Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China: Five triggers for a Chinese attack on Taiwan
Asia Times ^ | 08/21/04 | Lawrence E Grinter

Posted on 08/21/2004 5:47:15 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster

SPEAKING FREELY

Five triggers for a Chinese attack on Taiwan

By Lawrence E Grinter

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please

click here if you are interested in contributing.

With the re-election of Chen Shui-bian as president of the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan, continuing trends toward Taiwan's de jure independence and this summer's military exercises by China, the United States and Taiwan, it seems useful to review China's stated or implied "trigger" events for a People's Liberation Army (PLA) attack against the democratically governed nation of Taiwan.

Beginning with former president Jiang Zemin's Eight Points proposal in December 1995, and amplified in subsequent statements, China's leadership has stated or implied five events that they say would cause them to use force against Taiwan. Throughout these pronouncements, Chinese authorities have continued to publicly treat Taiwan as an internal Chinese province, although the Republic of China has never been ruled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Each of China's five conflict triggers lends itself to Beijing's particular interpretation. However, it is probable that the Chinese leadership's internal definitions of when and how Taiwan might be crossing a "red line" is fluid and under debate within the CCP Standing Committee and Central Military Commission. The five trigger events are:

1) A declaration of independence
Taiwan is de facto independent and has been since the sovereign ROC government took over administration of the island in 1947. The Republic of China government, established by Sun Yat-sen on the mainland in 1912, was a founding member of the United Nations and a formal security treaty ally of the United States between 1954 and 1979. Provided the PRC has no plans to attack Taiwan, President Chen Shui-bian has twice formally promised not to declare de jure independence. So what might constitute for Beijing the threshold of Taiwan's de jure independence? Evidently not the recognition of the Taiwan government by 26 other sovereign governments. Nor Taipei's recent use of referenda or a proposed constitutional revision that speak about sovereignty. I assume President Chen's forthcoming constitutional proposals also will be carefully crafted. So, short of an explicit formal independence declaration by the president of Taiwan, Beijing faces the dilemma of having to live with Taiwanese measures that come right up to, but stop just short of a formal declaration.

2) A military alliance by Taiwan with a foreign power
When the United States dropped its recognition of the Republic of China in January 1979, the US-ROC bilateral Mutual Defense Treaty also ended. In its place came US commitments under the Congressional Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, pledging Washington to make available to Taiwan necessary defensive equipment. Since 1979 Taiwan has purchased billions of dollars of weapons and equipment from the United States and Mirage 2000 jet fighters from France. Evidently, for Beijing, these weapons purchases, related training and resupply pipelines have not constituted a "military alliance". But what if Taipei votes for the money to purchase new theater missile defense or Aegis fire-control systems? There seems to be very little Beijing can do about it. What seems to most disturb Beijing is potential new US-ROC technological cooperation that could deflect or negate China's growing offensive threats against Taiwan.

3) Internal turmoil in Taiwan
Taiwan is a democracy with a robust political system and an essentially wide-open media. Beijing has no choice but to live with this. So, just what might constitute sufficient "turmoil" in the Republic of China for the People's Republic of China to mount an attack? Interestingly, demonstrations last spring in Hong Kong against Beijing's proposed internal security provisions saw nearly 500,000 Hong Kong citizens take to the streets, and Beijing did very little about it. Nor did Beijing intervene following the apparent assassination attempt on President Chen and Vice President Annette Lu one day before the election of March 20 in Taiwan.

So what is Beijing's definition of "turmoil"? Clear examples of that took place in Beijing in May and June 1989, when nearly a million Chinese citizens demonstrated in Tiananmen Square, demanding democracy, and Deng Xiaoping finally ordered in the PLA to drive them back. And in 1999, when Chinese internal security forces squelched 10,000 Chinese citizens (belonging to the Falungong) in Beijing. Given the offshore distances, Beijing would seem to have a high "turmoil" threshold regarding Taiwan. However, one can assume that PRC security services have thousands of agents inside Taiwan, agents trained in instigating "turmoil". Presumably Taiwan authorities are prepared for such actions.

4) Possession of weapons of mass destruction
The Chinese government has operationally deployed about 450 nuclear weapons. By summer 2004, the PLA had pointed nearly 600 short-range ballistic missiles (M-9s and M-11s) at Taiwan. By contrast, Taiwan has never operationalized a weapon of mass destruction (WMD), and threatens no one. Taiwan signed the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) in 1988, and ROC nuclear reactors are under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) full safeguard inspections. Since then, no evidence has surfaced from Beijing, Washington or Taipei about any ROC WMD. From Beijing's viewpoint, what would constitute WMD in Taiwan? Biological, chemical, nuclear radiological materials? Unassembled or operationalized? Offensive or defensive? Information warfare capabilities? ROC missiles capable of retaliating against a PRC attack? What if Chinese agents placed WMD materials inside Taiwan, and Beijing announced their "discovery" to the world? How would Taiwan disprove such WMD?

5) Unwillingness to negotiate on the basis of 'one China'
Former president Jiang Zemin stated this war trigger in December 1999. Over the past five years, Taipei has made hundreds of offers to meet with PRC representatives in open or closed discussions on unification matters with no prior conditions. President Chen reiterated his offer after his May 20 re-election. However, Beijing has stonewalled all of Taipei's offers. One wonders what else the ROC can do to appear reasonable in Beijing's eyes, short of capitulation.

Of China's five war "triggers", the three that President Hu Jintao's government is currently emphasizing are a formal independence declaration, emergence of technology to defeat a PRC attack and lack of progress in negotiations. With no Taiwanese WMD in the picture, the Chen government being cautious on independence declaration rhetoric and continuing to make negotiation offers to Beijing, it seems to be the US-ROC defensive arms purchase that is most worrying Beijing. Once again, China faces the dissonance between its stated policies, or "triggers", and the changing power realities across the Taiwan Strait and in Washington.

Lawrence Grinter is professor of Asian Studies, Air War College, United States. The views expressed here are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of the US Air Force or the US government.



TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: attack; china; chinesemilitary; independence; internalturmoil; taiwan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

1 posted on 08/21/2004 5:47:16 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster; maui_hawaii; tallhappy; Dr. Marten; Filibuster_60; Jeff Head; Khurkris; ...

Ping!


2 posted on 08/21/2004 5:47:53 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
China wants Taiwan because of it's great wealth. Capture Taiwan and China's GDP increases by 33%. Plus many of China's crony capitalists will force their into Taiwanese hi tech companies (compulsory joint ownership)
3 posted on 08/21/2004 5:51:22 AM PDT by dennisw (Allah FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Jeff Head
Well, they have to get to Taiwan before Hong Kong collapses...question for ya..can you see PRC doing anythig BEFORE the 2008 Olympics?..Woudl they risk jepardizing the Games?..Or, perhaps, is it the ultimate "maskirova"..they'd launch they attack, as the Opening Ceremonies begin? The'd have , what 100,000+ hostages, er "guests"..

Jeff..I pinged you..here's the plot for your next novel.

4 posted on 08/21/2004 5:59:40 AM PDT by ken5050 (We've looked for WMD in Iraq for LESS time than Hillary looked for the Rose Law firm billing records)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
Capture Taiwan and China's GDP increases by 33%.

Only if it isn't blown to smithereens in the process. Also, aren't many of Taiwan's businessmen involved with mainland manufacturing already, thereby bringing wealth, to China, if not to the military/business clique?

Boy, talk about a military/industrial complex--China really has it in spades!

5 posted on 08/21/2004 6:00:40 AM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

a fascinating new book
"the pentagon's new map"
thomas barnett
makes the opposite claim- that china will not invade taiwan because of the impact on world trade. China is a huge trading nation and trading nations don't invade.
Demographics suggests when a large percentage of males have no wives chances of invasion increase.
I can see both sides.


6 posted on 08/21/2004 6:01:25 AM PDT by genghis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

Would an offer of US statehood be a trigger?


7 posted on 08/21/2004 6:01:49 AM PDT by ASA Vet (Tourette's syndrome is just a $&#$*!% excuse for poor *%$#** language skills.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

The author leaves out 2 or even 3 indirectly related triggers-

1.A big outbreak of anti-party protests & violence in provinces like Xinjiang(Muslim dominated) & Tibet or even in the mainland may throw Beijing offguard and present a tempting opportunity for Taiwan to declare independence & force China to attack in order to preserve unity(given that Taiwan is an emotive uniting factor on the mainland).

2.Big Regional flareups with Indonesia or Vietnam over the Spratleys,with Japan over any crisis in North Korea or with India(in the event of an Indo-Pak war) may also make Beijing to try & subvert attention by launching a swift war on Taiwan.

3.The event of the US getting "tied down" in North Korea or Iran is yet another window of opportunity for China given the likelyhood that the US population won't be interested in another war,this time with a nuclear power.


8 posted on 08/21/2004 6:15:27 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

You forgot:

0. Election of John F. Kerry,
assuring the PRC a free hand in
trashing Taiwan.


9 posted on 08/21/2004 6:21:36 AM PDT by Boundless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster

A people's army has no rival!

10 posted on 08/21/2004 7:07:58 AM PDT by risk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Not just that. For China to gain regional superiourity, control of Taiwan means control of a major shipping lane.

If they control Taiwain, and the Spratleys, they can pretty much control any goods shipped from the Indian Ocean up to Korea and Japan.

They are just forward thinking for hegemony,thats all.


11 posted on 08/21/2004 7:24:51 AM PDT by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ken5050; dennisw; TigerLikesRooster; HighRoadToChina; belmont_mark; Travis McGee; Squantos; ...
I believe there are only two triggers at this point:
  1. Is China prepared economically to cut us loose?
  2. Does China believe it can handle our carriers?
When they feel they can answer these two questions to themsleves in the affirmative...they will act. And it probably will be after they get us embroiled more heavily in the Middle East and after N. Korea is taken off its leash and attacks the South.

In the end...they will miscalculate and be brought down...but it will take a lot of blood and loss to do it.

IMHO, the only way we can avoid a major conflict is to act now, like Reagan did with the Soviets, and maginalize, stop funding, and isolate them...so their totalitarian system can bankrupt itself. That will be extremely hard and painful to do at this point...but not as hard or painful as the alternative IMHO.

12 posted on 08/21/2004 8:38:15 AM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
Exactly right. This has much more to do with their overall forward thinking plans of hegemony than with just contolling Taiwan.

See my post 12.

13 posted on 08/21/2004 8:47:17 AM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

To stop funding the Communists & bankrupting them is indeed a good idea-but is it possible??The Europeans were wholeheartedly involved in bleeding the Soviets,but now the EU (including the UK) see China as a money minting have & have pretty much given up on Taiwan.The Soviets had the PRC as a not so friendly neighbour(& Western ally)- but Russia needs Chinese arms purchases to survive & will only sacrifice it's relationship with China to help the US once it itself feels directly threatened.

& While due credit must be given to Reagan,the economic (& to a lesser extent political) collapse of the Soviet Union started in the late 60s to 70s,Reagan just accelerated the process.China on the other hand has a booming economy(a fact which only certain Freepers don't want to believe)-most nations,including the US would'nt want to go to war with the biggest market in the world.


14 posted on 08/21/2004 8:49:58 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

To stop funding the Communists & bankrupting them is indeed a good idea-but is it possible??The Europeans were wholeheartedly involved in bleeding the Soviets,but now the EU (including the UK) see China as a money minting have & have pretty much given up on Taiwan.The Soviets had the PRC as a not so friendly neighbour(& Western ally)- but Russia needs Chinese arms purchases to survive & will only sacrifice it's relationship with China to help the US once it itself feels directly threatened.

& While due credit must be given to Reagan,the economic (& to a lesser extent political) collapse of the Soviet Union started in the late 60s to 70s,Reagan just accelerated the process.China on the other hand has a booming economy(a fact which only certain Freepers don't want to believe)-most nations,including the US would'nt want to go to war with the biggest market in the world.


15 posted on 08/21/2004 8:51:02 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
If any one person can be pointed to for the major responsibility of the fall of the Soviet bloc, it has to be Reagan. Clearly, he adminstered the coup and there were a lot of other factors in play too.

As to the PRC, I am afraid that unless we find a way to economically cease the funding of the red Chinese...we will be fighting a major conflict against them some day...and not too far in the future.

16 posted on 08/21/2004 9:04:56 AM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Well put....excellant thread thus far. Thanks for the ping Jeff !

Stay safe !


17 posted on 08/21/2004 9:17:48 AM PDT by Squantos (Be polite. Be professional. But, have a plan to kill everyone you meet. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Another option in defeating the communists is to help in creating a large well-educated middle class in China. At a critial level, they will want and demand democracy.

This was origionally a plan of Republic of China to retake mainland, but don't if it is still their plan?


18 posted on 08/21/2004 9:21:00 AM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TigerLikesRooster
Beijing has stonewalled all of Taipei's offers
Taiwan should keep making the offers, but never agree to anything in any talks that actually come about. China's not interested in anything except capitulation. It's already been nearly 60 years. In another 40 or 50 years world support for China's nonsense will be at an end, and China's population will be roughly half what it is today. There will be no living memory of Mao, and very likely the single party state apparatus will have drifted even further out of relevance.

19 posted on 08/21/2004 9:21:51 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy

The attitudes of any middle class is primarily related to its economic condition.The middle classes in France during the 1780s,in Poland in 80s & the Indian Freedom struggle all faced severe economic discrimination along with political & social problems.If China has the middle class it has now,it is due to the economic reforms of the 1980s & the subsequent boom.An excellent parallel to present day China is Germany before the 2nd world war-Hitler was the most popular leader even when the war was going downhill & it was proven beyond doubt that he was ruthless megalomaniac.The reason for this support was the massive employment the German economy generated in the 1930s (consequental increase in living standards) & his tagline of Germans being the Master race & Aryan Pride.

In short,while political factors are important,economic conditions are the prime deciding factors of any middle class action & it is acknowledged that most folks on the mainland feel proud to be Chinese now.


20 posted on 08/21/2004 9:34:31 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Seeing how the Athen's Olympics have been such a bust, such a non-boost to a nation's prestige, the 2008 Olympics in China may not be a factor in China waiting past 2008 to annex Taiwan by force.
21 posted on 08/21/2004 9:37:11 AM PDT by dennisw (Allah FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
Based on my own vivists to the far east, including the ROC and China, the PRC is embarked on a massive economic reform plan that has been going on for years.

But, based on my own observations, this reform has nothing to do with the creation of a large, economically independent middle class or helping the people.

It is not a reform of their government form towards freedom, it is a reform of their economy towards economic independence and hegemony.

What they have done is to ingeniously find a way to fund their communistic...which is evolving more and more into a fascist, totalitarian regime. The Marxist and Maoist models failed. They saw very starkly what happens when that economic failure is ongoing and systemic...the regime and the entire system fails like it did with the Soviets.

So the Chinese found a way to introduce some open market capital principles into their system. They have done it to lure our investment and money into their system...in essence having the west fund their rise to manufacturing, energy and ultimatley to economic independence. Once they reach that critical mass and become independent...they will be in a position to nationalize it all, cut us loose, and hurt us tremndously economically in the process.

I have seen them put on quite a show for visiting American CEOs and political dignataries. The people really benefiting are the old members of the party which represents 7-9% of the population, and their military and political establishment. The problem is, that this 7-9% of 1.3 billion is a big number...close to 100 million.

100 million well off, elite, ruling people can put on quite a show...whole cities, or large suburbs of major cities are outfitted for display. Entire manufacturing complexes and sectors are equally outfitted. American are impressed and salivate over the cheap labor now and the promise for a vast emerging market potential and so they throw more and more money at it. But back in the hinterlands, the masses work for pennies an hour in miserable conditions.

The ruling elite there have no interest in helping those masses rise. Those masses are the ticket, via cheap labor, to the PRC's rise. So there will be no huge market potential under this sytem...just a fly-trap to bring in western monies.

The only way those massew will rise is when they rebel. In order to do that, the economic, political and military rule of the elite communists must somehow be broken. Right now, we will have to bankrupt them to do that...and I believe we still can if we have the will. Otherwise, sooner or later it will come to a shooting war IMHO.

Sorry for the length.

22 posted on 08/21/2004 9:42:29 AM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet; Boundless; belmont_mark; Dr. Marten; dennisw; Filibuster_60; Fishing-guy; genghis; ...

The New Chinese Empire: And What It Means for the United States China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Inc.: The Dynamics of a New Empire
The New Chinese Empire:
And What It Means for the United States

by Ross Terrill

Paperback
reviewed by Chang Yun-ping
Google search for Ross Terrill
China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Inc.:
The Dynamics of a New Empire

by Willem van Kemenade
tr by Diane Webb

library binding
reviewed by Orville Schell

NOT A PING LIST, merely posted to: ASA Vet; Boundless; belmont_mark; Dr. Marten; dennisw; Filibuster_60; Fishing-guy; genghis; HighRoadToChina; hedgetrimmer; Jeff Head; Khurkris; ken5050; maui_hawaii; Pearls Before Swine; risk; Squantos; sukhoi-30mki; TigerLikesRooster; Travis McGee; tallhappy

23 posted on 08/21/2004 9:53:14 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Wow! Great post!
24 posted on 08/21/2004 9:54:32 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ValerieUSA

George: "Dad, it's me. Hey, listen, I was at Fortunoff's the other day, and, you know what, you were right."

Estelle, feigning a Chinese, muffled voice: "Chinese food."

Frank, hanging up: "Sorry, George, our Chinese food just came. Talk to you later."

George: "Chinese food?"

http://www.stanthecaddy.com/the-junk-mail-script.html


25 posted on 08/21/2004 9:57:39 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (Unlike some people, I have a profile. Okay, maybe it's a little large...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

A massive revolt will creat whole bunch of warlords with nuclear weapons. That just makes the world much much more dangerous.

Besides, I don't think Americans will put up with the severe rise in prices if we cut off trade with them. I am more in favor of FAIR trade.


26 posted on 08/21/2004 10:02:30 AM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: genghis
The "trading nations don't invade" line is ahistorical poppycock. It is something IPE (international political economy) types within political science departments ginned up and as an article of faith and a reason not to know anything about security and real politics. All the historical evidence is against it. The US and UK in the 20th and 19th centuries respectively, were the two biggest trading nations in the history of the world. And fought literally hundreds of wars, many of them aggressive. Tell Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Panama... Or read a little book by James Farwell called "Queen Victoria's Little Wars". Trading nations have in fact frequently waged wars of predation or opportunity or in defense of trading or property interests, especially against smaller and technologically weaker opponents.
27 posted on 08/21/2004 10:17:50 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
Actually, I don't give a rats rear about prices in this context. And free and independent subsets of China would be much more reasonable about nukes than China is. China helps NK and Iran, who are seeking nukes with us as the target. China's military teaches the doctrine of "assymmetric warfare". They are not remotely our friends, under the present dictatorship.
28 posted on 08/21/2004 10:20:54 AM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: JasonC
The "trading nations don't invade" line is ahistorical poppycock. .............

Classic case was Germany invading France in WW2, it's largest trade partner
29 posted on 08/21/2004 10:48:56 AM PDT by dennisw (Allah FUBAR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Fishing-guy -- one of the many ChiCom lovers here at FR.
30 posted on 08/21/2004 11:51:32 AM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

3. How close are the supercavitating weapons to deployment?


31 posted on 08/21/2004 11:57:40 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Hillary becomes the RAT candidate on October 9. You saw it here first.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

How do we know you are not a Chicom lover, since you are against the Republic of China (free China).


32 posted on 08/21/2004 12:58:07 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
I'm not against Republic of China.

You, on the contrary, never miss an opportunity to lie about ROC and smear their leaders and people in deference to ChiCom position.

33 posted on 08/21/2004 1:17:06 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

You are for Republic of China?

Then you must be against Taiwan Independence?


34 posted on 08/21/2004 1:18:56 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
No. Republic of China is independent Taiwan right now.

Supporting ROC is not mutually exclusive with an indpendent Taiwan, ie changing the name to Repuboc of Taiwan either.

I support my fellow free people in the decisions they make.

Your lame attempts to distort are sad ChiCom nonsense. All you do is support the ChiComs now.

35 posted on 08/21/2004 1:41:51 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

Taiwan independence is not compatible with Repbulic of China. Taiwan independence is to dissolve Republic of China.

You got some explaining to do with your comrades.


36 posted on 08/21/2004 1:49:14 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
You are not honest, but still, even if your assertion that "Taiwan independence is not compatible with Repbulic of China. Taiwan independence is to dissolve Republic of China" were true, what would be wrong with it?

Why can the people of Republci fo China freely decide to change the name of their country? Are you against this freedom and right?

Currently the President of RoC not allowed to visit the WhiteHouse. The US says RoC is not a nation. Do you agree with these policies? I do not.

Should the White House host the President of the RoC with State visits as is done for other heads of state? I say yes.

Should the US establish diplomatic relations with the ROC? I say yes.

37 posted on 08/21/2004 1:57:27 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
If Taiwan, as you assert, is not independent now, what is it dependent on?

Republic of China is an independent sovereign nation. Do you agree?

38 posted on 08/21/2004 2:01:03 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

Well, are you for Republic of China or are you for Taiwan independence (Republic of Taiwan)? Make up your mind.

Personally, I am for Republic of China (free China).

As for free people making up their own minds, I am all for it. That's why we need to know exactly what is Taiwan independence and who are behind it.


39 posted on 08/21/2004 2:21:25 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy

Answer the questions.


40 posted on 08/21/2004 2:49:44 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

What questions?

Why don't you answer the questions. Republic of China or Republic of Taiwan? What's Taiwan independence and who are behind it?


41 posted on 08/21/2004 3:22:11 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
These questions (which I have answered):

Currently the President of RoC not allowed to visit the WhiteHouse. The US says RoC is not a nation. Do you agree with these policies? I do not.

Should the White House host the President of the RoC with State visits as is done for other heads of state? I say yes.

Should the US establish diplomatic relations with the ROC? I say yes.

42 posted on 08/21/2004 3:27:23 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
Republic of China or Republic of Taiwan?

Currently there is no Republic of taiwan. I support RoC. If RoC changes its name to RoT I support them.

I support free democratic allies, as is Taiwan.

What's Taiwan independence and who are behind it?

Taiwan indpendence is Taiwan not being taken over by China. Currently it is represented by the Republic of China as far as the formal name of the nation.

It is supported by people who do not want the communists to take over Taiwan.

People who oppose it favor the communists taking over Taiwan.

As far as you questions about favoring the name the people of Taiwan want to call their nation, it is not my place to favor one over the other as I am not a citizen of that country.

Are you a US citizen?

43 posted on 08/21/2004 3:33:09 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

So you are not going to answer the questions.

If prsident Chen wants to come to US as leader of Republic of China and he belives in upholding the constitution of ROC, then go for it. If he is a two-faced politican who is working on destruction of ROC, then he is on his own.


44 posted on 08/21/2004 3:35:08 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
IMHO, the only way we can avoid a major conflict is to act now, like Reagan did with the Soviets, and maginalize, stop funding, and isolate them...so their totalitarian system can bankrupt itself. That will be extremely hard and painful to do at this point...but not as hard or painful as the alternative IMHO.

You are more optimistic than I am; I think that we have passed the point where we can succeed with such marginalization.

Not that I like the status quo. I think that we should go ahead and stop as much trade as we can with the vile Chinese government now.

Not because it will weaken China -- that it might to some extent, since we are still by far their largest marketplace -- but to strengthen ourselves and quit throwing away $120 billion in red ink that we are creating every year with our foolish trade policies, and rebuild our own factories.

The way that we are doing "free" trade is too expensive to carry on. If it were a success and we were making lots of money, that would be a testament to its strength. But the red ink is flowing, our debt is increasing far too quickly, and there is nothing that says suddenly, one bright morning, it will all reverse and we will not be running red ink while free trading away.

Instead, it will either stop when we can borrow no more as a risk-free debtor, which may be sooner than any of us would like, or political action is taken.

45 posted on 08/21/2004 3:51:15 PM PDT by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

It seems that all I can do at this point is to boycott Chinese goods, and buy gold. Those are two small steps, but if most Americans did these things, the economic funding of China would start to wind down.


46 posted on 08/21/2004 4:00:13 PM PDT by Unknowing (Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

I think the question of economics is the most important.
Can they offset any business losses with the United States by business with Europe and/or the mideast?

There is also the question of what effect a rapidly declining dollar would have.

As far as the carrier question, don't they have us totally hornswaggled with which one, is it called the Sunburst missile?

But of course, taking out one of our carrier groups might be the straw that turns the whole thing nuclear. And no matter what the results in America, nuclear conflict with China would utterly destroy their military/manufacturing base. So I am inclined to think they would weigh very heavily the possile results of messing with our carriers.


47 posted on 08/21/2004 4:08:01 PM PDT by djf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
So you are not going to answer the questions.

I answered all your questions directly and specifically. Feel free to ask more or ask for elaboration.

You, though, have not answered any of my questions:

Currently the President of RoC not allowed to visit the WhiteHouse. The US says RoC is not a nation. Do you agree with these policies? I do not.

Should the White House host the President of the RoC with State visits as is done for other heads of state? I say yes.

Should the US establish diplomatic relations with the ROC? I say yes.

You did respond somewhat to one question but it was incoherent gibberish and can't be seen as an answer.

48 posted on 08/21/2004 4:13:29 PM PDT by tallhappy (Juntos Podemos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: tallhappy

Other than calling people Chicom lover, are you ever going to answer the questions? Are you for Republic of China and against Taiwan independence or vice versa?

BTW, how do we know you are not a Chicom lover?
If you have problems with the Bush administration, you need to ask them. P.S. don't call them Chicom lovers.


49 posted on 08/21/2004 4:24:02 PM PDT by Fishing-guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Fishing-guy
Then you certainly are not in favor of the current trae practices with the PRC...it is anything buyt fair.

Also, we heard the same doom and gloom about the break-up of the Soviets...many nuclear armed rogue nations and such...didn't transpire. There are a LOT less nucs in China than the Soviets had, so excuse me if I discount this arguement.

If there is a revolt...a strong nation will rise out of the rest with our and the ROC's help and we shall work with them, like we did the Soviets, to avoid unchecked proliferation.

50 posted on 08/21/2004 5:00:24 PM PDT by Jeff Head (www.dragonsfuryseries.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson