China sharpens language, warns Taiwan that independence 'means war'

[simple1]

2 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

You ignore the fact that a large part of population is motivated only by personal profit; if they can make money, they want reunification with mainland

 

Have you spent time in Taiwan or have contact with Taiwanese people? I suggest to you Taiwanese are usually very much against integration with the current political system in PRC.

[jcsmith]

While it is true that the [U.S.] military budget jumped from $611B (36% of the spending in the world) in 2016 to $732B in 2020 (38% of the spending in the world) it's not as though the U.S. military's status was diminished with that $611B. They spend spend more money than the other top ten countries combined year after year. 

 

China meanwhile is #2 by a long shot but its a distant second. In 2016 they spend $215B (13%) and while that went up to $261B last year, it wasn't that significant of a gain in relation to the U.S. Does the U.S. military really need to be spending 250+% more than the second country? 

Military should be the first thing cut when the U.S. needs money, and I'm sure it will be. But it never gets cut by all that much.

Edited February 1, 2021 by onthedarkside
quote of hidden post removed

[PatOngo]

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

 

Have you spent time in Taiwan or have contact with Taiwanese people? I suggest to you Taiwanese are usually very much against integration with the current political system in PRC.

I have worked in Taiwan and I found the Taiwanese, totally paranoid of the Chinese, that was a few years ago, these must be very worrying times as the Chinese have ramped up their sabre rattling of late. I'm sure Taiwan will get good support internationally if the Chinese ever have the intestinal fortitude to try and liberate Taiwan!

[Scott]

Troll post removed.  Continue and face a suspension.

 

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Let's see what Biden actually does regarding trade between America and China.

Bill Clinton, George W Bush and Barrack Obama all had no problems with trade between America and China. China exported a mountain of cheap goods to America, this was good for China and good for America. China had a big trade surplus, America benefitted from buying cheap goods. Three presidents, nearly a quarter of a century of benefits for both.

Trump came along, and slapped taxes on the Chinese goods being imported into America. Beijing responded by slapping taxes onto American goods entering China. This was harmfull to both America and China. Yes, let's hope Biden goes back to what was happenning during the two decades prior to Trump.
 

Both Bush and Obama understood that western businesses thought they had to give away their crown jewels (their proprietary technology and processes) in order to get a foot in the door of the Chinese market.  China made fools of these businesses.

 

The Trans Pacific Partnership, begun under Bush and finalized but not ratified under Obama was meant to keep trade conducted in accordance with western free market rules in that part of the world.  Trump pulled out of it.

 

Biden and the rest of the world understand that China does not play by western rules and will not go back to trade as conducted pre-Trump.  Biden will probably eventually lift some tariffs, but will work with other partners to address China's abuse of intellectual property, human rights, etc.

Edited January 31, 2021 by heybruce

[kingdong]

8 hours ago, heybruce said:

Yes, it is more complicated.  However the fact remains that it would take many years to replicate Taiwan's chip manufacturing facilities.  The western world could either depend on China for these essential chips during this time, or attempt to do without.  Either option leaves China with a stranglehold on the world economy. 

 

While the west would desperately attempt to build similar or better facilities, China would be doing the same with the advantage of holding the major chip making facilities.  The west would have the advantage of having the facilities that make the machines for the individual steps in the manufacturing process, but China would have the advantage of holding examples of these machines which could be reversed engineered.  I know, none of this is easy, figuring out how to build precision equipment from a copy on hand is a major undertaking.  Finally, if a war were to start between North and South Korea the situation would get much worse for the west, and strengthen China's hand considerably.

 

There is no scenario in which China seizing Taiwan is not a crippling economic blow to the west. 

 

 

ah the pleasures of globilisation,till it goes tits up,now they,re holding all the cards.

[heybruce]

17 minutes ago, kingdong said:

ah the pleasures of globilisation,till it goes tits up,now they,re holding all the cards.

Opponents of globalization would have a much more convincing argument if they could give an example of a successful modern economy that was not dependent on international trade.

Edited January 31, 2021 by heybruce

[kingdong]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

Opponents of globalization would have a much more convincing argument if they could give an example of a successful modern economy that was not dependent on global trade.

 " successful modern ecnomy" well if the current scenario as you described is the result,then perhaps the west should have developed their own industries and research instead of relying on others,just finished a book,the rape of nanking,very disturbing,i,ve read up a bit of the history of 20th century china and it would seem up to  1945 they were humiliated by other countries taking liberties with it,just like germany in the 1930 s lets hope history dosen,t repeat itself in this instance.

[kingdong]

Seems joe,s been slung in at the deep end,only time will tell how things pan out.

Edited February 1, 2021 by onthedarkside
quote of hidden post removed

[Jeffr2]

21 minutes ago, kingdong said:

Seems joe,s been slung in at the deep end,only time will tell how things pan out.

Trump didn't help with his failed trade war.  This is an interesting perspective on China.

 

https://www.thenation.com/article/world/biden-china-cold-war/

 

Biden’s China Problem: Resisting a New Cold War in Asia

 

The breakdown of the neoliberal consensus creates an opening for a more progressive China policy—while also increasing the danger of war.

[robblok]

11 hours ago, kingdong said:

Do you honestly think the usa will interfere militarily against china? Do you think the west will be in the financial position,( i,e the corona pandemic) to want to get involved?perhaps the west should mind its own buisness as the alternative could very well be ww 3.

I don't honestly think that the US would get into a war with China over Taiwan. Maybe an initial fight but once the Americans take too many losses (China wont care about its losses) the population will revolt. So I don't think there will be a real war. That was my point actually. 

 

But on the other hand I am not completely sure China will risk it, because it could mean a blow to their economy too.

[rabas]

7 hours ago, heybruce said:

So the best case scenario is that the west continues to keep the Taiwan fabrication plants running under mainland China control, with all the security concerns and economic vulnerability that entails.  Or the west can starve these plants of needed inputs, and suffer the consequences of starving the world of state of the art processors.

 

Neither is appealing.

 

You confuse 'factory' with technology. If you walked through a modern factory you would see countless super hi tech machines from all over the world, not from Taiwan. More important is who develops the technologies. Not to mention that things like IC design/layout  are done on computers using global software.

 

No one doubts the economic hit vis-à-vis Taiwan's factories should China go rogue, but it could pale compared to COVID. You can also read up on this issue Taiwan, Chips, and Geopolitics (Dec 2020):

 

"On closer inspection however, TSMC appears unlikely to be a decisive factor shaping either Beijing’s calculus over the “Taiwan problem” or that of third-party governments ... It neither gives foreign governments sufficient incentive to change their basic calculations vis-à-vis Beijing in the event of a war in the Taiwan Strait, nor leaves them without options to mitigate risks from losing access to TSMC’s services, at least over the long term."

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, rabas said:

 

You confuse 'factory' with technology. If you walked through a modern factory you would see countless super hi tech machines from all over the world, not from Taiwan. More important is who develops the technologies. Not to mention that things like IC design/layout  are done on computers using global software.

 

No one doubts the economic hit vis-à-vis Taiwan's factories should China go rogue, but it could pale compared to COVID. You can also read up on this issue Taiwan, Chips, and Geopolitics (Dec 2020):

 

"On closer inspection however, TSMC appears unlikely to be a decisive factor shaping either Beijing’s calculus over the “Taiwan problem” or that of third-party governments ... It neither gives foreign governments sufficient incentive to change their basic calculations vis-à-vis Beijing in the event of a war in the Taiwan Strait, nor leaves them without options to mitigate risks from losing access to TSMC’s services, at least over the long term."

 

We're arguing over details.  The fact that the critical equipment was built elsewhere doesn't mean there this equipment is sitting in warehouses waiting for someone to build another factory.  A lot of it is made to order, and not made quickly.  Also, it takes trained people to run the equipment, and trained experienced people to run it well.  In addition there are layers of management knowledgeable about the technology making things work together.  From your source:

 

"To run a cutting-edge logic fab, companies need extensive process knowledge, close research collaborations with their suppliers, deep pockets to constantly invest in new equipment, and substantial government backing."

 

"Even if TSMC builds fabs outside of Taiwan, they will be trailing-edge: TSMC’s 5 nm fab in Arizona will only be operational in 2024, by which time the company will already be mass-producing next generation 3 nm chips in Taiwan. The business ecosystem within Taiwan that has facilitated TSMC’s rise is also unlikely to be replicated overseas quickly under market conditions, even with the cooperation of friendly governments such as in the United States."

 

In other words, replicating what TSMC does in Taiwan anywhere else will take years, and the replicated facility will be years behind state of the art when it is finished. 

 

China will have a choke hold on the industry if they can capture TSMC's facilities and people largely intact.  The world will suffer a debilitating shortage of chips that have become critical if the factories are not captured intact and kept running. 

 

Perhaps the economic impact will be less than that of Covid 19, but no country wants to suffer another economic hit that comes close to that magnitude.  Except perhaps China, which may have conclude that since Covid 19 hurt other countries more than itself, China came out relatively stronger, and might do the same following another economic shock.

Edited January 31, 2021 by heybruce

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, kingdong said:

 " successful modern ecnomy" well if the current scenario as you described is the result,then perhaps the west should have developed their own industries and research instead of relying on others,just finished a book,the rape of nanking,very disturbing,i,ve read up a bit of the history of 20th century china and it would seem up to  1945 they were humiliated by other countries taking liberties with it,just like germany in the 1930 s lets hope history dosen,t repeat itself in this instance.

So no examples of a successful modern economy that doesn't trade with the outside world; in other words, a globalized economy.

 

There are examples of countries that attempted to be self-sufficient without trade with the outside world.  North Korea is a current example, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge is a past one.  Neither worked out too well.

[placnx]

17 hours ago, rabas said:

 

You are right and make a good point. However, it's more complicated. Taiwan is only a global resource for IC manufacture, they run factories. If you want to make a SotA IC today, you must first buy billions of dollars of the most sophisticated technology on Earth, just for one factory. This mostly comes from US/Japan/Europe and the US is still on top.

 

If China ever took over Taiwan, IC manufacturing would collapse because It can't survive without a constant supply of high tech machines and support from manufacturers who maintain them. I doubt anyone would help China get it up and running. The world's machines would just go to new factories elsewhere. 

 

The problem is that the West is unprepared for a sudden move by China to control the chip industry. For its own good, Taiwan should put new fabrication facilities somewhere out of reach of China so that the West could not be blackmailed into acceding to the takeover of Taiwan. If the Taiwanese had time, they could blow up existing factories before Xi takes his triumphal tour. They should have a Stuxnet pre-installed to clean up the software at their Chinese facilities as well.

[placnx]

17 hours ago, Gulfsailor said:

The future technology is EUV lithography, whose market is completely dominated by ASML, a Dutch company. They’d happily sell to anyone...

You may not be aware that a lot of chip making technology is licensed from America, so that Dutch ASML may be prohibited from selling to certain Chinese customers, especially those affiliated with the military. 

 

It's also a problem with surveillance technology, robotics, many things, but I think that attitudes are changing in Europe. Germany now scrutinizes private tech deals with China.

[placnx]

14 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

You do not understand Taiwan "democracy". Taiwan local elections have similarities to the old municipal politics Chicago, Palermo, Naples, New York from 50 years ago.  Yes, Taiwan has a form of parliamentary democracy and they make much progress every year. However, you have a bias that promotes Taiwan virtues and sadly they have many weaknesses. You ignore the fact that a large part of population is motivated only by personal profit; if they can make money, they want reunification with mainland. If there was so much dislike of mainland, why is Taiwan a big investor?

I wonder how much new investment is going from Taiwan to China these days. Like many people, there was wishful thinking that China would become increasingly democratic. Instead there's been a reversion to the norm, i.e. authoritarianism. Taiwanese investors were also investing there to supply factories servicing Apple and other deluded Western companies, such as Apple.

[placnx]

14 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

So you believe USA should have ignored nation with 1 billion people, nuclear weapons and which was fundamental to any possibility of the USA extricating itself from the mess of Vietnam war, and for keeping North Korea from staring a war?  Easy to criticize50 years later, but the USA made the right move for world peace.

 

I do not support China, but I can see that the response must be worldwide with all nations sharing common voice. Russia borders with China and they have as much concern as USA and EU, but they stay quiet because USA and EU is an enemy. Time to make peace with Russia like was done for WWII. Russia makes friends with China on same basis it made Molotov and Von Ribbentrop agreement that allowed tragedy of grab on Poland and Finland. Now we ask Australia to take on China alone. Look at what  China does to Australia because no one helps Australia. Many of the civil disturbances we see now are stirred up by a foreign force through disinformation and funding for "social justice" (which is not, but  acts as cover for protests).Why would any small country in Asia stand up to China after it sees how Australia is abandoned.

The Nixon/Kissinger gambit was motivated by the coming US election, to of course create a narrative that this would get China on the US side, so to make N Vietnam agree to terms more favorable to Nixon's image! I doubt that America at the time felt any threat from a nuclear China.

 

Today, assuming that China is still under CCP control, it would be in no position to bully anybody, especially Australia, since AU would not be exporting much to China. The world would be such a better place without an overbearing China.

 

After the fall of the Soviet Union, there should have been a Marshall Plan to support the embryonic democratic forces. Instead the Russian economy was made worse by some economists from the US who wanted to privatize their SOEs. Russia could have been a solid partner of the West.

 

We should remember history to learn from it, so as not to get ever deeper into a policy gone terribly wrong. 

[ctxa]

2 hours ago, placnx said:

The problem is that the West is unprepared for a sudden move by China to control the chip industry. For its own good, Taiwan should put new fabrication facilities somewhere out of reach of China so that the West could not be blackmailed into acceding to the takeover of Taiwan. If the Taiwanese had time, they could blow up existing factories before Xi takes his triumphal tour. They should have a Stuxnet pre-installed to clean up the software at their Chinese facilities as well.

What people seem to forget here is that 2019 and 2020 both were tough years for China when it comes to chip and technology following the ban pushed by Trump's administration of US companies selling chips (among other things) to Chinese companies. 

 

In the past China used to buy many chips from Korea and Taiwan, but during 2019 and 2020 there was a huge shortage of chips in China (I am the shareholder of a factory in Shenzhen which manufactures cables and I know very well what I am talking about). This continuous and desperate shortage of chips has pushed the Chinese government and private companies to invest hugely into their own chip development. I am not saying that at this point in time China can manufacture its own chips, but they've been investing hugely on manufacture their own chips for the last 2 years, and eventually they'll get there. And as time passes we are certainly offered more possibilities to purchase local chips for our cables.

 

While Taiwan may have been important for China in the past regarding chips, nowadays every day that passes it is less and less so.

Edited January 31, 2021 by ctxa

[kingdong]

6 hours ago, heybruce said:

So no examples of a successful modern economy that doesn't trade with the outside world; in other words, a globalized economy.

 

There are examples of countries that attempted to be self-sufficient without trade with the outside world.  North Korea is a current example, Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge is a past one.  Neither worked out too well.

Granted they didn,t,nor did they jeopardise their countries security by cozying up to a country like china in an attempt to make a buck"

[kingdong]

8 hours ago, robblok said:

I don't honestly think that the US would get into a war with China over Taiwan. Maybe an initial fight but once the Americans take too many losses (China wont care about its losses) the population will revolt. So I don't think there will be a real war. That was my point actually. 

 

But on the other hand I am not completely sure China will risk it, because it could mean a blow to their economy too.

 "Their economy"what the one based on exports to a now  bankrupt west?" The population will revolt " who the americans like during the vietnam war or the chinese? in the case of the latter seem to remember a " revolt "in tinnaman square a few years ago.

[heybruce]

22 minutes ago, kingdong said:

Granted they didn,t,nor did they jeopardise their countries security by cozying up to a country like china in an attempt to make a buck"

I take it that you think it is better for a country to let its citizens starve than participate in the world economy.

[kingdong]

9 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Trump didn't help with his failed trade war.  This is an interesting perspective on China.

 

https://www.thenation.com/article/world/biden-china-cold-war/

 

Biden’s China Problem: Resisting a New Cold War in Asia

 

The breakdown of the neoliberal consensus creates an opening for a more progressive China policy—while also increasing the danger of war.

Increasing the danger of war,and if the chinese do want to start getting lairy what better time to do it with the world economy paralysed by the corona pandemic.

[kingdong]

11 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I take it that you think it is better for a country to let its citizens starve than participate in the world economy.

"starve" ? how do,es the global economy equate to food production.?

Edited January 31, 2021 by kingdong

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, placnx said:

The Nixon/Kissinger gambit was motivated by the coming US election, to of course create a narrative that this would get China on the US side, so to make N Vietnam agree to terms more favorable to Nixon's image! I doubt that America at the time felt any threat from a nuclear China.

 

Today, assuming that China is still under CCP control, it would be in no position to bully anybody, especially Australia, since AU would not be exporting much to China. The world would be such a better place without an overbearing China.

 

After the fall of the Soviet Union, there should have been a Marshall Plan to support the embryonic democratic forces. Instead the Russian economy was made worse by some economists from the US who wanted to privatize their SOEs. Russia could have been a solid partner of the West.

 

We should remember history to learn from it, so as not to get ever deeper into a policy gone terribly wrong. 

"After the fall of the Soviet Union, there should have been a Marshall Plan to support the embryonic democratic forces. Instead the Russian economy was made worse by some economists from the US who wanted to privatize their SOEs. Russia could have been a solid partner of the West."

 

Hindsight is always 20-20, but there was undeniably a missed opportunity at the time.  An equivalent to the Marshall Plan would have been very expensive, and a hard sell at a time when numerous factions in the US were salivating over the possibilities with the money no longer needed for the Cold War.  But the world would be in a much better place if such an investment had been made, and the cost at the time would have been much less than the cost of a new cold war, hot wars in regions such as Syria, and a "friend" such as Putin undermining western democracies whenever possible.

 

In 1990 we weren't smart enough to realize this.  Unfortunately we seem to be less smart now.

[heybruce]

17 minutes ago, kingdong said:

"starve" ? how do,es the global economy equate to food production.?

How well did Cambodia do in feeding its population under the Khmer Rouge?  How well does North Korea do at feeding its population when the weather is bad?  

 

Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, and many others are prosperous, productive nations that do not produce all the things that their citizens want and need.  Global trade makes the people of these nations happy and productive.

 

To make it as simple as possible:  Some nations are good at producing food and raw materials.  Some nations are good at manufacturing stuff.  Both groups of nations are better off if they exchange what they are good at producing with nations that are good at producing the other necessary stuff.  That is what globalization does.

Edited January 31, 2021 by heybruce

[rabas]

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

To make it as simple as possible:  Some nations are good at producing food and raw materials.  Some nations are good at manufacturing stuff.  Both groups of nations are better off if they exchange what they are good at producing with nations that are good at producing the other necessary stuff.  That is what globalization does.

Why, that's called trade.

 

We've had trade for thousands of years now, probably 10000s thousands or more. Globalization, as the term is used nowadays, is something different.  Its about power and control.

 

[placnx]

18 hours ago, kingdong said:

"starve" ? how do,es the global economy equate to food production.?

 

Most of the world imports food from somewhere. If crops fail in Brazil, China may not have enough food for the pigs.

[heybruce]

16 minutes ago, rabas said:

Why, that's called trade.

 

We've had trade for thousands of years now, probably 10000s thousands or more. Globalization, as the term is used nowadays, is something different.  Its about power and control.

 

Globalization is trade.  Power and control are politics.  The two are inextricably linked, unfortunately.

 

I like starting my days with oats from the temperate climates, coffee from the tropics, and orange juice from the semi-tropics.  That would not be possible without globalization.  I can't even estimate how many parts of the world contributed to the affordable electronic gadget I'm currently using, but I like it as well.

[kingdong]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

How well did Cambodia do in feeding its population under the Khmer Rouge?  How well does North Korea do at feeding its population when the weather is bad?  

 

Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, and many others are prosperous, productive nations that do not produce all the things that their citizens want and need.  Global trade makes the people of these nations happy and productive.

 

To make it as simple as possible:  Some nations are good at producing food and raw materials.  Some nations are good at manufacturing stuff.  Both groups of nations are better off if they exchange what they are good at producing with nations that are good at producing the other necessary stuff.  That is what globalization does.

Yeah yeah yeah,i know how it all works,but as i pointed out there should be limits,and when " globilisation"puts your countries security at risk then theres obviously something wrong.