
        
             | trasz wrote:
             | So, how many people died in that conflict?
             | 
             | Because, frankly, I don't give a damn about oil or
             | territorial claims. That's just politics. People's lives -
             | that's what matters.
        
       | justicezyx wrote:
       | Ms. Tsai is a skillful politician. Her success primarily lies on
       | the adoption and the adept use of identity politics in Taiwan.
       | 
       | Despite a long history of national linkage with mainland China,
       | Taiwan, under the colonization and brutal cultural and economic
       | transformation by Japan invasion in the early 20 century till the
       | end of WWII, have gone through a heart breaking separation from
       | the homeland.
       | 
       | Ms. Tsai, just like her mentor, Mr. Lee Teng-hui are heavily
       | influenced by liberal Democratic political ideology, and refined
       | that with a modern form that is closer to western worlds. Mr. Lee
       | Teng-hui represents a more Japanese heritage. And because of his
       | disillusioned passion for communism, Lee had been a communist,
       | and got bullied by KMT after the retreat.
       | 
       | Ms. Tsai led a whirlwind of political ascension through labeling
       | "Ben Sheng Ren " "Wai Sheng Ren " political identities. Where she
       | also mastered the online propaganda toolings eg the 1450 army (ht
       | tps://zh.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%B6%B2%E7%B5%A1%E6%89%93%...).
       | Mrs. Tsai's domestic policy heavily rely on trade economic value
       | for political ties like importing US pork with additive that are
       | known to have harm to human
       | https://zh.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%B6%B2%E7%B5%A1%E6%89%93%...
       | And cultivation of national pride to distance the Taiwan island
       | from mainland, and make the island more prestigious and similar
       | to a national body. Like the so-called "advanced vaccine" by
       | Taiwan's own Rd center
       | https://www.dw.com/zh/%E5%8F%B0%E6%B9%BE%E5%BC%80%E6%89%93%E...
       | these vaccines are rushed to public without adequate testing, and
       | caused higher than usual death.
       | 
       | Ms. Tsai obviously has no adherence to the international law that
       | recognize Taiwan as a part of China. And many Taiwan politicians
       | are fearful of joining China for historical reasons. They even
       | rejected Jiang Zeming's offer to retain it's own military and
       | civil government, by just recognizing formally the CCP led
       | central government, literally a federated nation.
       | 
       | Unfortunately, Taiwan's cultural linkage to China is weak. And
       | the mainland is gearing towards a coercive reunification in some
       | form that is appropriate to China's economic and political
       | consideration. I.e., If China continue to grow and surpass US in
       | all major aspects of national strength, Taiwan can keep this
       | state indefinitely, as China does not really care that much when
       | it becomes a more powerful US. But US won't allow that, global
       | hegemony is a zero sum game, the loss of that status will destroy
       | US financial industry, for an example of the consequence. And
       | Taiwan for her self proclaimed high vision of independence, is
       | heading into a dead end. As a weakening China will be more
       | hostile to the island, Taiwan, in its own pursuit of some
       | potlical value, will bring ruin to the island, probably bundled
       | with significant damage to the mainland. Meanwhile, US would
       | righteously declare the victory of democracy, and say nothing
       | about the human suffering in the conflict, and exploit the
       | economic loot afterwards.
       | 
       | In the end, I'll support the growth of China in all aspects of
       | national power. Hopefully a better version of US can born from
       | that. I'll do my best to influence the Western audience about the
       | more complicated aspect of Taiwan issue, to broaden their view
       | about alternatives than just the black and white democracy vs
       | xxxx (authoritarian dictatorship swap any of your favorite words
       | on China).
       | 
       | The US led world order is simply not going to sustain, everyone
       | needs to understand not only US cannot make an example of the
       | right and good, US no longer have the means other than
       | destruction in shaping other nations' fate.
        
         | thoughtstheseus wrote:
         | This comment is straight bunk. Anyone truly curious should seek
         | out primary sources from actual people living in Taiwan.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | diego_moita wrote:
         | I take from this that you're a CCP agent.
         | 
         | The majority of your past comments are reiterations on the
         | talking points and propaganda of the Chinese Communist Party.
        
           | rectang wrote:
           | The HN policy is that we're supposed to assume people are not
           | paid shills.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
           | 
           | > _Please don 't post insinuations about astroturfing,
           | shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades
           | discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about
           | abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data._
           | 
           | In the case of articles touching on China, though, this is
           | hard. We will never hear the perspectives of Chinese
           | nationals who disagree with the CCP line, even if they reside
           | outside of China, because they will be reported and their
           | loved ones will face fearsome punishments. So HN "debate" is
           | polluted because only one side is let through, regardless of
           | whether those espousing the CCP line have any formal
           | relationship with the CCP.
        
             | newbear1 wrote:
             | The logical reasoning is starting lacking, and the
             | preassumptions are equally entrenched.
             | 
             | > We will never hear the perspectives of Chinese nationals
             | who disagree with the CCP line
             | 
             | This is not true. Watch Radio Free Asian, the epoch times,
             | and many indenpent Chinese dissident channels on YouTube
             | like Mr. Jiang Feng (https://youtube.com/c/%E6%B1%9F%E5%B3%
             | B0%E6%97%B6%E5%88%BB). These are mostly Chinese speaking
             | content. You of course can find a lot of English content of
             | western media interviewing Chinese dissident.
             | 
             | > they will be reported and their loved ones will face
             | fearsome punishments.
             | 
             | Another slander by western Media about the social situation
             | in China. Essentialy, the media wants to paint the Chinese
             | soceity as inhuman, and incapable of rational thinking.
             | That of course becomes a nice subconscious justification of
             | violence towards them, like what happened in the colonial
             | era by White colonists to justify their policy towards
             | Indians.
             | 
             | Chinese do not report their friends and family. The might
             | expose by standers occasionally, online. But again that's
             | not too different from someone got cancelled here.
             | 
             | > polluted because only one side is let through
             | 
             | The one sided part is the negative and inhuman side of
             | China right?
             | 
             | Think yourself for a moment the slanders some IDs received
             | when they advanced a contrararian view on China with
             | seemingly plausible backings, and the unanimous views that
             | portrait a unjust and inhuman Chinese society.
             | 
             | If you think the one-sided part is the positive part, then
             | it bears explanation that how someone stating objective
             | truth got slandered repetitively without any factual
             | counterparts.
        
               | orhmeh09 wrote:
               | Radio Free Asia is a propaganda outlet run by and for the
               | US government and it used to be attached to the US state
               | department: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Agency_f
               | or_Global_Media
        
         | yumraj wrote:
         | > In the end, I'll support the growth of China in all aspects
         | of national power.
         | 
         | If you're a Citizen of the Mainland China, then I'll support
         | your right to support your nation and its current CCP
         | Government, even if I disagree with it.
         | 
         | However, if you're a resident/citizen of a Western nation and
         | earning your livelihood there, I'll encourage you to take
         | another look at the whole situation and decide for yourself if
         | CCP model and its behavior towards other nations and even its
         | own minorities is really the right model for any country, let
         | alone China.
        
         | dh5 wrote:
         | Here comes the 50 cent army
        
           | akomtu wrote:
           | I have to disagree. The comment above uses proper English,
           | proper formatting, cites sources where appropriate. That's a
           | 5 dollar comment at the very least.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-12-24 23:02 UTC)