China prefers peaceful reunification. They don't want to fight a war if they don't have to. At the same time, peaceful reunification is a core interest of China. Which means that they will go to war, but only if they believe peaceful reunification is no longer possible.
So yes they do watch the US to make calculations. But even if the US is weak, they still don't want a war as long as they believe peaceful reunification is possible.
Furthermore, Taiwanese reunification is not only a core interest, it's also possibly the most emotional one for the Chinese. Large portions of the population support reunification, and they will overthrow whichever leader lets Taiwan go.
This is why "raising the stakes" by announcing military support for Taiwan does not deter China. Quite the opposite: they encourage China to go to war, costs be damned, because such foreign support signal that peaceful reunification will become impossible.
As for Hong Kong, see my comment here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31705632
China doesn't have to fight. They could just accept that the ROC/Taiwan is an independent country (which of course it is whether China accepts it or not). China has no obligation to start a war of conquest.
1) politicians see unifying China as their life goal for historical reasons, from Republic of China to People's Republic of China, it is something colonizers do not understand. I don't understand why people paying a high price to buy some old artifacts stolen from China back, but apparently for something, it is about pride. I believe the government would fall if they declare no interests on Taiwan.
2) strategically, Taiwan's location is important, having a foreign power influenced island (especially the US), is a lock on Chinese Navy, that's why it is called the first islands chain. China has to go beyond to protect its trade and energy routes.
Given the fact that US is all about containing China now, there will have to be a lot power play in Asia now, which is to US's advantage, since US is far, and China will suffer more from the war (trade routes and so on). I don't know how this will play out.
And yet, those ships have sailed. We aren't in this mess just because China is supposedly a bad guy, there are real relevant historical reasons why things are the way they are, and they can't be swept under a rug.
If China attacks Taiwan, it is absolutely because of China. It would, after all, but their own choice to engage in such a war of aggression.
Because that doesn't change the fact that a war against Taiwan would be a war of choice?
> Let's say China puts missles in Cuba similar to what happened during the Cuban missle crisis, and the US attacks either China or Cuba as a result. Would you then also wholly blame the US for "its own choice to engage in such a war of aggression"?
This is an odd comparison given that the US stopped Taiwan from developing nuclear weapons thus preventing a similar situation as the Cuban missle crisis in Taiwan. If that's your point, then China should _thank_ the US for its actions preventing Taiwanese nuclear "aggression" (I put it in quotes, since really they were developing it to prevent invasion so calling it "aggression" is kind of ridiculous, but I digress...). Besides, the US _removed_ its troops from Taiwan decades ago so the US threat in Taiwan has really decreased if anything.
So yeah none of those points really change the fact that China does not need to invade Taiwan and that it would wholly be war of choice. China could just continue to live with an independent Taiwan as it has for more than 70 years. That is if it chooses not to start a war of its on volition.
Some of us have difficulties in understanding the mindset: if some population wants one system, and is unavailable to be part of a different system (they would have moved, would not they), how do those "reunification supporters" on the other side believe, psychologically, that a system change is imaginable? They believe that coercion can be an effective solution? That "the others will adapt"? If so, that the new configuration will be stable (like a model of energy states)? It does not sound sound, in these ways - it may sound like "early stopping" in thoughts.
Furthermore, the Chinese sense of history is much longer. There are many examples in Chinese history in which some territory splitted off and then reunified later. So things like "the configuration won't be stable" wouldn't be Chinese thinking. To the Chinese, splitting off is the unstable configuration.
Given how the current Taiwan situation came to be, many Chinese view the Taiwan government as relatives with whom they've had a fight, and whom — after losing — bunkered down in the basement. The basement is still part of the house. They're still part of the family, so let's not be too cruel to them and seek peace. But if they no longer claim to be part of the family, then kick them out.
Don't they all consider themselves Han people? How do they configure their identity? Their ethnic and historical ties do not appear to be severable.
The people of Taiwan, just like those of Ukraine do not want to be re-absorbed.
> Quite the opposite: they encourage China to go to war, costs be damned, because such foreign support signal that peaceful reunification will become impossible.
It already is impossible. I think the world, save Beijing is moving on.
Your comment was excellent, and helpful to me. Thanks.
I do disagree that China isn't watching US reaction through a million lenses to see how they can best increase their odds rolling over Taiwan with minimal damage. My strongest evidence? Political changes in Hong Kong.