Everybody knows about the backstory, there was a civil war, KMT fled to Taiwan creating two Chinas sort of, maybe, neither recognises the other, whole thing. ROC (Taiwan) ended up transitioning from military rule to a multi-party democracy, while the PRC (mainland China) didn’t do that (they did reform economically, “socialism with Chinese characteristics” and all that, but still a one-party state, not a multi-party democracy). The status quo right now is that Taiwan is in the grey area of statehood where they function pretty much independently but aren’t properly recognised, and both sides of the strait are feeling pretty tense right now.
Taiwan’s stance on the issue is that they would like to remain politically and economically independent of mainland China, retaining their multi-party democracy, political connections to its allies, economic trade connections, etc. Also, a majority of the people in Taiwan do not support reunification with China.
China’s stance on the issue is that Taiwan should be reunified with the mainland at all costs, ideally peacefully, but war is not ruled out. They argue that Taiwan was unfairly separated from the mainland by imperial powers in their “century of humiliation”. Strategically, taking Taiwan would be beneficial to China as they would have better control of the sea.
Is it even possible for both sides to agree to a peaceful solution? Personally, I can only see two ways this could go about that has the consent of both parties. One, a reformist leader takes power in the mainland and gives up on Taiwan, and the two exist as separate independent nations. Or two, the mainland gets a super-reformist leader that transitions the mainland to a multi-party democracy, and maybe then reunification could be on the table, with Taiwan keeping an autonomous status given the large cultural difference (similar to Hong Kong or Macau’s current status). Both options are, unfortunately, very unlikely to occur in the near future.
A third option (?) would be a pseudo-unification, where Taiwan becomes a recognised country, but there can be free movement of people between the mainland and Taiwan, free trade, that sort of stuff (sort of like the EU? Maybe?). Not sure if the PRC would accept that.
What are your thoughts on a peaceful solution to the crisis that both sides could agree on?
edit: Damn there are crazies in both ends of the arguments. I really don’t think giving Taiwan nukes would help solve the problem.
I think the current best solution, looking at the more reasonable and realistic comments, seems to be to maintain the status quo, at least until both sides of the strait are able to come into some sort of agreement (which seems to be worlds away right now given their current very opposing stances on the issue)
So then, they don’t support changing it now, but would if the geopolitical realities were completely different.
Jesus christ in heaven! Do words mean anything to you?
They don’t support pushing for it now because of the risk of inciting a war with China, but a clear majority do not wish to enjoin with the PRC - and many more people in those same polls express support for moving towards independence as compared to pro-unification, and I suspect strongly that the fear of antagonising China suppresses many more would-be pro-independence supporters from expressing their true position on this.
I don’t know that the argument that effectively represents China as an aggressor here as the reason many Taiwanese don’t officially support moving to independence is particularly impressive one, personally.
Cool! So they don’t support it now. So is the “the reality now” what matters to you or not?
I don’t give a shit about whatever you just said.
I know I, and anyone with an ounce of sanity, including the vast majority of the Taiwanese people (whose opinions you completely disregard), think it would be completely insane to start WWIII just based on some point of pride, instead of enjoying the continued peace that the status quo has provided for decades.
What if the geopolitical realities were completely different, and there was no risk of WWIII? What if the geopolitical realities were different, and the US hadn’t intervened in the situation in the ways they did historically?
In response to the latter you claim that “the reality now is what I care about,” but then you go on and on and on about how important it is to imagine what people would want in the former hypothetical, instead of looking at what they actually do want in the reality now.
Because of Chinese intimidation and threats. Many more who voted for a flat ‘status quo’ option absolutely would wish for China to back off so they could officially become independent and a recognised nation. That is my contention.
A good thing that I didn’t say that they should then. As unreasonable as China is being here, I’ve never once said that the Taiwanese should declare independence because of the actual risk of the Chinese reaction.
There’s good reason to believe, as I’ve indicated to you in many other replies that many Taiwanese right now, as it is now, would like to push for independence but don’t feel it viable so the polling reflects that. I think that, if true (and to be clear - I think it is) is reason to believe that it ultimately commands a majority.
Why are we supposed to consider hypotheticals where China’s actions are different, but not hypotheticals where the US’s actions were different? It makes no sense!
I don’t get the point of comparison here. I haven’t really said anything about the USA. I supposed if the history of USA-Taiwan was different, Taiwan may never have got to the point it is now and been annexed many times over at many different points in many different timelines. But I’m not really talking about Taiwan as it was in the 1950s, 60s, 70s or 80s.
Enough - you are a completely ridiculous, obstinate, unreasonable chauvinist.
I just could not believe you’d have the audacity to say “the reality now is what I care about” after I spent 40 comments trying to convince you that the reality now is what matters. You are just impossible.
The reality of what people in Taiwan now think, not alternative history scenarios regarding a different USA reaction to Taiwan at specific points of divergence. I think a majority of the would-be pro-independence bloc across Taiwan likely do wish to move towards independence, but feel it unrealistic and dangerous to do so because of the potential reaction from China, and so answer “status quo” or “status quo, decide later” on polls out of that specific resignation.
Just alternate present scenarios, gotcha.
Right, and I think a majority of the would-be pro-unification bloc across Taiwan feel currently feel that unification is not necessary because there isn’t a looming alien invasion.
You’re acting as though “pro-independence” or “pro-unification” are just these abstract things that can be understood in a vacuum, utterly unconnected to geopolitical realities, except, for some reason, when the geopolitical realities pertaining to China are involved. But these positions will always be dependent on what they actually mean for the people Taiwan, in existing reality. US investment breaks this vacuum, this “Platonic form” of pro-independence just as security concerns from the PRC do.
You cannot, fundamentally, talk about what they would support “in a vacuum” or “if security concerns did not exist” because they will never be in a vacuum and security concerns will always exist. This gets back to something I asked previously: