But more importantly, you dodged the military strategic significance of Taiwan. Telling China to give up Taiwan is like asking China to give cut off its lifeline.
At the end of the day, your point boils down to that China ought not to think that way, for reasons that you believe are the only legitimate reasons. But that is useless: Chinese do view things that way, and if foreign forces pressure China to let Taiwan go, then they will fight to the end.
It seems to me that you are saying that a contemporary political position (that Taiwan should be ruled by the same government as mainland China) is in fact a "core value". Unity can be a value, but the political position that the island of Taiwan is an integral part of China, and China can't be unified without it, is not. That's the position which is encouraged by propaganda and government rhetoric, and mirrors similar positions with regards to, for example, Tibet.
Were this danger to disappear then I foresee much greater chances of Taiwan emerging as a independent state, probably as one that is aligned with PRC in the same manner Canada is to the US.
Say what?
Can you give some background (and, especially, evidence or documentation) for this? Because that sounds completely insane.
China obviously doesn't want the matter resolved peacefully, if at all, because they use this conflict for internal control.
I don't have an opinion on that. Just want to point out that out of the previous 2500 years, China has been unified for only 500 years, and 300 of those 500 years was spent under the yoke of a foreign invader (the Mongols).
This is not true, Mongol rule only lasted for about 100 years.
Han dynasty lasted 400 years. Tang about 300 years, Ming and Qing together lasted about 550 years. All of that adds to about 1250 years of unified times. That did not count Qin or Sui or Northern Song, which are unified that just happened to be short lived.
I don't know where you got your numbers.
> China's people also believe that.
Only because that is what they learn and hear (literally) daily, starting with kindergarten. Just reduce this crab step by step, and it will fade away. The same is true for this even more stupid 7-dash line. They draw this stuff only really, really every map you see in China.
Yes education is a contributing factor. But it is my no means the only factor. Your take also ignores the fact that unification is Chinese core value, which is valued more than western freedom of speech, and that this core value has been around for thousands of years.
I think if you asked the average American living in the continental United States, that they would not care one iota if Puerto Rico suddenly became independent. And frankly it's the same for people living in mainland China - their day-to-day lives would change zero percentage if Taiwan was formally recognized. It's purely a matter of conditioned education delivered as part of the party system.
Is warring with all neighbors a core value too? Chinese government, through censorship, controls the minds of the Chinese people. The government needs to update the core values.
The extent of "mind control" is really not that great. The internet exists, and despite imperfect controls people have access to information. It would probably take Xi down to try to abandon Taiwan.
If the vision is that everyone will be living happily ever after under the PRC umbrella, I could see some flaws in that reasoning. Like a whole population that will probably take up arms guerilla-style. I've visited Taiwan and even wearing pro-CCP colours is frowned upon. If they just want the territory and not the people and it'll end up another XinJiang style "re-education" camp, well that's obviously something unsupportable.
Also, of course Taiwan is so crucial to global supply chains that this has all the ingredients to become a world war in short order, which is pretty worrying.
How about unification, under the government of Taiwan? Is everybody down with that? No? Oh, then maybe the mainland could see why Taiwan isn't down with unification on the mainland's terms.
But that's the problem. Neither side is willing to be unified "under" the other. That's not unification; that's subordination. Neither is willing to be subordinated. So no non-violent unification is currently possible.
They mostly don’t. It’s not that big of an issue outside politics and loudmouths, which sometimes converge.
Taiwan is an excuse to add fire to patriotic indoctrination.
This has strategical implications. Do we want to grandstand or do we want to actually solve a problem? If we want to grandstand at all cost, then we have to wage war with China and force them into submission. If we want an actual peaceful resolution then something has to give.
Maybe the Taiwanese can defend their nation mostly by themselves; amphibious assault is not easy, even for major world powers. Even more difficult with satellites watching your (extensive) preparations. Even more difficult with hostile submarines prowling the seas. The PLA can't march to Taiwan.
It is not China that is deviating from the status quo.
Who is we and they? Based on your Twitter profile, you're Chinese and your views seem perfectly aligned with the official CCP position.
If you think my views are too much like CCP's, you should talk to more mainlanders. There's a way deeper rabbit hole out there.
Yes I have a different opinion than the mainstream western one. So what? I can have my own legitimate, independently researched opinion, of which some parts may or may not align with other actors because that's what I happen to believe in based on research results.
Who is "we" and "they"? The west vs China of course. This was, after all, the context to which I was replying to. Not sure how you missed that context.
Again, the question: does your opinion of her statement change when considering the panicked crying (that you casually omitted) which was pointed out by another user?
>To be perfectly clear, if that wasn't already so, I am against any kind of sexual assault and I support an investigation into corrupt officials.
Another dodge. The question isn't about generalities. It isn't about "different opinions about China". The question is about this very specific instance.
(I didn't doxx you, your information is in your profile.)
My post was never supposed to be a full summary, and I never claimed that it is, so it's very strange that you attack me for not fully summarizing. Passages such as crying, feeling like a zombie, etc are already covered by western media and people have likely already read that -- me pointing out all that again does not add anything useful. The intention from the beginning is to let people read the full thing, including translation nuances, and to let them read parts that they probably haven't read yet (or not in its original form), so that people can make up their own minds. That includes reading up about crying, and more importantly, how the passage about crying was written as well as the context in which that passage appears.
I added some commentary after people asked me to comment on another translation and compare that with the first. But that commentary was secondary to the main goal, which is to let people read the original, full text and make up their own minds. Thus it is neither necessary nor a goal of that commentary to be a full analysis, and I never claimed that it was.
Why are you so obsessed with this? Why is my opinion so much more important to you than what Peng Shuai herself wrote in full? What are you afraid of? Why do you not like the fact that I let others read the original source?
I think there is only one possible answer: you have a specific opinion that you want to force on others, so you are alarmed by others being exposed to more and original information. That's some chilling 1984 thought police behavior right there.
What do you make of the crying?
Do you not see how your attempt to skirt the question makes you look like an apologist and not a neutral commentator? Do you think people reading our exchanges won't notice?
>I think there is only one possible answer: you have a specific opinion that you want to force on others, so you are alarmed by others being exposed to more and original information.
I haven't disputed any "information" you've provided. Not once. The truth is exactly the opposite: I've been questioning your omission of key information.
>That's some chilling 1984 thought police behavior right there.
In a thread precisely about abuse of state power, with real lives at stake, this comment is tasteless. It's you who support the CCP in almost all your commentary here and on Twitter.
I hope you see the irony. Rest assured, people reading this will.
>Why are you so obsessed with this? ... What are you afraid of?
As someone with women in his family who have suffered sexual assault, I find your refusal to even acknowledge her crying, both sickening and cowardly. That's not even to mention your unwavering support for the CCP. But that will be on your conscience not mine.
Okay you know what, this time I'll tell you why I was reluctant to answer.
The first part is: because I don't trust you!
Here, just look at this sentence:
> It's you who support the CCP in almost all your commentary here and on Twitter.
This is a huge misrepresentation of my (much more nuanced and complex) position. If you do good research into my Twitter history will you find multiple points where I disagree with CCP. But the fact that you disregard such facts, and choose to misrepresent me as "supporting CCP in almost all commentary", is telling.
Right off the bat, your suspicious, paranoid behavior gives you away as someone who actively seeks to label people as a propagandist, shill, enemy, criminal, etc. merely for disagreeing with your world view on China. The fact that you continue to stalk and hunt me further confirms it.
The second part is because the Hacker News crowd loves to attack, or downvote without discussing, comments on China that they don't agree with. I have to be careful with not offending the crowd by giving too much wrong opinion. And here you are, zooming in on wrong opinions, which you call "apologist".
I've discussed the Peng Shuai situation in detail in private with multiple people, including women. The opinion among mainland Chinese is, for the most part, very different than the narrative painted in mainstream western media. But why should I say too many things which will potentially cause a flood of downvotes and shitstorm simply because that's not what people here like to hear?
Just think about how wrong this is. For a crowd that loves to preach freedom of speech, I have to fear giving my opinion, in no small part thanks to people like you who continue to harass me and continue to label imaginary enemies. For a crowd who wears the mantra of "we are only against the CCP, not the Chinese people", I have to be wary of giving opinions aligned with the Chinese people. No, having a different opinion on China is not "being an apologist", it's having a different opinion.
So my statement that you are engaging in 1984 thought policing, and actually also in McCarthyism 2.0, is not "irony", it is accurate. The biggest irony is that even though you are supposed to be a supporter of free speech, you attempt to deny others of their free speech by labeling them as enemies, merely because you disagree with them.
You know what, my relatives lives are indeed at stake, and they are indeed being threatened — by a potential US-led war for which its consent is manufactured by anti-China propaganda. So I'm pushing back at that. I can see that you have fully bought into the China threat theory, zooming into anybody who has a different opinion about China, like a drone, denying others of the opportunity to see a different perspective. This is entirely deplorable behavior.
You've said this a few times so I'm going to call you on it.
Can you point to a few examples? Specifically, do any of your Twitter posts disagree with the CCP's official stance on censorship, human rights, international relations, international boundaries, democracy, Hong Kong, Taiwan or Tiananmen Square? Are any of your comments critical of specific, highly ranking CCP officials?
Or, are your comments limited to economic policy and other similarly non-controversial issues?
You've repeatedly touted how critical you are of the CCP on Twitter as proof that your opinion is not one-sided, so I'm looking forward to your response.
> and the first time you've even acknowledged that the crying wording exists(!)
Go back and read what I wrote in verbatim! I wrote:
> There is no doubt that Zhao is a manipulative jerk and that he engaged in unacceptable questionable acts.
"unacceptable acts" include that which make her cry! I didn't "omit" saying that he did deplorable things. This is yet another deplorable example of you looking for imaginary enemies and engaging in thought policing.
No, they aren't. China has been making empty threats for literally decades.
Yes, I am sure they will throw around more empty threats and not follow through on them.
But this "red line" thing is just internal propaganda that they never actually follow through on.
It is time the rest of the world stops pretending.
Furthermore, China can no longer afford to use empty threats when US warships are inceasingly sailing in China's backyard. Things weren't so militarily contested before.
And yet it keeps making them, and no actually doing anything about any of this.
It has been decades of empty threats. I am sure people said the same thing, the last time more empty threats for made.
Yeah, no. Thats the facts. They keep making empty threats, and not following through on them, and they are still doing that to this day.
> more serious about true independence
Well, Taiwan is already truly independent, and that has been the case for decades. They have their own laws, borders, and taxes. That is what an independent country is.
Furthermore, the official stance of the ruling party, is that they are already independent.
Nothing really needs to change, for them to become independent, because that is already the case.
> had maintained the One China Policy.
They have their own taxes, laws and borders. They are already an independent country, actually. There is nothing to be maintained, other than some fantasy make believe lip service.
But you seem to think that this trend can go on forever no matter what. That is a dangerous mistake. What's needed is deescalation, not more escalation in the faulty thinking that they will continue to do nothing no matter what happens.
Exactly, I agree. They keep making threats, that they don't follow through on, and they will continue to not follow through on them.
Nothing is needed, to do anything, given the fact that Taiwan is already independent, and that has been the case for decades.
> What's needed is deescalation
There is nothing to de-escalate. Taiwan is already an independent country, and it has been so for decades, and that will continue.
They have had their own taxes, laws, and borders for decades. And they have those same things today. Nothing has changed. They are already independent, and that was the case before, and still is now.
And anyway, the only one who can choose to stop making those empty threats is china. Complain at them if you don't like their big talk, and no follow through threats.
I am saying that none of this has changed. Taiwan is its own independent country, for decades, and we've been doing the same things, which is follow our defensive treaty with them, and have been doing this for decades.
That's the status quo. Nothing needs to change. Nobody is shooting down Chinese military assets.
All that is happening is the same exact, completely normal defensive treaty actions that we've been doing for a while.
And china isn't going to do anything about this status quo, of Taiwan already being an independent country, with a defense treaty with the US.
So go tell the fucking PRC to deescalate.
Chinese people initially saw Taiwan as part of China for historical reasons as well as a result of the civil war. Propaganda slows this from stopping, but the problem very much is not manufactured.
[1] Sino-Japanese Friendship and Trade Treaty
Yes, there is a certain believe among Chinese that Taiwan is an inalienable part of their territory, but most don't believe that reunification should be achieved by force. There is also the idea that Taiwanese people are indeed different from mainland Chinese, but at the same time, any strong Taiwanese identity is the result of propaganda and indoctrination by the Taiwanese authorities.
In other words, it seems that Chinese citizens believe that Taiwanese are "misguided children", thus there is no reason to punish them militarily, and the Taiwan question should be treated as an internal conflict, like any other separatist movement.
Hence, I did not say people believe reunification needs to be achieved by force. What I did say is that if foreign forces pressure China into letting Taiwan go, then China will fight back.
Then this line:
> if the president lets go of Taiwan, the CCP would be overthrown tomorrow.
doesn't make much sense to me. Who would overthrow the CCP, if not the Chinese people? And if they would be willing to do that, why wouldn't they believe in achieving reunification by force?
Letting go of the reunification aspiration entirely, and letting Taiwan relinquish their identity as Chinese, is a whole different matter and would make lots of people angry. It would be seen as a sign of a weak government, one which is in collusion with foreign forces to destroy Chinese sovereignty; an extension of early 20th century efforts by the west to balkanize China. The CCP will lose legitimacy.
Once CCP is overthrown, who can say whether the new policy is peaceful? Maybe a populist will make use of the anger to incite people to call for an invasion.
The CCP are actually moderates. Be careful of what you wish for.
There are different types of "Chinese", and as the PRC frequently does, you are blurring the difference between them.
Taiwanese are 中文 but not 中國.
> being Chinese is being 中国人, which doesn't mean belonging to the Chinese state
I wish that were the case, but the CCP declare themselves the arbiter and they have all the guns. People's Daily says we are "race" traitors if we don't obey their government.
So we don't like calling ourselves 中國人 anymore. I can read OK but not speak their 國語 well enough with the Taiwanese I meet to understand what they prefer. It is not a simple question. 或者华人? Maybe they ignore the pinks and still say 中國人.
我叫自己唐人
If the PRC were as reasonable as the relative you quoted above, none of this would matter. But they are not.
Haha, no. CCP will just present it as a victory for some weird reason, and everyone will just keep applauding. There might be some resentment, but not open one.
And even for those who "cared" I've explained, that imagine yourself as a Taiwanese, who had and always will have a better life than any mainlander. Would they want to have a dictator above themself who beat them up like they did with HKese? So far, I've found no mainlanders yet who would still insisted to take them over. (of course personally, in chat it might be different)
Even Chinese people seem to think that Taiwanese want to be part of China. In reality support for unification is about 4% of the population. The official One China Policy exists to prevent immediate start of war.
There is nothing to do with the Communist ideology or any particular party or people. If it were KMT on the mainland and Communist Party on Taiwan, they would do the same.
I would bet that a Scottish-style ref in Taiwan (which would be tantamount to declaration of independence and hence, dead on arrival) may yield a surprising similar response: no majority support for independence.
You are also missing the part where the ambiguous stance is mostly a consequence of China's threat of immediate violence if independence is ever declared. Taiwanese support for reunification is under 15% or so - and even lower among Taiwanese who were born in Taiwan. Why would they, when their living standards are way higher than China's and they live a free country?
If China would allow a referendum in Taiwan (accepting any outcome peacefully), there would be 90%+ majority for independence.
Once people taste freedom they tend to not want to give it up, no matter how messy.
So, no, I don't think Taiwanese would agree to become Chinese.
Democracy != Liberal democracy.
I hope you are not seriously thinking true propagandists are recruited out in the open via HN comments. Are you seriously paranoid and naive at the same time?
People in China are happy. People in Taiwan are happy. What moron would start a war over it now?
People in China and Taiwan are happy as it is right now, yes. But if the status quo changes, for example if Taiwanese independence is recognized, people will become unhappy.
Another factor that complicates things is the fact that Taiwan is a strategic location for the US's military containment of China. The whole "first island chain" depends on it. The US knows it, China's life depends on it.
There's a reason why this issue has persisted since 1949 and why it's China's "reddest of the red lines".