A quick update on the China War Thesis released less than a week ago. China’s military sent 71 planes and seven ships toward Taiwan in a 24-hour display of force directed at the self-ruled island, Taiwan’s Defense Ministry said Monday, after China expressed anger at Taiwan-related provisions in a U.S. annual defense spending bill.
China’s military harassment of Taiwan, which it claims is its own territory, has intensified in recent years, and the Communist Party’s People’s Liberation Army has sent planes or ships toward the island on a near-daily basis.
Become an Insider: These videos are just the beginning of the time-saving research, data, an insight-driven community, and real-time ALERTS you won’t get anywhere else. Join today and get access to information you can’t live without.
I totally agree with Chris but this really should come as NO surprise. This is something Martin Armstrong has been blaring about that the Chinese, Iranians, North Koreans are NOT stupid.
They are seeing the United States flex its military muscle in its quest for global domination. China, Iran, North Korea etc know full well that “IF” the US succeeds in its war with Russia, (let’s cut the bullshit, that it’s Ukraine fighting Russia, they are not) that they are next on the Hit List.
China already got its calling card from the US when Nancy Pelosi went to Taiwan knowing FULL well that would royally piss off Xi and the CCP. She did it anyway so China is now well aware they are next and they are seeing it with some low level trade sanctions targeting certain Chinese companies.
We have to face the facts that the US is basically in collapse mode right now and every Empire that is on its way out flexes its military might. The US is no exception. The problem becomes when you factor in the Nukes everyone has. All it takes is one mistake and we have a Nuke problem.
It Is The Leaders Of The Country Who Decide ~ Hermann Goering
Some truths are eternal:
Gustave Gilbert, an American psychologist fluent in German, worked as a translator with the Nuremberg Tribunal and interviewed Goering in the days between his conviction and his suicide. Gilbert then wrote “Nuremberg Diary,” a 1947 book based on interviews with Goering and other Nuremberg defendants.
Gilbert asked Goering how it was possible to build and sustain public support for a war effort, especially in Germany, which had barely recovered from the still recent disaster of World War I.
Here’s Goering’s reply:
“Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood.
“But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.”
“There is one difference,” [Gilbert] pointed out. “In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.”
“Oh, that is all well and good, [replied Goering] but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”
Really? I think harassment is a rather strong, perhaps misleading word, even if in a very technical sense it's descriptive.
I'm not clear on specifically why China is suddenly ratcheting up - but, then, I'm still busy with and attending to visiting family - however it is generally obvious. This pattern has been in play long enough. China's military maneuvers follow from the aggressive actions of Pelosi's intentionally provocativeAugustvisit to Taiwan, and the very recent inclusion in the latest US spending bill of new monies to equip Taiwan with yet more weapons of war.
All this despite the continual assurance of the US government that we are not encouraging Taiwan to rebel against China - whose province we all formally insist Taiwan is (as part of the one-China doctrine embraced by nearly all nations, notably including the US and NATO alliance).
We've seen this playbook before, with just a slight variation: Ukraine, 2014-2022.
Here, once again, the West is insisting we're doing nothing to encourage the most antithetical elements of a client state to separate from and stand opposite to the government of which it is legally and internationally recognized to be a (semi-)autonomous region, while at the same time we're engaged in the manipulation of local elections in that province to bring to power the political faction of our choice - which, in both cases, we formed through our nominal NGOs - headed by the leader of our choosing and grooming. And, then, we start providing military equipment and experts to train and support a growing soldiery.
What is China supposed to think and do when faced with such provocation? Particularly in light of what they've just observed in Ukraine? And knowing - as we all do - that the Western effort in Ukraine is about to be lost, and so the US - which is ever in need of a new war to keep the home population enthralled and the money presses cranking out new wealth for the donor class - needs a new proxy to put into play against a new newly-created international "threat to democracy."
Harassment is a term that better describes the international policy of the United States in particular, and the collective West more generally. We keep insulting, manipulating, poking, and prodding until we create annoyance, then irritation, and finally a response; at which point we accuse the nation harassed of unjustifiable provocation - which, of course, our governors insist, simply must be replied to so that (they explain to us) the miscreant doesn't start to think it can behave however it wants on the world stage.
On the other hand it can be just an excuse to finalize the another step toward “One China”.
What surprises me most is that a number of countries do not recognise democratic Taiwan because communist China doesn’t like it.
GO figure!
If China invades Taiwan, we could sanction them, just like we did with Russia.
Then, as well as having little energy, we’d have very little of everything else. Oops!
You can feel the power and influence and wealth rotating from west to east, can’t you? It’s going to be the story of the next generation.
The reunification of Taiwan with the mainland is historically inevitable; in the long run China will tolerate no less. However - and this is a big however - China has not been in a hurry to close the gap. So long as the international community has agreed in principle that Taiwan is part of one China, the Chinese government has appeared content to pursue the long process of building ties that would eventually indicate to the Taiwanese that they have become functionally integrated into the Chinese economy and society.
It is the West’s belligerence that has pushed the gently flowing stream, creating waves that simply didn’t have to be produced. Certainly not now. So the question becomes, why? That is, cui bono? as we’ve taken to asking around here.
The answer seems pretty obvious: this is how the US/West provokes China into an impossible choice - either let Taiwan become a tool of the West, a colony of the US on China’s immediate coast (think Soviet Union beachhead in Cuba), or take action to head off the escalation of (a) international recognition of Taiwan as a 2nd China, and (b) militarization of the anti-China party on the island. (Created and funded, let’s remember, by the US’s internationally-active “democracy” supporting NGOs.)
Those are dots even the most dull witted can connect, and see where it points, as clearly as did the US with Cuba/USSR. It simply ain’t going to happen. For China it’s an existential threat, especially given the adolescent behavior of the West’s hegemonic bullies and bravadoes.
Alexander Mercouris has a nice historical/contextual review, worth viewing for broad thematic perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT0Rx8_Ac9A
Brian Berletic (former Marine) provides a non-Westcentric perspective on the Taiwan-China-US dynamic from January, 2021 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlcnY3plJHQ&list=PLkhlYgGXRhhy9IRm0qHdbVYFreJYsX1HY&index=78
In fact, Berletic has a 79-video series exploring the Taiwan issue, each tackling some aspect of dynamics that have led to the current situation: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLkhlYgGXRhhy9IRm0qHdbVYFreJYsX1HY
Either that, or the people of Taiwan saw what happened to their friends in Hong Kong, and figured out all by themselves that “One Country, Two Systems” might be just a con job.
From my point of view, the vibe just totally shifted post-Hong Kong. It wasn’t some “deep state move” - the CCP made this happen all on its own.
Question: do the people of Taiwan get a say in how this plays out?
Yeah it would definitely speed up decoupling. All that industry we outsourced would have to come back home. Hmmm. Be a difficult few years though. No iphones, no computers, no drugs. Until we rebuilt our own factories.
Amusingly, China imports more oil than we do. And who has the Navy that safeguards world shipping again?
I don’t know VT, you’ve made some leaps and comparisons that don’t make sense to me.
The reunification of Taiwan with the mainland is historically inevitable; in the long run China will tolerate no less.
Would you also say that Texas’s reunification with Mexico is equally inevitable? I don’t see anything inevitable in it. And I’m with davefairtex: what China promised re: Hong Kong and what they have actually done put the stake into the heart of any benevolent Chinese promises.
I also don’t see how anything that has happened in Taiwan is an existential threat to China. Russian nuclear weapons in Cuba could reach the US in minutes, but Taiwan has nothing with which to strike China. The only existential threat Taiwan seems to me to be to China is because they are a prosperous Chinese culture with MUCH more freedom than China. Communist utopias have always been embarrassed (and sometimes fatally so) by other similar neighbors who are free and don’t knuckle under to a Communist dictator. For instance, during the Cold War 1.0, West Germany was a supreme embarrassment to East Germany and the Soviet bloc. South Korea is still a supreme embarrassment to North Korea and Communist dictators everywhere. Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan was unnecessary, but she’s actually a greater threat to the US than to China. Tanks, antiaircraft weapons and drills to repel an amphibious invasion in Taiwan are only a threat to China’s hypothetical invasion of Taiwan, not to China itself.
And who is more alarmed by the prospect of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan than the US? Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam and the rest of the nations on the South China Sea.
If I was the Ruler-for-Life of China I’d tell Taiwan and the world that we’ll unify with Taiwan when the people of Taiwan vote to reunify with us. In the meantime I’d focus on building trust and ties with Taiwan that would eventually lead to that reunification. As it stands now, Taiwan has everything to fear from China and China has nothing to fear from gnat-sized Taiwan except political embarrassment and economic competition.
Please don’t understand any of the above as a defense of any statements or actions coming out of the US. We’re idiots. However, I do support US Navy and Air Force “freedom of navigation” patrols as they’re currently being conducted (one lonely ship or aircraft in international waters or airspace at a time). The Chinese have made ridiculous and highly provocative claims to most of the South China Sea and been overruled by the international community. Her tiny neighbors have no one to stand up for them and the rule of law, so we do it.
Safeguards it against what/who? Near as I can tell the only threat to international shipping is the US and EU imposing restrictions and confiscating vessels.
There was a problem a few years back with pirates off the coast of Africa but the US Navy didn’t step in, hunt them down and make everything safe. It took years of effort by shippers, local governments and other nations to deal with it.
I expect the Chinese navy would be happy to protect Chinese ships.
Interesting commentary. I’ll add one thing no one seems to have mentioned so far. Advanced semiconductor chip manufacturing. TSMC and one or two other companies are the largest semiconductor fabrication (chip making) companies in the world. China’s tech and plants are so far behind as to be a joke in the tech. community. How much do you think that’s worth both financially and in terms of ability to have access to products.
I think the US-based manufacturers are smart to be investing in plants on US soil.
@davefairtex, @thc0655,
I think we’re looking at China v. Taiwan (or China v. Hong Kong for that matter) through different frames of reference/perspective.
I can make my perspective clearer by clarifying the frame in which I’m situating the conflict(s). In my frame, the similarities between the conflicts involving China, Russia, and even Trump become clear. But I’m not going to post that here because it would inappropriately hijack the thread. I’ve given it its own post, here: Framing China.
I don’t think you are looking back far enough. It wasn’t with Hong Kong that the vibe shifted, it was in 2014 with the Sunflower Movement (or Sunflower Revolution) in Taiwan itself which was very much like other colour revolutions around the world. In that case it was a student-led occupation/sit-in of the parliament in Taiwan in protest against a Cross-Straits Services Agreement between Taiwan (under the then KMT) and mainland China. The movement successfully got the Agreement halted before it could be implemented and at the next presidential and legislative elections (in 2016) the KMT (which is pro-reunification but anti-communist) lost to the (now currently ruling) DPP (which is anti-reunification and of course anti-communist).
Everything since then has only be an acceleration of that phase shift that occurred in 2014.
Excellent question that isn’t asked often enough. It reminds me of a skit that was poking fun at the underlying logic of this from the Australian comedy series Utopia wherein a bureaucrat calls a meeting to flesh out some talking points for the Prime Minister about a defence spending bill and in the end the meeting concludes that increased defence spending is needed to protect Australia’s trade routes with China from China: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTCqXlDjx18
As best as I can tell the need to safeguard world shipping is a hold-over from the 1800s (and before) and early 1900s when piracy was a much bigger issue (pre-1900s) and when the first half of the 1900s saw two major global conflicts in which shipping was targeted (in particular in the First War, even neutral shipping was targeted with unrestricted submarine warfare by Germany). However we don’t live in that world anymore and we don’t have to…unless we choose to make it that way through actions that increase the likelihood of a third global conflict (though we may find that this time the conflict is a lot shorter, a lot more intense and a lot more devastating than the previous two; it may well last only a few days and result in more people dead than both previous World Wars combined and likely over the fate one set of Chinese on an island squaring off against another set of Chinese (the ones whom our governments have all nearly universally recognized as the sole government for China) on the mainland).