Xi warns Taiwan will face 'punishment of history' for separatism

[webfact]

Xi warns Taiwan will face 'punishment of history' for separatism

By Philip Wen

 

Chinese President Xi Jinping speaks at the closing session of the National People's Congress (NPC) at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, China March 20, 2018. REUTERS/Damir Sagolj

 

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese President Xi Jinping warned self-ruled Taiwan on Tuesday that it will face the "punishment of history" for any attempt at separatism, offering his strongest warning yet to the island claimed by China as its sacred territory.

 

Taiwan is one of China's most sensitive issues and a potentially dangerous military flashpoint.

 

China's hostility towards Taiwan has risen since the 2016 election of President Tsai Ing-wen from the pro-independence Democratic Progressive Party.

 

China suspects Tsai wants to push for formal independence, which would cross a red line for Communist Party leaders in Beijing, though Tsai has said she wants to maintain the status quo and is committed to ensuring peace.

 

China has been infuriated by U.S. President Donald Trump's signing into law legislation last week that encourages the United States to send senior officials to Taiwan to meet Taiwanese counterparts and vice versa.

 

The United States does not have formal ties with Taiwan but is required by law to help it with self-defence and is the island's primary source of weapons.

 

In a speech at the end of China's annual session of parliament, Xi told the 3,000-odd delegates that China would push for the "peaceful reunification of the motherland" and work for more Taiwanese to enjoy the opportunities of China's development.

 

"It is a shared aspiration of all Chinese people and in their basic interests to safeguard China's sovereignty and territorial integrity and realise China's complete reunification," Xi said.

 

"Any actions and tricks to split China are doomed to failure and will meet with the people's condemnation and the punishment of history," he added, to loud applause.

 

China has the will, confidence and ability to defeat any separatist activities, Xi said.

 

"The Chinese people share a common belief that it is never allowed and it is absolutely impossible to separate any inch of our great country's territory from China."

 

PATRIOTIC SPIRIT

 

China has also been worried about independence activists in the former British colony of Hong Kong following massive street protests there in 2014 for universal suffrage.

 

Xi said China would uphold Hong Kong's high degree of autonomy, but also seek to increase "national consciousness and patriotic spirit" in the Asian financial centre.

 

Proudly democratic Taiwan has shown no interest in being run by autocratic China, and has accused China of not understanding how democracy works, pointing out that Taiwan's people have the right to decide its future.

 

The new U.S. law on Taiwan adds to strains between China and the United States over trade, as Trump has enacted tariffs and called for China to reduce its huge trade imbalance with the United States, even while Washington has leaned on Beijing to help resolve tensions with North Korea.

 

Taiwan has thanked the United States for the law and its support, but its foreign ministry said on Monday there were no plans for any senior leaders, such as the president, to visit the country.

 

While China's stepped up military drills around Taiwan over the past year have rattled Taipei, Xi reiterated claims that China's rise was not a threat to any country, though China considers Taiwan to be merely a Chinese province not a nation.

 

"Only those who in the habit of threatening others will see everyone else as a threat," Xi said.

 

(Additional reporting by Stella Qiu and Christian Shepherd, and Twinnie Siu in TAIPEI; Writing by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Michael Perry)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-03-20

 

[HLover]

5 minutes ago, webfact said:

Only those who in the habit of threatening others will see everyone else as a threat," Xi said

Well said, actually.

[sandrabbit]

2 hours ago, HLover said:

Well said, actually.

 

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Xi warns Taiwan will face 'punishment of history' for separatism

?

[car720]

3 hours ago, HLover said:

Well said, actually.

Damn well said.  And who is it that makes the most threats these days?

[Srikcir]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

"The Chinese people share a common belief that it is never allowed and it is absolutely impossible to separate any inch of our great country's territory from China."

Apparently not all the Chinese people, ie., those living in Taiwan.

Emperor Xi needs to decide whether China lives in the 21st century or the 20th century. He should also remember that the last emperor of China was forced to abdicate following Sun Yat-sen's republican revolution. 

[mikebike]

Xi's biggest challenge is keeping the CCP relevant at home. The 100 years of humiliation has been drilled into the populace and he must walk a fine line between modernization and historical abuses of the Chinese people (as they perceive them) to maintain power over a vast and diverse population.

 

Banging the drum of nationalism apparently works well in democratic and socialist systems to fire up the base.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, car720 said:

Damn well said.  And who is it that makes the most threats these days?

 

Well, this topic is about a threat made by Xi.

Edited March 20, 2018 by Morch

[tonbridgebrit]

Let the Chinese have their war. The important thing is, is that NATO stays out of it.

[tonbridgebrit]

10 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Apparently not all the Chinese people, ie., those living in Taiwan.

Emperor Xi needs to decide whether China lives in the 21st century or the 20th century. He should also remember that the last emperor of China was forced to abdicate following Sun Yat-sen's republican revolution. 

And them Chinese who follow Sun Yat Sen today, that's them Chinese in the Republic of China (Taiwan) , they should remember that Sun's followers were beaten by Mao Zedong's followers in China. Thank God that countries like America and Britain did not send soldiers to China, to intervene in China's civil war.

The Chinese who lost the civil war, they fled to Taiwan. Why on earth should the rest of the world fight for Taiwan today ? They didn't fight for them during the civil war. Today, Republic of China (Taiwan) should remember that.

[kamahele]

5 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

And them Chinese who follow Sun Yat Sen today, that's them Chinese in the Republic of China (Taiwan) , they should remember that Sun's followers were beaten by Mao Zedong's followers in China. Thank God that countries like America and Britain did not send soldiers to China, to intervene in China's civil war.

The Chinese who lost the civil war, they fled to Taiwan. Why on earth should the rest of the world fight for Taiwan today ? They didn't fight for them during the civil war. Today, Republic of China (Taiwan) should remember that.

Yes, after largely sitting out the war with Japan while others fought in their stead, the communist forces did indeed run out those that chased the Japanese out of China into Taiwan. Those forces have since then kept the much larger communist forces out of Taiwan with little help from the outside.

[Srikcir]

4 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

And them Chinese who follow Sun Yat Sen today, that's them Chinese in the Republic of China (Taiwan) , they should remember that Sun's followers were beaten by Mao Zedong's followers in China. Thank God that countries like America and Britain did not send soldiers to China, to intervene in China's civil war.

The Chinese who lost the civil war, they fled to Taiwan. Why on earth should the rest of the world fight for Taiwan today ? They didn't fight for them during the civil war. Today, Republic of China (Taiwan) should remember that.

I was making a broader point with reference to Sun Yat-sen - even emperors are vulnerable to overthrow. 

As far as to what the ROC peoples (as well as Xi) should remember, it's the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act that requires the US to have a policy to:

• provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character
• maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan.
• authorizes de facto diplomatic relations with the governing authorities by giving special powers to the AIT to the level that it is the de facto embassy
• be treated under U.S. laws the same as "foreign countries, nations, states, governments, or similar entities,"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Relations_Act

The new US law is perfectly aligned with the Taiwan Relations Act. Xi's reaction is feigned theatrics.

[Morch]

7 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Let the Chinese have their war. The important thing is, is that NATO stays out of it.

 

The new talking point - let the PRC do whatever it likes, place restrictions only on the West.

[tonbridgebrit]

7 hours ago, kamahele said:

Yes, after largely sitting out the war with Japan while others fought in their stead, the communist forces did indeed run out those that chased the Japanese out of China into Taiwan. Those forces have since then kept the much larger communist forces out of Taiwan with little help from the outside.

You're claiming that Mao Zedong's communists did not do a lot of fighting against the Japanese ?? You're claiming that Chiang Kai-Shek and his KMT did most or all of the fighting against Japan ?  Stop being ridiculous. Here's a link from wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong#Alliance_with_the_Kuomintang:_1935–1940

Yes, so the Chinese communists beat the Chinese Nationalists in mainland China, and the Chinese Nationalists fled to Taiwan. They took with them China's name, Republic of China. If it was okay for Chinese communists to fight against Chinese Nationalists in mainland China, bearing in mind that no other countries sent their soldiers to be involved. In that case, surely, it's okay for them to fight again, without other countries getting involved ?

I quote from you "Those forces have since then kept the much larger communist forces out of Taiwan with little help from the outside."  And indeed, when or if Xi attacks the Republic of China (Taiwan) , Taiwan must fight without NATO forces helping it. NATO forces getting involved would be wrong.

[tonbridgebrit]

7 hours ago, Srikcir said:

I was making a broader point with reference to Sun Yat-sen - even emperors are vulnerable to overthrow. 

As far as to what the ROC peoples (as well as Xi) should remember, it's the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act that requires the US to have a policy to:

• provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character
• maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan.
• authorizes de facto diplomatic relations with the governing authorities by giving special powers to the AIT to the level that it is the de facto embassy
• be treated under U.S. laws the same as "foreign countries, nations, states, governments, or similar entities,"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_Relations_Act

The new US law is perfectly aligned with the Taiwan Relations Act. Xi's reaction is feigned theatrics.

Okay, thanks for your post. I really do feel Washington fighting a war against China, because a load of Chinese in a de facto independent state want to declare independence officially, makes Washington look absurd. Taiwan is already a de facto independent state, there's no major benefit for them in declaring independence officially. The only thing they gain is, is to antagonise Beijing.

[Srikcir]

3 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

NATO forces getting involved would be wrong.

But NATO nations like the UK can be involved independently without linkage to NATO.

 

However, if the US presence in the open waters and/or airspace of the South China Sea in proximity to Taiwan were to be attacked without warning, ie., first strike as part of a Chinese strategy to invade Taiwan, Article 5 of NATO could bring at a minimum European/UK NATO members into the fray.

Furthermore, the US security agreements with a number of nations within the Asian-Pacific region such as Australia and South Korea may also trigger additional military defense measures against Chinese military hostilities against the US.

China will have to "thread the needle" if it decides to attack Taiwan without triggering a US/NATO/Pacific ally military response.

[tonbridgebrit]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The new talking point - let the PRC do whatever it likes, place restrictions only on the West.

Morch, if Beijing attacks South Korea or Japan, in that case, yes, NATO should step in, and defend those countries. If Beijing attacks Taiwan, why should NATO step in ?

I can very easily say that I don't recognise the Republic of China (Taiwan) as a nation or country. That's because they don't have an embassy in London. So, Beijing attacking Taiwan is the same as Beijing attacking whatever place in mainland China.  South Korea and Japan do have embassies in London, that's why Beijing attacking South Korea or Japan IS an invasion.

I really do feel that, if Washington wants to fight a war against Russia, because it feels that Russia is a threat to America, well, let's think about that. Washington fighting a war against Islam, because it believes that Islam is a threat to America, well, I'm not sure. As for Washington fighting a war against China, because a load of Chinese in Taiwan want to switch from de facto independence to official independence, well, what can I say ? How about tell Taiwan to not declare official independence ? And tell them that, IF they declare it, NATO will not get involved if or when Beijing attacks them. That should be enough to stop the Republic of China (Taiwan) declaring their independence officially.

[tonbridgebrit]

17 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

But NATO nations like the UK can be involved independently without linkage to NATO.

 

However, if the US presence in the open waters and/or airspace of the South China Sea in proximity to Taiwan were to be attacked without warning, ie., first strike as part of a Chinese strategy to invade Taiwan, Article 5 of NATO could bring at a minimum European/UK NATO members into the fray.

Furthermore, the US security agreements with a number of nations within the Asian-Pacific region such as Australia and South Korea may also trigger additional military defense measures against Chinese military hostilities against the US.

China will have to "thread the needle" if it decides to attack Taiwan without triggering a US/NATO/Pacific ally military response.

Again, thanks for your post. You're correct, Beijing must make sure that any attack on Taiwan does not involve attacks on any American military units. Is it okay if I try to be funny by saying that Beijing should tell Washington, just prior to any attack, to remove all American military units in the area ? Just in case Beijing does un-intentionally harm Washington's military units.

You're a person who knows a fair bit about Taiwan. I really do think we should look at the bigger picture. Taiwan imports a huge amount of Chinese goods, and Chinese tourists are flooding Taiwan. Also, Taiwan has one of the lowest birth-rates in the world. A load of men from Taiwan turn up in mainland China, marry women, and then take them women to Taiwan. Those women then give birth in Taiwan. And a large number of big Taiwanese manufacturers have re-located their factories to mainland China. What's the point of declaring independence officially, bearing in mind it will harm all this in a massive way ?  How about Taiwan keeping the existing situation ? I think it's Taiwan that's taking part in theatrics with all this independence talk. 

[Morch]

51 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Morch, if Beijing attacks South Korea or Japan, in that case, yes, NATO should step in, and defend those countries. If Beijing attacks Taiwan, why should NATO step in ?

I can very easily say that I don't recognise the Republic of China (Taiwan) as a nation or country. That's because they don't have an embassy in London. So, Beijing attacking Taiwan is the same as Beijing attacking whatever place in mainland China.  South Korea and Japan do have embassies in London, that's why Beijing attacking South Korea or Japan IS an invasion.

I really do feel that, if Washington wants to fight a war against Russia, because it feels that Russia is a threat to America, well, let's think about that. Washington fighting a war against Islam, because it believes that Islam is a threat to America, well, I'm not sure. As for Washington fighting a war against China, because a load of Chinese in Taiwan want to switch from de facto independence to official independence, well, what can I say ? How about tell Taiwan to not declare official independence ? And tell them that, IF they declare it, NATO will not get involved if or when Beijing attacks them. That should be enough to stop the Republic of China (Taiwan) declaring their independence officially.

 

I don't know that NATO got anything to do with anything. Some NATO members may.

 

That you don't recognize Taiwan as this or that it pretty much meaningless. The fact stands that some countries do, and that some (such as the US), even have standing agreements/pacts/laws/whatever with Taiwan pertaining to defense issues. So once again, other than inane deflections and obfuscations, not much of substance.

 

The rest of your post is the usual mumbo jumbo going on about "Washington" and your warped (not to say PRC aligned) propaganda take on what it's policies ought to be.

 

 

 

 

[mike324]

54 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Morch, if Beijing attacks South Korea or Japan, in that case, yes, NATO should step in, and defend those countries. If Beijing attacks Taiwan, why should NATO step in ?

I can very easily say that I don't recognise the Republic of China (Taiwan) as a nation or country. That's because they don't have an embassy in London. So, Beijing attacking Taiwan is the same as Beijing attacking whatever place in mainland China.  South Korea and Japan do have embassies in London, that's why Beijing attacking South Korea or Japan IS an invasion.

I really do feel that, if Washington wants to fight a war against Russia, because it feels that Russia is a threat to America, well, let's think about that. Washington fighting a war against Islam, because it believes that Islam is a threat to America, well, I'm not sure. As for Washington fighting a war against China, because a load of Chinese in Taiwan want to switch from de facto independence to official independence, well, what can I say ? How about tell Taiwan to not declare official independence ? And tell them that, IF they declare it, NATO will not get involved if or when Beijing attacks them. That should be enough to stop the Republic of China (Taiwan) declaring their independence officially.

Perhaps you have to go back into history, when Japan ceded control of Taiwan, the power was given to the US, which in term passed it on to the local government during that time. Hence Taiwan has been independent form that point on. Taiwan was a member of UN and many world organization bodies until Beijing put an end to it by intimidating other member countries to not recognize it.

 

The fact that Taiwan doesn't have an "official" embassy does not mean its not an independent country. It is, and it has been with a an independent government. Taiwan has embassies everywhere around the world, it just that China has pressure host countries to prevent it from calling it an "embassy".

 

If China does go to War with Taiwan, Taiwan should be in the same position as Japan or South Korea, viewed as an independent country. By law the US is requested to protect Taiwan from China. If you don't think US should support Taiwan, than the US shouldn't be in any conflict zones, same goes for UK who has troops all over world offering peace and security in different regions.

 

I don't see whats the point of mentioning Taiwanese opening up factories in China, marrying Chinese. Taiwanese feel and in fact most people around the world know Taiwan is an independent country, hence they would like to declare independence. Yes its rocking the ship because China is a bully and because of China's retaliation, they won't declare independence without support. Its just that simple.

[Jools]

China would claim Hawaii if not nipped in the bud. They specialize in re-writing history.

[tonbridgebrit]

On 3/21/2018 at 9:25 AM, mike324 said:

Perhaps you have to go back into history, when Japan ceded control of Taiwan, the power was given to the US, which in term passed it on to the local government during that time. Hence Taiwan has been independent form that point on. Taiwan was a member of UN and many world organization bodies until Beijing put an end to it by intimidating other member countries to not recognize it.

 

The fact that Taiwan doesn't have an "official" embassy does not mean its not an independent country. It is, and it has been with a an independent government. Taiwan has embassies everywhere around the world, it just that China has pressure host countries to prevent it from calling it an "embassy".

 

If China does go to War with Taiwan, Taiwan should be in the same position as Japan or South Korea, viewed as an independent country. By law the US is requested to protect Taiwan from China. If you don't think US should support Taiwan, than the US shouldn't be in any conflict zones, same goes for UK who has troops all over world offering peace and security in different regions.

 

I don't see whats the point of mentioning Taiwanese opening up factories in China, marrying Chinese. Taiwanese feel and in fact most people around the world know Taiwan is an independent country, hence they would like to declare independence. Yes its rocking the ship because China is a bully and because of China's retaliation, they won't declare independence without support. Its just that simple.

Hello there.
Okay, you mention Japan and Taiwan. In 1895, Japan defeated China in a war and took over Taiwan. Basically, Japan stole Taiwan from China, the island of Taiwan was certainly part of China prior to 1895. Below is a link with wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan#Japanese_rule

So, Japan loss World War Two, surely, it would have been right to hand Taiwan back to China ? China was/is the rightfull owner of the island of Taiwan ??


You also mention the issue of Taiwan with the United Nations. 
Yes, in 1945, the UN accepted the Republic of China as a nation. They accepted Chiang Kai Shek. By the way, the Big Five won World War Two, and the Big Five made themselves permanent members of the UN Security Council, with the power of veto. The Big Five are USA, Britain, France, Russia and China.

Okay, in 1949, Mao Zedong won the civil war and announced that China's new name would be Peoples' Republic of China. China's seat at the UN was held by Republic of China (Taiwan) and not by Peoples' Republic of China. It was in 1971, when finally, Peoples' Republic of China actually took China's seat at the UN, Republic of China (Taiwan) no longer has China's seat. Basically, China has never had two seats at the UN.

Do you think it was a good idea to recognise Peoples' Republic of China as China, rather than Republic of China ? Or, do you think it's better to recognise Republic of China (Taiwan) as China, rather than Peoples' Republic of China ?

By the way, Taiwan does not have a seat at the UN, and I think Beijing will never let them. China is one of the Big Five.
 

Edited March 22, 2018 by tonbridgebrit

[tonbridgebrit]

On 3/21/2018 at 9:25 AM, mike324 said:

I don't see whats the point of mentioning Taiwanese opening up factories in China, marrying Chinese. Taiwanese feel and in fact most people around the world know Taiwan is an independent country, hence they would like to declare independence. Yes its rocking the ship because China is a bully and because of China's retaliation, they won't declare independence without support. Its just that simple.

You don't see the point of mentioning Taiwan relocating most of it's manufacturing base to China ?  What about Taiwan being flooded by Chinese tourists ?
We're talking here about Taiwan declaring independence, and how China will launch a military attack and/or invasion in response. Do you accept, if/when China launches the attack, well, it's going to harm the huge amount of trade between China and Taiwan ? What about the Chinese tourists flooding into Taiwan ? Surely, you accept a war will have a negative impact on Taiwan getting the Chinese tourists ?

Do you accept that China will probably clamp down on it's trade and tourists prior to any military attack on Taiwan ?  And if Beijing does carry out a trade war with Taiwan (partially block Taiwanese goods entering China with taxes) and if Beijing reduces the number of Chinese tourists entering Taiwan, well, is Beijing wrong ? Surely, it's Beijing right to carry out such action, if they wish. I mean, Beijing slaps 'harsh' taxes onto European and US goods entering China. But they, at present, allow Taiwanese goods to enter China with minimal taxes. Is Beijing wrong to scrap this benefit for Taiwan, if Beijing is angry ?  Surely not ??  

[mike324]

On 3/23/2018 at 2:40 AM, tonbridgebrit said:

Okay, you mention Japan and Taiwan. In 1895, Japan defeated China in a war and took over Taiwan. Basically, Japan stole Taiwan from China, the island of Taiwan was certainly part of China prior to 1895. Below is a link with wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan#Japanese_rule

So, Japan loss World War Two, surely, it would have been right to hand Taiwan back to China ? China was/is the rightfull owner of the island of Taiwan ??

You also mention the issue of Taiwan with the United Nations. 
Yes, in 1945, the UN accepted the Republic of China as a nation. They accepted Chiang Kai Shek. By the way, the Big Five won World War Two, and the Big Five made themselves permanent members of the UN Security Council, with the power of veto. The Big Five are USA, Britain, France, Russia and China.

Okay, in 1949, Mao Zedong won the civil war and announced that China's new name would be Peoples' Republic of China. China's seat at the UN was held by Republic of China (Taiwan) and not by Peoples' Republic of China. It was in 1971, when finally, Peoples' Republic of China actually took China's seat at the UN, Republic of China (Taiwan) no longer has China's seat. Basically, China has never had two seats at the UN.

Do you think it was a good idea to recognise Peoples' Republic of China as China, rather than Republic of China ? Or, do you think it's better to recognise Republic of China (Taiwan) as China, rather than Peoples' Republic of China ?

By the way, Taiwan does not have a seat at the UN, and I think Beijing will never let them. China is one of the Big Five.
 

"Taiwan, along with Penghu and Liaodong Peninsula, were ceded in full sovereignty to the Empire of Japan by the Treaty of Shimonoseki."

 

I'm sure you read that, that is how war is, and how countries were conquer and lost all over the world. So Taiwan was ceded in full. When Japan lost the war and left, they did not return it back to China instead they hand the power down to the US which in term pass it down to the locals there - not back to China.

 

There are two groups of people in Taiwan, one is the locals who immigrated there long before WW2, and those mainlanders (KMT) that fled there during Chinese war. Locals make up the majority even today and they feel like they are independent - compare to the KMT who still thinks Taiwan will reunify with China one day. This is why Taiwanese are actually pretty divided too. KMT had the military power so they rule Taiwan during the Chinese war after they fled to Taiwan. But that does not change the fact that Taiwan no longer belongs to China even though Taiwan had a ruler that fled from China. This is the main reason why China still has no authority over Taiwan, because they don't according to law.

 

I think its the best to recognize China and Taiwan at the UN and all other world organizations. China has absolutely no power, no oversight of Taiwan. How can they make decisions thats in the best interest of Taiwan? But because their political power is so great, other nations have to agree with their choice even though they very well know China and Taiwan are two different countries.

 

 

[tonbridgebrit]

On 3/24/2018 at 9:20 AM, mike324 said:

"Taiwan, along with Penghu and Liaodong Peninsula, were ceded in full sovereignty to the Empire of Japan by the Treaty of Shimonoseki."

 

I'm sure you read that, that is how war is, and how countries were conquer and lost all over the world. So Taiwan was ceded in full. When Japan lost the war and left, they did not return it back to China instead they hand the power down to the US which in term pass it down to the locals there - not back to China.

 

There are two groups of people in Taiwan, one is the locals who immigrated there long before WW2, and those mainlanders (KMT) that fled there during Chinese war. Locals make up the majority even today and they feel like they are independent - compare to the KMT who still thinks Taiwan will reunify with China one day. This is why Taiwanese are actually pretty divided too. KMT had the military power so they rule Taiwan during the Chinese war after they fled to Taiwan. But that does not change the fact that Taiwan no longer belongs to China even though Taiwan had a ruler that fled from China. This is the main reason why China still has no authority over Taiwan, because they don't according to law.

 

I think its the best to recognize China and Taiwan at the UN and all other world organizations. China has absolutely no power, no oversight of Taiwan. How can they make decisions thats in the best interest of Taiwan? But because their political power is so great, other nations have to agree with their choice even though they very well know China and Taiwan are two different countries.

 

 

Hello.
Okay, about Japan beating China in a war, and taking Taiwan. Now, I am criticising/condemning Japan for taking Taiwan after that war. Do you feel the same way ? Now, if we don't say that Japan was wrong when doing this, well, we're going to end up saying that China, today, is entitled to fight wars, try and win, and grab islands and land.
Now, that would be absurd, right ?  
About how Japan handed Taiwan to the US, and how Washington handed Taiwan to the locals and not to China. I'm saying that Washington should have handed Taiwan back to China. And Taiwan was part of the Republic of China, so was large parts of mainland China part of ROC, after 1945. So, it was okay for the Communists to take parts of the ROC in mainland China, but it's not okay for them to take the bit of the ROC that's on the island of Taiwan ?  

You're right, Taiwan is a de facto independent state. Correct, China has no power in Taiwan. Beijing's attitude to Taiwan is simple, "don't declare independence, and you won't be attacked".

Do you really feel that Beijing's attitude is outrageous ? Beijing fought a civil war against the Nationalists, Beijing is simply claiming ownership of all land that was part of China prior to 1949. If there had of been a group of Nationalists trapped in Shanghai after 1949, well, Beijing would have removed them.


And I notice that those who are against Beijing simply don't mention the massive economic benefits that Taiwan gets from China. Taiwan's biggest export partner is China, and Taiwan imports more from China than any other place, and Taiwan rakes in good tourism revenue from China.

Okay, back to the issue of people being allowed to declare independence. See, whatever country we're talking about does NOT actually have to give whatever people "the right to declare independence".  So, in America, if California wants to become independent, even if most people actually want it, well, the US government certainly does have the right to not allow California to break away. It's not a case of "if that area is very different to the rest of the country, then, they are allowed to break away". You're only allowed to break away IF the central government allows you to do it.

Edited March 25, 2018 by tonbridgebrit

[boomerangutang]

Xi as 'president for life' is wrong for many reasons.  This saber rattling with Taiwan (initiated and sustained by China) is but one proof.    It can only get worse.

[boomerangutang]

On 3/21/2018 at 7:25 PM, Jools said:

China would claim Hawaii if not nipped in the bud. They specialize in re-writing history.

I'm in Hawaii right now.  Yikes.

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

You're only allowed to break away IF the central government allows you to do it.

Doesn't your "break away" theory only apply to Taiwan if it was originally part of sovereign Communist China (1949)?

Between 1945 and 1949 Taiwan was the governed by the sovereign Republic of China ruled by the Kuomintang. After 1949 it remained under the governance of the KMT. Where is the "break away?"

[CharlesSwann]

I suspect the reason China is so against Taiwan's independence is because the nationalists looted China's treasures almost in its entirety in 1948 and carted them off to the present National Palace Museum in Taipei.

 

I'm surprised this issue is rarely explicitly raised but it must be rankling the Chinese. They will not let Taiwan get away with it - and rightly so. If you've ever been in the National Museum in Beijing - it's a vast place filled with bugger all.

 

If Taiwan has any sense, they will use the return of the majority of that stuff to China as a bargaining chip. In any case, there's no way China will allow them independence and let let them keep all that stuff.

Edited March 26, 2018 by CharlesSwann

[tonbridgebrit]

20 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Doesn't your "break away" theory only apply to Taiwan if it was originally part of sovereign Communist China (1949)?

Between 1945 and 1949 Taiwan was the governed by the sovereign Republic of China ruled by the Kuomintang. After 1949 it remained under the governance of the KMT. Where is the "break away?"

Okay, you're saying that the "break away" theory does not apply to Taiwan.
Okay, you're saying that from 1945 to 1949, Taiwan was governed by the Republic of China. So, Taiwan was part of the Republic of China during those four years ? Well, this goes back to : the Communists were taking over the Republic of China in mainland China, and the rest of the world did not send soldiers to stop the Republic of China becoming communist. Soldiers were not sent to stop the Republic of China becoming the Peoples' Republic of China.

So, today, why have a policy where NATO soldiers might be sent to stop the last bit of the Republic of China becoming the Peoples' Republic of China ?  We agree, it would have been 'wrong' to send American and British soldiers to the Republic of China prior to 1949, to fight in the Chinese civil war ? It was, after all, a Chinese civil war. Why send soldiers to fight in somebody else's civil war ?

[mike324]

15 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Hello.
Okay, about Japan beating China in a war, and taking Taiwan. Now, I am criticising/condemning Japan for taking Taiwan after that war. Do you feel the same way ? Now, if we don't say that Japan was wrong when doing this, well, we're going to end up saying that China, today, is entitled to fight wars, try and win, and grab islands and land.
Now, that would be absurd, right ?  
About how Japan handed Taiwan to the US, and how Washington handed Taiwan to the locals and not to China. I'm saying that Washington should have handed Taiwan back to China. And Taiwan was part of the Republic of China, so was large parts of mainland China part of ROC, after 1945. So, it was okay for the Communists to take parts of the ROC in mainland China, but it's not okay for them to take the bit of the ROC that's on the island of Taiwan ?  

You're right, Taiwan is a de facto independent state. Correct, China has no power in Taiwan. Beijing's attitude to Taiwan is simple, "don't declare independence, and you won't be attacked".

Do you really feel that Beijing's attitude is outrageous ? Beijing fought a civil war against the Nationalists, Beijing is simply claiming ownership of all land that was part of China prior to 1949. If there had of been a group of Nationalists trapped in Shanghai after 1949, well, Beijing would have removed them.


And I notice that those who are against Beijing simply don't mention the massive economic benefits that Taiwan gets from China. Taiwan's biggest export partner is China, and Taiwan imports more from China than any other place, and Taiwan rakes in good tourism revenue from China.

Okay, back to the issue of people being allowed to declare independence. See, whatever country we're talking about does NOT actually have to give whatever people "the right to declare independence".  So, in America, if California wants to become independent, even if most people actually want it, well, the US government certainly does have the right to not allow California to break away. It's not a case of "if that area is very different to the rest of the country, then, they are allowed to break away". You're only allowed to break away IF the central government allows you to do it.

War is what causes boundaries to be redrawn and countries lost. I don't think we need to debate about that, and which is why I feel strongly about the issue with Taiwan. It became an independent state as a result of war. Just take a look at Europe, over 10 countries that were create in the last 100 years too! 

 

I don't deny the massive amount of economic Taiwan has received. But trade goes both ways, before China open up to the world, Taiwan was a manufacturing power house. If China never opened up, perhaps Taiwanese would have came to Thailand. So China also benefited greatly from Taiwans manufacturing sector / experience as well. 

 

But yes nowadays, Taiwan does rely heavily on China because so many investors have gone to China. So yes its not the best interest for Taiwan to declare independence, but if they do there will be great economic loss and a period of adjustment, but its not like it will break the country.

 

Your analogy with California doesn't apply. The president of USA overseas California, the laws passed by the president effects California. Xi JIng Ping does not rule Taiwan, laws in China doesn't effect Taiwan. Get it. Which is why majority of the folks know that Taiwan is an independent country.