You should’ve seen the freaking huge clock they had in Beijing counting down to Hong Kong’s return. Ethnic nationalism coupled with a fair size chip on the shoulder about western powers no longer being able to bully them.
- Both China and Taiwan recognize Taiwan to be a provice of China. The rest of the world does, too. Governments in both Taiwan and the mainland claim to be the “true” government of the whole country.
China has always jealously guarded what it perceived to be its own territory. Look at the history: it is one long effort to achieve and preserve political unity. It is a trend that is 1000s of years old. China is not going to give up Taiwan or Tibet. Were it not for the Ruskies, they would probably have grabbed outer Mongolia (currently the nation of Mongolia, which was a Soviet satellite) too.
By the same token, China doesn’t want to fight its own people. There is a military and political standoff that is decades old that is likely to persist for decades more. China is unlikely to attack Taiwan, and this is why war is extremely unlikely. If Taiwan were formally to break away (i.e., declare independance), then perhaps that is possible. Even GWB called a Taiwanese politician irresponsible when he used independance rhetoric.
Considering the massive amounts of investment going from Taiwan to China, the status quo is in the best interest of both units.
- Even if T&C were to start something, there would be very little reward for the US to get involved. Quite to the contrary, it would probably be in the best interest of all concerned for China to win easily without any outside intervention. In that case, C would see the US and other countries as a good sports. People would piss and moan about the poor Taiwanese and their “democracy,” but they really would not be much worse off.
If the US were to intervene, there would be horrible death, massive economic waste, and a loser China that was pissed off at the US for good. And that’s the best case scenario, pretty much.
I also don’t agree that China is going to become an aggressor nation. There is nothing in their history, nothing, to suggest that they will. Geographically they are right near India, another country that is becoming more and more powerful. China is already starting to leak into Siberia, however, so a Russo-Chinese conflict is the most likely of all war scenarios.
I’m no fan of the Iraq war, but let’s not go nuts here. Of course we could “beat” Iraq; the question is whether we could do it without killing a large portion of the civilian population, destroying the infrastructure, sowing chaos, and ruining the reputation of the United States in the eyes of the rest of the world.
(I thought msmith537 was British?)
I suppose I used the wrong term. Of course you could beat Iraq, if by beat you mean completely destroy. However I’m not so sure you could win, if by win you mean not killing a large portion of civilian population and levelling the country, and not get the rest of the world completely pissed at you. Germany beat Poland, but they sure didn’t win.
I think you’re hitting upon a contradiction that is at the core of how dangerous the situation with respect to Taiwan could be.
The standard view of Taiwan from most Chinese is simply dogmatic: it is an insult to the pride of China that Taiwan isn’t drawn on international maps as being part and parcel of mainland China. There is little logic to it, other than nationalism.
I suppose an analagous situation is trying to explain why some folks in the US have such an idealized notion of “the South will rise again.” For these folks, it doesn’t matter one whit whether industries or wealth or whatever happens to be in the North or the South, it’s just the idea of the South rising again that is so attractive.
Now, imagine if that same type of zeal was to be held by an overwhelming number of Chinese re: Taiwan, instead of a relative few Americans re: the South. It is a very powerful political force.
I don’t buy for one moment the argument that trade and economics will prevent a major war that would be a clash between two major powers and worldviews. If the issue of Taiwan were to heat up, in China the conflict would be portrayed as “American hegemony/imperialism run amok” vs. “China maintaining international order by stopping warlike aggression into countries’ internal affairs.” In other words, a war would be as much about fighting a percieved danger of American interventionist policies as it would be about reunifying China. In the US, on the other hand, it’d be “the US defending a tiny democracy from being crushed by a giant” vs. “China’s superpower ambitions.”
In the face of such high-minded missions (as they’d be portrayed in either country), who would give a moment of thought to issues of trade? Would Americans think twice about how many products might disappear from the shelves of WalMart if they think that war means standing up to Commie aggression? Ha!
I put it to you that a trade and economic relationship might encourage the two countries to work together, but it won’t do a damn to stop the US and China from sliding towards war. Few countries have ever made a cold, rational analysis of the costs and benefits of going to war, and I see no reason why they will start doing so in the near future.
I guess I misunderstood your point then. And I don’t know that the inherent difficulties of fighting against a guerilla war in Iraq would be applicable to repelling a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. If we tried to overthrow the government of China, it would be analagous. Otherwise I don’t think so.
Except the US did this very thing when it went to war with Iraq the first time. Had the potential economic impact of having Iraq in control of Kuwait’s oil reserves and production capability not been so great, the US would never have bothered to undertake Gulf War I. The economics of oil is the only reason we have any interest in the Middle East to begin with - without oil its just sand. Why else would we continue to prop up the Saudi government?
My original point was that it was assumed the US would win in a war with China. I tried to use the present difficulty in Iraq to show that in no way is this a foregone conclusion. Maybe that was wrong of me, and the present insurgency in Iraq has little to do with a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. I still don’t think the US will automatically win any war it’ll get into in the future, and don’t think a US victory should be assumed/
O.K., point taken.
Talk about missing the point.
What I’m saying is that war is not a contest that can be prevented by being linked by trade and economics alone. That’s a simplistic view that completely ignores the fact that politics and ideology are tremendously strong factors that can send nations to war regardless of any rational calculation of economic self-interest.
In other words, there are many politically compelling reasons for a country to use to justify war, trade and economics are among those reasons. The list of politically compelling reasons to prevent war at any particular time is much shorter, and I don’t put trade on that list.
If people are ginned up and maybe even ready to send young boys to die for some cause, it is a very, very weak retort that war should be avoided because it would impact the trading relationship between two countries. If such an argument has been successful at any time in history, I’d sure love to know about it, because I’m certain that that would be the exception, rather than the rule.
No the issue is that the US would win a war with China over Tiawan. There is such a thing as a limited war. In this case it would be to deny China access to the straight.
Going to war with China at this point would be insane. And not the going to war with Iraq kind of insane, the kind that would have Nixon saying “You did what now?” Not only would we need a major draft, probably bigger than in Vietnam, we’d need to vastly expand our naval and air forces to support the new theater while occupying Iraq and Afghanistan. And this is just assuming someone in Beijing doesn’t decide to break out theater level nuclear weapons.
It’s one thing to rattle the proverbial saber at China when they’re just badgering Taiwan to keep the news interesting. But if we actually went to war with China over some craphole island that has an independent existance only so we can trade parting shots with China, whoever makes the decision needs to be dragged into the street and torn apart by an angry mob. At that point I will be putting on a dress and matching neck brace and heading for the Canadian border as fast as my car will go. I like Taiwan as much as anybody, but they aren’t worth WWIII.
Actually, scratch that. I’ll head south, that should get me farther away from the fallout.
Where to start? If you’ve followed the Taiwan China saga for even the past decade, then this sure sounds like the latest round of saber rattling. No where near the level of 1996 when there was live fire going into international shipping lanes.
Remember that Taiwan has lived with a very large belligerent neighbor since 1949. China does not have much in the way of projecting force outside of it’s borders. Also, what is never talked about is that it is highly like Taiwan has the bomb. Sure, it’s a MAD strategy. After my home in Shanghai get’s nuked, then Taiwan would become a radioactive wasteland. Then the China economy would tank when foreign direct investment disappears and multinationals pull out.
China’s current government has a faustian bargain with the masses. You let us rule, and we’ll let you get rich. As more and more Chinese enter the middle class, the last thing they want is to see McDonalds, BMW, motorola, sony, hawaiian vacations, hollywood movies, imported food and oil, nintendo, ad nauseum go away before they enjoy their piece of the pie.
Finally, I’ve said this on the boards before and will say it again, I expect that within a decade and perhaps 5 years, economic integration between Taiwan and China will drive some sort of raprochment between the two. No idea what form that will take, but some kind of accomodation will take place.
[apologies in advance that owing to work and travel schedules, I probably won’t be able to contribute for the next couple of weeks.]
I suspect so too, but I question saying “most Chinese” feel that way. Certainly that’s been a standard position of the leadership’s rhetoric for some time. But there’s another divide, and that’s the one between rhetoric and actions. You do have to remember the power of “face” in Chinese actions. For all the bluster, China has never made more than saber-rattling gestures about actually conquering Taiwan militarily in over half a century, even at Taiwan’s weakest and the Beijing militarists’ strongest. What could plausibly happen to change that? You keep hearing the rhetoric, from both governments, because to back off from it publicly would mean loss of face - that may be all there is to it. But that doesn’t prevent warm, or at least cordial, relations behind the scenes of the play-acting.
You’re neglecting another aspect of the trade-and-economics argument, and that’s the trade *between * China and Taiwan. That’s been growing rapidly (but quietly) since, well, Deng took over in Beijing and began a detente movement. There has been substantial investment in the mainland by Taiwan companies in recent years; China’s economy depends on it. Travel and currency restrictions have been eased step by step. But you’d have to read the back pages of the Business section to realize that, while the canned speeches are on Page 1.
Operational impracticality aside, what reason would China have to invade Taiwan? That would not only impact their economy significantly, both immediately and long-term, but even if successful it would stir up popular resentment among a people that have largely come to see themselves as independent with their own unique history anyway. Incidentally, the ROC quietly abandoned its claim to represent all of China about 5 years ago or so. Not all that publicly, remember preserving “face” applies to them too, but a substantive change anyway.
I don’t see any good reason, rationally or emotionally, why either China and Taiwan would really choose war, but it is certainly possible that Western governments would misread the rhetoric vs. the reality in any situation in their relations and might attempt to interfere, with destructive consequences.
Upon preview, China Guy has made much the same points, and better, but I spent too much time on this not to post it.
From the time I’ve spent in China, I’ve met a few intellectual types who questioned the government line on Taiwan. Aside from elites, however, I think the overwhelming number of Chinese have very strong feelings about Taiwan… but I don’t think their views are qualitively any more sophisticated than the views of a large number of Americans who supported the war last year because Saddam was “bad guy.”
As far as trade between China and Taiwan reducing tensions, let me be clear: if war were to come about, it would not be just about Taiwan, no more than WW2 in the Pacific was just about Pearl Harbor. I think Taiwan would merely be the trigger that would incite a brewing US-China confrontation.
The points made by you and China Guy are well stated, and nobody can question your expertise in things Chinese, of course. I disagree, of course, and I’d point out the tendency of many China watchers to exhibit a bit of irrational exhuberence about the prospects of that fascinating country. I don’t want to put words in either of your mouths, but I disagree with the points made by some sinologists that the cause of tension between the US and China more or less boils down to a misunderstanding of each other.
That being said, I point out this article as a counter to those who claim that the US is a bunch of warmongers readying for war in the Taiwan Straits. Will they make the same claim of China? (There’s a much better story in The Times today, but I can’t link to it)
My experience in and knowledge of China sounds like it’s about the same as yours, a few business trips and forcibly-polite conversations with the hosts, but certainly anyone who lives there knows better, as does China Guy.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply - I had understood you to be asserting that Taiwan is just an innocent bystander in the crossfire of US-China relations, while dismissing Taiwan’s own ability to get themselves understood and their interests respected in Beijing and Washington. That may well be what happens, but I tend to think the possibility is receding into improbability.
Yes, there are tensions and always will be, in rough proportion to the intersections of our interests, which are growing. But there are a lot of other intersections of interests involved, for one thing, and for another thing few interests are improved by war. Commercial/trade interests drive US/China relations in both directions, and I would suggest that they drive cross-strait relations by now, too.
Let’s take it further - how would a China-US war start? Over what? Not with an invasion across the strait either way; that’s just not feasible. Some impasse in a trade arrangement? Fuhgeddaboudit. Perhaps a coup in Beijing putting militarists/nationalists back into power, or a popular counterrevolution being hijacked by the militarists/nationalists, with a Taiwan attack to distract the populace? Plausible, especially given the rising expectations by the increasingly-affluent mainlanders combined with growing resentment of an authoritarian government; that historical pattern generally leads to revolution. But that would be an entirely new situation to address; I don’t see how one can predict adequately what forces would be in play.
Thanks for the link - it demonstrates that China is willing to rattle its sabers for effect’s sake, too. My favorite example is the Quemoy-Matsu incident, in which the PRC and ROC forces agreed to take turns shelling some island on alternate days so they wouldn’t risk anyone getting hurt.
I think they are getting that mixed up with Kosovo, with General Wesley Clarke ordering British troops to attack russian troops that had landed at some airport, with the brits replying with the above quote.
Declan
Anyone that thinks that Sino- US and/or Sino-Taiwan tensions are at the highest level of anxiety in the past 25 years is either trying to sensationalize to get his piece in a newspaper or is completely out of touch. 1996 for example was much worse.
The Chinese government does whip up nationalist tendancies, but the average man in the street has been raised from birth with the “understanding” that Taiwan is part of China. They never really think about it or question it. however, if you actually discuss why China would ever want to invade Taiwan, it usually gets pretty interesting and often end up with locals questioning why indeed? Especially if it were at the cost of China’s modernization.
Be that as it may, if China really wanted to engage in brinkmanship, they could take the island of Xiao Jinmen, which is about a stones throw off of the coast of Fujian. China could have done that pretty much any time in the past 25 years but have choosen not to.
I’m hardly a star in the eyes everything China is great kinda guy. I do have the perspective of first living in the Chinese countryside in 1985, living more than 10 years since then in China and altogether nearly 20 years in north Asia. Anyhoo, I’m off to the airport and will try to get back to this thread if I can.
This entire thread is pointless.
Two words: Nuclear Weapons. That means no war. Get it? Is this some kind of fun fantasy for some people? It’s like speculating on a Star Trek alternate timeline episode or something. It will not happen.