[TigerLikesRooster]

It has always been the case that China would rather shoulder the huge overhead of empire maintenance than take the economically viable path, forgoing unrealistic territorial ambition. It has turned into an ingrained tradition for two milenia. One China is their destiny, as far as China is concerned. However, there used to be a long period of time in which their empire broke up, and they first fought one another to near extinction and warring states persisted for centuries. When it is overwhelmingly untenable to maintain an empire, they relented with great reluctance.

We will see if this pattern repeats in the future or the cycle is broken for good. As it stands now, I see the breakup and long period of multiple 'Chinas,' not China.

[RinaseaofDs]

The global security ramifications of such a thing cannot be understated, in my opinion.

There must be viable possibilities for extending western intelligence networks into disgruntled territories in order to soften the landing for the west if it does break apart.

There is a ghost city in Mongolia that is still under development and nobody lives there. You can’t keep supporting the military burden of garrisoning your territories, the cost of force projection, AND the ‘jobs’ programs necessary to keep the peasants out of the cities.

China is the most important and fascinating thing not being talked about right now. All eyes are on Europe, the inevitable.

[Vince Ferrer]

As it stands now, I see the breakup and long period of multiple 'Chinas,' not China.

If it gets anywhere near that bad, we will start seeing riots and violence against Han in the outer territories, such as already has happened in the Muslim territories. If the Han start moving in to the center, that will be a signal China may crack up.