Hacker News Reader

> That it will happen is a certainty,

Not saying that you're wrong, because you seem much more informed and involved on/in this subject than I am, but from half the world away I can say that around 10 years or so ago that "certainty" wasn't that "certain", so to speak, at least not from what I could gather by reading the "local" press (mostly the Financial Times and The Economist).

Do you happen to have any resources available that further comment on that certainty? Again, not because I'm thinking that you're wrong, but because I'm really curious about this subject (there was a similar Taiwan-related post on the front-page of this website a few days ago but it dropped off pretty quickly).

You are looking for sources that will predict the future with accuracy?

Taiwan is definitively on the next because it is way too close in distance to China for its own good.

> You are looking for sources that will predict the future with accuracy?

No, I was looking for sources that would talk about the "certainty" of invasion by China (in a large enough interval, from let's say tomorrow to 10-20 years into the future), like I said, about 10 years ago that was not the official discourse.

"Predicting the future" would be to ask for a specific date/time interval for that supposed invasion, which I did not ask for because that would have been a reasonably difficult task to predict, I concur.

Since you mentioned the Economist, here's an article from Feb 18th, 2021 - China faces fateful choices, especially involving Taiwan (https://www.economist.com/china/2021/02/20/china-faces-fatef...).

> To many Chinese, the island’s conquest is a sacred national mission

Thank you, that is exactly what I was looking about. Certainly a different tone from what I remember reading back then.

>At some point in the next 10-40 years, Taiwan will be a bargaining chip America will trade away for something else they value more.

The US has a permanent interest in the continued existence of an independent, non CCP aligned Taiwan. The only thing that time and time again frustrated the ambitions of Great Powers has been geography. Taiwan is the cork in the bottle containing the PLAN within the first island chain, without which China can operate freely throughout the Pacific. Just about every projection has China become the world's largest economy. America's only play to maintain dominance is to make sure that the tyranny of geography restrains the Chinese from operating militarily as freely as they would want. Much American blood had been shed in winning the Pacific in the first place. America is willing to shed more blood to keep it that way.

The same way the US has a permanent interest in the continued existence of an independent, non Russian Federation aligned Crimea. If Taiwan looses it's economic value (say, chip production becomes a commodity when Moore's law truly ends, and the CCP subsidizes local chip production to kill off TSMC), it may not be worth the nuclear war to the CCP 'no'.

i don’t think it’s going to happen in any case. it depends on what the USA does. if the position is like in the cold war: "this way and no further" china will probably not risk a nuclear war.

You could very well be correct. I certainly am not an expert in this area nor am I comfortable making any personal predictions about it. I've just heard more chatter about it than I have in the past.

PRC/CCP cares a lot about "face". "Taking over Taiwan" is much less important than saying they control Taiwan but grant local autonomy.

'Face' gets overblown. If all they cared about was face, they wouldn't be stacking the Hong Kong Parliament and taking the geopolitical capital hit for it.

The US military doesn't sell weaponry to HK nor does it have a defence treaty like they do with Taiwan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-American_Mutual_Defense...

imposing control on Hong Kong happened because it did not require high-stakes combat with a nuclear peer competitor

I agree it's guaranteed to happen. There is no scenario where China doesn't begin to squeeze Taiwan, and likely sooner rather than later. I expect them to initially pursue a very aggressive Hong Kong style scheme against Taiwan, more so than a full-scale military invasion (which is not the ideal way to take it; that's their last choice among the options). Which year? Who knows, that isn't even important, as nobody can stop what China is inevitably going to do. The West will have no choice but to stand by and watch - maybe with a few gripes, a few trivial sanctions - just as they have with every single thing China has done (Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, South China Sea, Covid, Myanmar, and the comprehensive human rights erasure that has occurred in all of China under Xi).

I'd bet on it happening during Xi's reign, as it's critical to his pursuit of legacy. He's obsessed with writing his own name into China's history, taking Taiwan (and simultaneously defeating the West as he does it) would be a very big stamp on that. It would formally signal China's new empire-like dominion over Asia.

I don't think the US will trade Taiwan as a bargaining chip. By the time the US is willing to trade it, China will fully understand it's not really worth bargaining over any longer. The time to bargain would be now, or in the recent past. If the US Government wanted to get something big for trading Taiwan, during the Trump Administration was the last time to do it (during max tensions), and the trade should have been North Korea being dismantled (as is; meaning the Kim family goes, the nukes go; only China could make that happen) and reunited with South Korea. The US Govt no doubt thinks their bargaining position is stronger than it actually is, and so doesn't think they needed to make such a trade, instead the US will get nothing and Taiwan will end up in China's hands regardless and North Korea will remain a key China pawn.

I don't see a military takeover of Taiwan anytime soon. As you yourself said, it's a last resort for China, because they know full well that the island will not go down without a fight, much less stay pliant if conquered. It's also much more strategically important for the US and Japan than Xinjiang etc, and an attack still has a non-zero chance of triggering WW3.

I think China is happy to play the long game, since every passing year strengthens their position and weakens Taiwan's. But who knows what will happen with the next CCP succession.

> and an attack still has a non-zero chance of triggering WW3.

Very improbable. Nobody cares enough about Taiwan to even officially recognize its existence.

The reason for that is because both Taiwan and China insist that you either recognize Taiwan xor you recognize China, but you cannot recognize both. (This is basically what the One China Policy means).

Additionally, world wars are never triggered intentionally. World War I broke out essentially because the decision makers ignored the wider consequences of +1'ing their opponent's military preparations (one author characterizes it as Europe sleepwalking into war). World War II broke out unexpectedly because Hitler underestimated the spine the Allies had when he requested they add Danzig to his list of silver platters. World War III will likely break out when someone crosses a red line to one party that isn't clearly communicated to another party--and a Chinese attempt to invade Taiwan is one of the likelier options on that list.

> The reason for that is because both Taiwan and China insist that you either recognize Taiwan xor you recognize China, but you cannot recognize both.

The only reason Taiwan "insists" on that is because of the threat of invasion if they declare independence. Just because a bully tells you to stop hitting yourself while they smack your hand into your face does not mean the bully is not doing the hitting.

Not quite so. Taiwan was ruled by the losers of China's civil war until about the 1990s (the modern party counterpart is the KMT). From their perspective, "One China" is about "we deserve to own all of China" and concomitant refusal to accept their loss in the war. Their opposing party (the DPP) instead advocates Taiwanese independence and refused to support the "One China" policy, but have declined to make any strident moves towards changing policy in power essentially for the reasons you mention.

You’re changing the story to suit your own narrative. The Civil War in China is not over. And it was never settled.

Before this, the bully was the Taiwan government. Then they lost the mainland, and fled to Taiwan, where they got sheltered by the Americans.

And now, you’re saying that the government on the mainland is now the bully over little Taiwan.

But the fact remains, that the last stage of the Chinese Civil War is not over.

> Additionally, world wars are never triggered intentionally

History is useless since none of the previous world wars had nuclear powers at play. You can't compare before and after. Like, not at all.

Don't fool yourself. We don't like to thing about great power war because it's so terrible. We think it can't happen to us because it hasn't happened in a generation or two. People have thought this before. They have always been wrong.

I assure you we have not seen the last of war. Ignoring or minimizing the possibility is self-destructive. You must acknowledge the possibility of disaster before you can engage in the active work of averting it.

> I assure you we have not seen the last of war.

Never even said that. Just saying the Taiwan situation is not going to start a massive conflict.

Taiwan is currently our 10th largest goods trading partner with $85.5 billion in total (two-way) goods trade during 2019. Goods exports totaled $31.3 billion; goods imports totaled $54.3 billion. The U.S. goods trade deficit with Taiwan was $23.0 billion in 2019.

Taiwan was the United States' 13th largest goods export market in 2019.

https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/china/taiwan

If you think the US doesn’t care about a Top 10 trade partner, and in particular the trade partner that houses TSMC, well have I got news for you. Do we care enough to go into a full-on firefight immediately? I don’t know. But we care enough that it would be a massive diplomatic row, and we’d almost certainly have a naval peacocking as a show of force. And nobody wants that right by South Korea, India, and Japan.

> and in particular the trade partner that houses TSMC,

Why do you think the US is working with TSMC to build plants in the US and intel is building more facilities as well? It's fairly obvious nobody has any confidence in the long run that Taiwan will remain independent.

> I think China is happy to play the long game, since every passing year strengthens their position and weakens Taiwan's.

Every passing year brings China one step closer to demographic collapse, the inevitable consequence of the One Child policy, and China is well aware of this.

"Collapse" is a bit hyperbolic. It will absolutely cause problems, but over the long term, not overnight.

Japan is several decades ahead of China on the same path, its population has been declining since 2011, and they have not imploded yet.

Imploded, no, but the Japanese economy basically peaked in 1991 and has yet to really recover (the so-called Lost Decade, although it's been well more than a decade now). As I understand it (this is before my time), in the 1980s, there was a widespread consensus that Japan was on the precipice of upstaging the US, much as there is a similar consensus nowadays that China is on the precipice of upstaging the US. That Japan failed to do so should augur difficulty for China to do the same.

What makes Japan be a good predictor of China's faith?

Yeah, and among the problems it will cause is a stagnation of Chinese economic growth and a decrease in young people. Both of which make large-scale military adventures extremely difficult.

CCP requires economic growth for popular support, this is one reason for the Belt and Road Initiative and other dumping policies, gotta keep those factories running at all costs. If growth stagnates or declines and unemployment spikes, things will get bloody.

Also China's demographic dividend will end while it's at a much lower stage of development than Japan in the 80s/90s. And unlike Japan, China's managed to piss off pretty much every major power who might have been inclined to help them.