The leader who's standing up to China
reuters.com
reuters.com
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...
Vote all these old geezers out! The major political parties in Australia are by and large a cesspit of spineless sellouts.
Vote for the smaller independent parties, especially those with younger candidates.
Drew Pavlou's party for example (with some Uyghur-Australians).
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-15/drew-pavlou-democrati...
Donate funds to these truth seekers if you can...
Just … we can hope in a not so hopeful scenario.
Too early to tell.
The point of PRC subsuming HK now is have ample time to cultivate new generations of HKers sympathetic to One Country before 2049 as exemplar for One Country Two Systems. The previous generation under UK education was always going to be tainted. Identity politics today is not going to be the same as that generations from now. The countercurrent is Tsai trying to manifest a strong, independant TW identity. The cultural clash will be in 20 years when those TWers look at HKers who will remain privileged and prosperous, but with a democratic facade - basically Singaporeans - and wonder if that life is better than war once the current charade that US can defend TW collapses. And more significantly, once PRC develops military capabilities to stalemate US both MAD and conventionally. Even then PRC will probably have to concede with some sort of satrap / vassal status. 1C2S doesn't have to be "feasible", it just has to be unambiguously better than the alternative, which is a matter of eroding US deterrence.
They can never speak out against their unwanted political overlords or end up like the incarcerated opposition politicians, journalists, lawyers, students, doctors, etc
Basically anyone who want to voice their own truth under their own free will ends up jailed and maybe tortured until they recant their true feelings and become another crushed spirit.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-14/hong-kong-tycoon-jimm...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-28/hong-kong-detains-pro...
Offtopic: dear god that article is a design trainwreck. I don't think I've ever been more thankful for Firefox's reader view.
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'état. 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...
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.
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.
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%...
Because, frankly, I don’t give a damn about oil or territorial claims. That’s just politics. People’s lives - that’s what matters.
Similar to how small-terrorist attacks (with small number of deaths) can result in huge policy changes that change countries forever.
> 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.
How telling.
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.
>_countries_ (not even territories!) that have tried to 'stand up' to the USA, you only see a trail of immiseration and coup d'état.
I think the situation demonstrates that China needs Taiwan more than the US needs Cuba.
I think the conclusion you should draw from this is the obvious one: China is not all powerful.
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.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_the_government_of_t...
This isn't a simple border dispute between separate countries. It's a governance dispute between two competing claims to a single country.
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?
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.
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 "本省人” “外省人” political identities. Where she also mastered the online propaganda toolings eg the 1450 army (https://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.
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.
Yes, I did that every single day. This is just what I currently feel. My perception might change. BTW, I am a Chinese living in US.
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.
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_Identification_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...
This is the CCP position, yes.
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.
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.
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.
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.
But, you are right, this is not the same at all as an ‘international law’ establishing that Taiwan is not a sovereign country.
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.
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.
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.)
Note also that capital D Democratic refers to an American political party. Lowercase d democratic is correct for your comment.
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
Any independent news organization is a problem for the CCP.
What? They didn't?
What? They didn't?
It is best to purify your mind and just read Thomas Schelling.
> simply another form of racism.
That's just plain stupid. I fear their authoritarian and murder leader, I don't fear their people.
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.
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
The US military generally has a very "meh" track record.
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.
It's also not the first time a highly motivated group of rebels won a guerrilla conflict in Afghanistan. The USSR fought a 9 year unsuccessful war in Afghanistan too, if you don't recall, after probably helping destabilize and overthrow the government; the current Taliban leadership grew out of factions of the mujahideen that ousted the Soviets back in the 1980s.
I'm no military expert, but it does seem like the US is not geared towards massive troop deployments right now. I've always thought that's because the expectation is that we won't have a massive troop war like WW1/WW2 again.
“Probably”?
And that's despite massive and direct US support to the Mujahideen, which the US didn't have to worry about.
Afghanistan was a winnable war. The way to win the war was, from the outset, to build a strong state that is fairly self-sufficient and motivated to defend itself, without too much corruption. The US military wasn't able to do that. At every turn they were ineffective in rooting out corruption and moral decay, didn't have anywhere near a workable vision for a path out of the Afghan disaster, and lacked the ability to implement a stable political system.
I agree that the US isn't geared towards massive troop deployments. That's why it's absurd to trot out troop numbers as the person I was replying to did.
This works until it doesn't. "American exceptionalism" is not unique to Americans.
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.
I'm not too worried about war between nuclear powers, but I do fear for Chinese and Chinese-looking people living in the west.
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…
China is attacking Lithuania economically for opening a Taiwanese Representative Office. China is not cooperating for mutual good.
In China, most people are better off with the current leadership (than the previous), and the economic prospects is at least looking good for them. They wouldn't want to rock the boat obviously.
So despite the fact that the people of china is peaceful and willing to cooperate unlike the CCP's external stance, they do hold responsibility for the actions of their leaders.
I take the same stance with the USA's actions under trump - this is in no way targeted at any particular country.
We’re born into a world with existing power structures that know how to defend themselves, that know the amount of carrot and stick that will this dismal compromise together. There’s no obvious way to change them, and by the time you’re big enough to try anything you have people you love, and a sense of what you risk. In the west we have nice memories of peaceful marches changing things. Even people who won’t discuss Tiananmen, know about the cultural revolution, about the millions that died in the civil war, and no illusions as to the danger of trying to change China