"irredentist" is a new word for my vocabulary, thanks! I totally agree with your points and I find people completely irresponsible for openly suggesting and arguing that war is inevitable. Biden is modeling the behavior and language focusing on competition in business instead of listing them as one of the axis of evil or other derogatory comment.
Mr Hanley is a conspiracy theorist, reading intent into the actions of the US and other countries - not helpful when it comes to Putin's attack on Ukraine, the morale of the army and citizens of Ukraine, and the willingness of Republicans to continue funding. Loyalists are the reason Ukraine is winning, and while the story of David and Goliath is centuries old, it is possible today. The rule of law, which Russia agreed to as a UN member, is worth fighting for to the end. Considering past wars where the US won and did not "take over" the country or its assets needs to be mentioned. Biden does want business partners (Taiwan) but not business larceny (China). When you believe in Democracy you choose to do business with other democracies, not dictatorships. I for one am comfortable purchasing goods made in Taiwan where people are paid a good wage and the intellectual property rights respected, but I am not comfortable purchasing goods from China where the quality is often inferior, the "employees" may or may not be paid a good wage and treated humanely, and the intellectual property may be stolen. Stick with the verifiable facts in all instances. When considering underlying intent - abstain from stating it as a "known fact" because it is disinformation.
Could it be that Varoufakis is simply an attention seeker ? What is he without controversy ? a failed economist and politician ? OH - he can be both at the same time.
hi Angelica! Thank you as always for your smart, clear, incisive writing. Really happy to see you are keeping Taipology going and for adding your voice contributing to our understanding of China and--especially--Taiwan.
Interesting debate going on in the comments, though probably not as interesting as the Kilkenomics debate; too bad no one took video.
Joe Biden made the phone call to the Kremlin in 2014 asking Russia as a gesture of goodwill to tell Ukraine's then elected president to keep security forces in barracks. They did. This allowed the coup to go forward, and much evidence points to US instigation and there is plenty of evidence of collaboration. Hunter Biden, Joe's addict son, stayed in Ukraine for the duration as White House liaison. The White House, in 2014, declared the people of Ukraine who were loyal to their government, "The Rebels", which is pure Orwell.
The US is backing Ukraine to the last drop of Ukrainian blood. Their militias have been torn to bits, and the war is not over.
Do not let your loyalties blind you to the game here. The game was stated a decade ago: Regime change in Russia. Ukraine's militants are just a tool to bleed Russia, hopefully to death. The reason for that is not noble, it is to take over Russia's massive resources.
Be clear Angelica. The same fate awaits Taiwan, although there is some alarm inside the Beltway that Ukraine is already bleeding the US of critical conventional weapons, and people are balking at the huge cost. Don't kid yourself. Taiwan is, in this administration's eyes, primarily a tool for harming China, and secondarily a source of chips. But we want chip production to come back here, and what would make that happen faster than the end of chip manufacturing in Taiwan.
It will be devastating to Taiwan if war occurs. Don't kid yourself. Inside the Beltway in Washington, you are a tool, and you do not look like most of them. Don't kid yourself about how most of those old guys think. If your nation burns to the ground, too bad, so sad. It will stir sentiment further against China. Good politics for elections.
2. Varoufakis is flat wrong about decoupling with China. There is no negative effect on climate goals to decoupling with China---quite the reverse. Varoufakis is an economist, and has a weaker understanding of the utility of solar and wind than you. China burns huge amounts of coal to make those products and sell them to the West. But I think you are aware of this.
3. I agree that the suggestion that "by predicting you manifest it" is ridiculous. That is not how these things happen. China's calculus is that Taiwan is a vulnerability. This is identical to US perception of Cuba during Castro's regime. Militarily, Taiwan is an outpost of a nation that has become "the enemy." Things were calmer before, because the US was a friendly trading nation. China became the enemy for one reason. China's GDP is greater than the USA's GDP. China went capitalist, and the old dinosaurs want a new cold war, because Asians are not supposed to rise above. Watch videos by Steve Bannon, racist at large. Be very clear what is going on here.
Xi's consolidation of power is a response to US/European attack. Don't kid yourself, those protests in Hong Kong were not all just spontaneous. Those were definitely supported, and probably instigated to harm China. What Xi is doing is what nations do when another nation acts against them. You can even see signs of the same thing in the US as well. We are more polarized. We are instigating problems with nations that want no part of those.
This is not to say that Xi and China are perfect, they are not. But even Soros said it---freedom without actual choices is not freedom. China has, for its faults, been the only reason that global poverty declined since 2000. All of it was because of China, and not just China's activity inside its borders. China has done so in Africa as well. The USA and Europe's effect on the world was to increase poverty, mostly because of bombing and war.
4. I have to agree with him that war should be avoided. But, generations grow up without war, and eventually everyone that knew war has died, and living memory is gone. We are in that kind of place in the developed world now. Consequently, we have leadership of the "free world" playing brinksmanship with nuclear war.
5. I have no strong position on Taiwan vs. China, though I lean toward recognizing Taiwan as a nation. It appears to be a nation in every normal sense of the word. The UN does not recognize Taiwan as an independent nation. Nations must find a way to exist in the context they are in. China is the giant that Taiwan must deal with somehow.
Tankie nonsense. the PRC does not and never has had a claim to Taiwan. As for the HK Protests being CIA sponsored, this is garbage. 60% of HK population wants nothing to do with the mainland. Not independence, but HK people governing HK with the welfare of HK people in mind. Not the relentless settler colonialism of Mandarin and Han culture triumphant.
I don't think you know what the word, "tankie" means. Do look it up. The claim PRC has to Taiwan is straightforward. The Qing dynasty gave Formosa to Japan in 1895 as part of a treaty. (War was involved.) Chinese had begun settling the island in the 6th century. Japan lost WW2 and gave up its claim to Taiwan. Taiwan was taken over by a rival army to Mao's forces. Both armies were mainland China armies. I am sympathetic to Taiwan as an independent nation. But any nation must be capable of asserting its independence. In this case, Taiwan's alliance with the United States is working against independence, because in the current climate the island is of strategic military importance.
There is no question of US support for the protests. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaE4cmBP6mk It is not correct to believe that the CIA can, or would, create protests out of whole cloth. Rather, regime change or "poking the bear" requires identifying an activist (preferably militant) faction. Then, support them in various ways, and urge them on. The Obama administration supported ISIS/Al-Qaeda in Syria. Without a fanatic or extremist militant group ready to fight and die, there is no possibility of regime change through proxy war. To do that operatives take advantage of the situation on the ground, allying with extremely unsavory people to accomplish a requested goal.
A good exercise is to invert a situation and see how you think then. There are plenty of people in the US who are unhappy, even militant, against our government. 30-40% of Republicans agree that violence may be necessary. If China was meeting with Jan 6th protesters, or providing weapons and military intelligence to militias in the Northwest US, would you say that China had nothing to do with it? I don't think so.
The student leaders also went to Washington DC, which they were free to do. They were encouraged, Congress passed bills in support. There is no question that the US did support the protests. If China did the same in support of, say, Jan 6th protesters, what would our position be?
I apologize for repeating that phrase 4 times. However, being smart is not the same as having full understanding of how nations and militant parties are used for proxy war. The USA's revolution was used by France for proxy war against England. It is unlikely Taiwan would win against PRC, but Taiwan would be used to chew up as much of PRC's military capacity as possible, and to create negative PR against PRC.
As I said, I sympathize with Taiwan personally. You are making the mistake of thinking that what I am saying is partisan. What I intend to convey is the necessities of realpolitik.
If you want to be successful, you must be able to put yourself in the position of your opponent(s) so that you can understand what motivates them so you know what they will probably do. This is fundamental to military strategy. If you refuse to do this, your doom is virtually certain. People often think that military minds are narrow. This is completely wrong, as it is civilian minds that are the most closed and narrow. An effective military must have a mind wide enough to understand its enemy correctly.
"irredentist" is a new word for my vocabulary, thanks! I totally agree with your points and I find people completely irresponsible for openly suggesting and arguing that war is inevitable. Biden is modeling the behavior and language focusing on competition in business instead of listing them as one of the axis of evil or other derogatory comment.
Mr Hanley is a conspiracy theorist, reading intent into the actions of the US and other countries - not helpful when it comes to Putin's attack on Ukraine, the morale of the army and citizens of Ukraine, and the willingness of Republicans to continue funding. Loyalists are the reason Ukraine is winning, and while the story of David and Goliath is centuries old, it is possible today. The rule of law, which Russia agreed to as a UN member, is worth fighting for to the end. Considering past wars where the US won and did not "take over" the country or its assets needs to be mentioned. Biden does want business partners (Taiwan) but not business larceny (China). When you believe in Democracy you choose to do business with other democracies, not dictatorships. I for one am comfortable purchasing goods made in Taiwan where people are paid a good wage and the intellectual property rights respected, but I am not comfortable purchasing goods from China where the quality is often inferior, the "employees" may or may not be paid a good wage and treated humanely, and the intellectual property may be stolen. Stick with the verifiable facts in all instances. When considering underlying intent - abstain from stating it as a "known fact" because it is disinformation.
Could it be that Varoufakis is simply an attention seeker ? What is he without controversy ? a failed economist and politician ? OH - he can be both at the same time.
You were excellent Angelica. I like Yanis, he is always interesting and choose this talk to hear him again. I was glad I did, you have a new fan.
Thank you Allen!
Has the recording been posted yet?
Unfortunately there was no recording! If only!
hi Angelica! Thank you as always for your smart, clear, incisive writing. Really happy to see you are keeping Taipology going and for adding your voice contributing to our understanding of China and--especially--Taiwan.
Interesting debate going on in the comments, though probably not as interesting as the Kilkenomics debate; too bad no one took video.
Thank you again and keep Taipology going!
1. Varoufakis is correct about Ukraine. Specifically it is Joe Biden that declared intent to put China down. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-biden-china/biden-says-china-wont-surpass-u-s-as-global-leader-on-his-watch-idUSKBN2BH2ZE The actual wording was sharper but I can't find the clip.
Joe Biden made the phone call to the Kremlin in 2014 asking Russia as a gesture of goodwill to tell Ukraine's then elected president to keep security forces in barracks. They did. This allowed the coup to go forward, and much evidence points to US instigation and there is plenty of evidence of collaboration. Hunter Biden, Joe's addict son, stayed in Ukraine for the duration as White House liaison. The White House, in 2014, declared the people of Ukraine who were loyal to their government, "The Rebels", which is pure Orwell.
The US is backing Ukraine to the last drop of Ukrainian blood. Their militias have been torn to bits, and the war is not over.
Do not let your loyalties blind you to the game here. The game was stated a decade ago: Regime change in Russia. Ukraine's militants are just a tool to bleed Russia, hopefully to death. The reason for that is not noble, it is to take over Russia's massive resources.
Be clear Angelica. The same fate awaits Taiwan, although there is some alarm inside the Beltway that Ukraine is already bleeding the US of critical conventional weapons, and people are balking at the huge cost. Don't kid yourself. Taiwan is, in this administration's eyes, primarily a tool for harming China, and secondarily a source of chips. But we want chip production to come back here, and what would make that happen faster than the end of chip manufacturing in Taiwan.
It will be devastating to Taiwan if war occurs. Don't kid yourself. Inside the Beltway in Washington, you are a tool, and you do not look like most of them. Don't kid yourself about how most of those old guys think. If your nation burns to the ground, too bad, so sad. It will stir sentiment further against China. Good politics for elections.
2. Varoufakis is flat wrong about decoupling with China. There is no negative effect on climate goals to decoupling with China---quite the reverse. Varoufakis is an economist, and has a weaker understanding of the utility of solar and wind than you. China burns huge amounts of coal to make those products and sell them to the West. But I think you are aware of this.
3. I agree that the suggestion that "by predicting you manifest it" is ridiculous. That is not how these things happen. China's calculus is that Taiwan is a vulnerability. This is identical to US perception of Cuba during Castro's regime. Militarily, Taiwan is an outpost of a nation that has become "the enemy." Things were calmer before, because the US was a friendly trading nation. China became the enemy for one reason. China's GDP is greater than the USA's GDP. China went capitalist, and the old dinosaurs want a new cold war, because Asians are not supposed to rise above. Watch videos by Steve Bannon, racist at large. Be very clear what is going on here.
Xi's consolidation of power is a response to US/European attack. Don't kid yourself, those protests in Hong Kong were not all just spontaneous. Those were definitely supported, and probably instigated to harm China. What Xi is doing is what nations do when another nation acts against them. You can even see signs of the same thing in the US as well. We are more polarized. We are instigating problems with nations that want no part of those.
This is not to say that Xi and China are perfect, they are not. But even Soros said it---freedom without actual choices is not freedom. China has, for its faults, been the only reason that global poverty declined since 2000. All of it was because of China, and not just China's activity inside its borders. China has done so in Africa as well. The USA and Europe's effect on the world was to increase poverty, mostly because of bombing and war.
https://247wallst.com/special-report/2022/03/05/the-number-of-weapons-the-us-released-every-year-since-2007/ "... the average annualized number of U.S. bombs dropped in this (2007-2022) 15-year period is 12,106."
4. I have to agree with him that war should be avoided. But, generations grow up without war, and eventually everyone that knew war has died, and living memory is gone. We are in that kind of place in the developed world now. Consequently, we have leadership of the "free world" playing brinksmanship with nuclear war.
5. I have no strong position on Taiwan vs. China, though I lean toward recognizing Taiwan as a nation. It appears to be a nation in every normal sense of the word. The UN does not recognize Taiwan as an independent nation. Nations must find a way to exist in the context they are in. China is the giant that Taiwan must deal with somehow.
Tankie nonsense. the PRC does not and never has had a claim to Taiwan. As for the HK Protests being CIA sponsored, this is garbage. 60% of HK population wants nothing to do with the mainland. Not independence, but HK people governing HK with the welfare of HK people in mind. Not the relentless settler colonialism of Mandarin and Han culture triumphant.
I don't think you know what the word, "tankie" means. Do look it up. The claim PRC has to Taiwan is straightforward. The Qing dynasty gave Formosa to Japan in 1895 as part of a treaty. (War was involved.) Chinese had begun settling the island in the 6th century. Japan lost WW2 and gave up its claim to Taiwan. Taiwan was taken over by a rival army to Mao's forces. Both armies were mainland China armies. I am sympathetic to Taiwan as an independent nation. But any nation must be capable of asserting its independence. In this case, Taiwan's alliance with the United States is working against independence, because in the current climate the island is of strategic military importance.
There is no question of US support for the protests. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaE4cmBP6mk It is not correct to believe that the CIA can, or would, create protests out of whole cloth. Rather, regime change or "poking the bear" requires identifying an activist (preferably militant) faction. Then, support them in various ways, and urge them on. The Obama administration supported ISIS/Al-Qaeda in Syria. Without a fanatic or extremist militant group ready to fight and die, there is no possibility of regime change through proxy war. To do that operatives take advantage of the situation on the ground, allying with extremely unsavory people to accomplish a requested goal.
A good exercise is to invert a situation and see how you think then. There are plenty of people in the US who are unhappy, even militant, against our government. 30-40% of Republicans agree that violence may be necessary. If China was meeting with Jan 6th protesters, or providing weapons and military intelligence to militias in the Northwest US, would you say that China had nothing to do with it? I don't think so.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hongkong-protests-poll-exclusive/exclusive-hong-kongers-support-protester-demands-minority-wants-independence-from-china-reuters-poll-idUSKBN1YZ0VK
Only 17% wanted independence. "...a large plurality blamed the HK government for the crisis, rather than the central government in Beijing."
Your last sentence is Orwellian. The only relentless settler colonialism in Hong Kong is from Europeans. This history is unequivocal.
*uses China State Media to advance a pro-China talking point*
Work harder for your 50 cents, Wumao.
The student leaders also went to Washington DC, which they were free to do. They were encouraged, Congress passed bills in support. There is no question that the US did support the protests. If China did the same in support of, say, Jan 6th protesters, what would our position be?
Reuters is not China State Media. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters
Reuters is owned by a Canadian corporation. Headquarters is in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Majority ownership is by the Thompson family. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_tree_of_Thomson_family
I apologize for repeating that phrase 4 times. However, being smart is not the same as having full understanding of how nations and militant parties are used for proxy war. The USA's revolution was used by France for proxy war against England. It is unlikely Taiwan would win against PRC, but Taiwan would be used to chew up as much of PRC's military capacity as possible, and to create negative PR against PRC.
As I said, I sympathize with Taiwan personally. You are making the mistake of thinking that what I am saying is partisan. What I intend to convey is the necessities of realpolitik.
If you want to be successful, you must be able to put yourself in the position of your opponent(s) so that you can understand what motivates them so you know what they will probably do. This is fundamental to military strategy. If you refuse to do this, your doom is virtually certain. People often think that military minds are narrow. This is completely wrong, as it is civilian minds that are the most closed and narrow. An effective military must have a mind wide enough to understand its enemy correctly.
tankie talking points. Wow, name calling is a great strategy.