What does China achieve from invading Taiwan?
-
Taiwan has been a part of China for far longer than the US has existed. Or that Hawaii has been part of the US. And there’s pretty good support for independence in Hawaii…
While I agree with you overall I would like to make clear that Taiwan was not part of China before 1683 when the Qîng Dynasty conquered the Ming rump which fled there (and kicked out the Dutch).
It's not "far longer" than the US existed, but is far longer than Hawaii has been controlled by the US Empire.
-
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
The thing that we call "Taiwan" is an island, not a country, the country is "Republic of China" (ROC). We call it mostly Taiwan, because there is the People's Republic of China (PRC) which is the mainland China. So you still have 2 countries, next to each other, both claiming to have the name "China".
You claim the name, you claim the country.
Also in part as the PRC won't let the RoC change it's name as it sees that as a declaration of independence.
Alas, the DDP can't even change the name of the RoC's national airline without risking a war.
-
While i agree with you. Taiwan is none of the usa business and usa involvment is a security risk to china
Likewise the PRC is a security risk to Taiwan. It's understandable why the RoC would like to be close to the US.
I wish that a peaceful not US involved solution could be found.
-
It is though. Both countries claim the other part to be part of the other. Denying that is just western histeria.
Technically correct, but the DPP would like to change that but the PRC doesn't allow the RoC to change that and relinquish the change as breaking the 95 consensus is seen as being an official declaration of independence, so the DPP has to stick to the "we're already de facto independent" line.
-
I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.
Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.
Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!
Honestly, it's really mainly historical clout.
Failing to conquer Taiwan was seen as the one thing Mao failed to do, and a strong leader managing it could make a claim to have surpassed Mao as great leaders of China.
The PRC is a massive fan of historical determinism and narrative might. Reunification would be a massive win for the pride and honour of the leader who did it. It's also a big thing for the average PRC citizen, they don't want war - but have had a lifetime of propaganda about it and are (somewhat rightly) worried about US aggression.
-
Likewise the PRC is a security risk to Taiwan. It's understandable why the RoC would like to be close to the US.
I wish that a peaceful not US involved solution could be found.
Everytime the usa intervene they cause chaos
-
Taiwan belonged to Qing Dynasty, followed by Japanese Imperial Rule, then they handed it to Republic of China in 1945 when Japan surrendered to the Allies. Republic of China is the Direct Successor to Qing Dynasty (unless you count the Japanese occupation). Then immediately after WW2 ended, the KMT (who runs the Republic of China) and the CCP had a civil war. The KMT-led ROC was losing so they retreated to Taiwan, where they are currenly located. We call it "Taiwan", but its technically (according to the constitution of the Government in Taiwan) still called the "Republic of China", and Taiwan is known as the "Free Area of the Republic of China", with mainland China technically a communist rebellion. There was never any peace treaties or armistance agreement. The civil war never legally ended or even paused, only de facto paused.
Then after the ROC retreated to Taiwan, the CCP proclaimed the People's Republic of China. ROC currently exists as a rump state.
So PRC could claim to be the successor to the ROC after an internal struggle.
The difference between the US-Britain sitation is that: (1) The US declared indepence right from the start, and (2) The US and Britain already recognized each other like over 200 years ago. PRC and ROC still have yet to recognize each other's legitimanct, and as far as I know, ROC still haven't published a declaration of independence, so they are implicitly still agreeing to the fact that they are both engaged in a civil for succession as the legitimate government of "China", not for secesion as an independent state.
Basically there are 3 factions. The PRC who views itself as the sole legitimate government of all of China, the ROC who also views itself as the sole legitimate government of China. And the Taiwanese Independence movement supporters, who doesn't want anything to do with either ROC or PRC.
So if Republic of China want to become Republic of Taiwan, they probably should publish the declaration of independence, otherwise, its still a civil war, an internal struggle for succession to the banner of "China".
Don't misunderstand, I am not pro-CCP, I'm on the side of Democracy whether its Republic of Taiwan or a unified Democratic China under Republic of China, but I hope there will be a democratic reunification instead of the situtation now with the CCP in control of over a billion lives.
"if Republic of China want to become Republic of Taiwan, they probably should publish the declaration of independence"
They don't have that choice. While independence is quite popular in Taiwan, the PRC has made it very clear that they see any movement toward Taiwanese independence as cause for war. Going so far as to fire literal warning shots over the island in 2022 and 1996.
-
Lazy adhominem
-
So? Before Qing dynasty taiwan was not part of china and became part through conquests. Taiwan has the right to be a separate entity what they dfon't have right to is to becone the usa puppet and threten china security and the interests that they have right to
Before any region was part of any country it was not part of that country, by definition
-
It doesn't matter. Polities reunify and separate all the time in history. The idea that a polity once becoming part of another can't separate again is so dumb
Interesting. So the Donbas has a right to leave Ukraine?
-
Interesting. So the Donbas has a right to leave Ukraine?
Yes but with the legal way with a referendom
-
Before any region was part of any country it was not part of that country, by definition
Yes. I think that reinforce my argument not yours
-
I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.
Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.
Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Taiwan is a single point of failure for chip manufacturing in the world I don't think annexation would destroy all the chip fabs I think they would still exist and they would be Chinese
-
I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.
Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.
Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!
One argument against democracy in China is that it is incompatible with Chinese culture.
Looking at Taiwan having a very successful democracy with Chinese culture is problematic for the Chinese Communist Party for that reason.
-
Taiwan is a single point of failure for chip manufacturing in the world I don't think annexation would destroy all the chip fabs I think they would still exist and they would be Chinese
Many chip fabrication machines in Taiwan are set up for sabotage in the event China invaded. Taiwan does not want to be a repeat of what the world saw happen to Hong Kong.
-
Everytime the usa intervene they cause chaos
Yes, the "pax" Americana has not been good for vast swathes of the Earth.
-
Yes. I think that reinforce my argument not yours
You can think that, but you'd be wrong.
-
Yes but with the legal way with a referendom
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Lol, ok. So Taiwan can only separate with a legal referendum held by China?
-
One argument against democracy in China is that it is incompatible with Chinese culture.
Looking at Taiwan having a very successful democracy with Chinese culture is problematic for the Chinese Communist Party for that reason.
What are you talking about? They have elections all the time, and the workers exercise a tremendous amount of power.
-
I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.
Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.
Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!
The premise of your question is all wrong. It centers western control of Taiwan as a natural status quo, and so paints every challenge of that control as a provocation or threat.
Advocating for Taiwan’s sovereignty is not the same as advocating for Taiwan’s continued fealty to the west.