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)
Sadly the current status quo is the best solution.
Taiwan’s economy is like 98% reliant on China. China could drain Taiwan dry without ever setting foot on that island. Taiwan will negotiate a deal with Xi. They may like it or not.
China is maybe a third of their trade…not 98%
We have actual data on Taiwanese economy but clearly you know better. 98% reliant? I trust that wholeheartedly!
Username checks out
China should accept Taiwans sovereignty as a separate Chinese country, and stop being such a little bitch. The end.
Well Taiwan sees itself as part of mainland China, just not a part of the communist regime
Not really. Not many people in Taiwan really think that anymore. They’ve moved on.
How do you know?
Most people in Taiwan identify as Taiwanese over Chinese. Most people in Taiwan push for status-quo in polling, and of those that don’t, the second-most popular opinion is independence.
What, you truly think an island with the population of 23 million think its logistically possible for them to overcome an over a billion population difference and somehow take the mainland back under the banner of the ROC? The mainland also has nukes.
This is not what I meant. The taiwanese sees themselves as part of China, not an independent country. Just not a region that’s compatible with the communist party which is the issue here. Maintaining the status quo doesn’t contradict that.
If the CCP goes away the issue is gone.
This is not what I meant. The taiwanese sees themselves as part of China, not an independent country.
Officially, but most Taiwanese people now identify as Taiwanese. But all the same, you think they think its realistic they can somehow “take back” the mainland?
Just not a region that’s compatible with the communist party which is the issue here. Maintaining the status quo doesn’t contradict that.
I guess, but they’re also not deluded enough to think they can ever take it back.
If the CCP goes away the issue is gone.
Which they have no power to cause.
but most Taiwanese people now identify as Taiwanese
Again, how do you know? And why would that imply that they don’t believe that Taiwan and China are one entity?
I don’t understand why you bring up the possibility of Taiwan to remove the CCP or retake mainland China. My comment had nothing to do with that but with the opinion of the Taiwanese
Not anymore really, the Taiwanese government has abandoned claims to the mainland.
Abandoning claims is not the same as abandoning the view that they belong
Lets be realistic. If the confederates ran away to Key West after the civil war, would the US accept a hostile state, backed by a hostile super-power, claiming to be the government of all of USA right off their coast?
No? But then Taiwan doesn’t actually seriously maintain this anymore. It’s all a front. They have to say this because repudiating the ‘one China’ system could be interpreted as a declaration of independence, which would be interpreted as a green light for China to invade.
It’s not even key west it’s more like they ran away to Maine
Not sure why you’re copping some hate, but your analogy is pretty accurate.
If the Confederates managed to hold out for 60 years, reformed, democratised and abandoned their past and wanted to renounce their claim to the USA and become their own independent state under their own identity - I would support them in that.
Albeit even then comparison isn’t quite right because Taiwan is closer to being the Union in this analogy, and the PRC the Confederates. It would be more like if the Union lost and fled to a safepost.
Taiwan is closer to being the Union in this analogy
mmyes, the defeated right-wing nationalist warlordists are the Union in this analogy. very good.
i would like to learn your secret: how do you become so informed on things you know nothing about?
mmyes, the defeated right-wing nationalist warlordists are the Union in this analogy. very good.
The comparison here is rooted who is the original compared to the two, not their ideologies. So in that sense, Taiwan would be the Union and Confederates would be the PRC.
Libs don’t actually care about the matter, they simply want to justify pre-existing positions, so anything that doesn’t support this feels hostile to them. In another comment thread I have someone who’s never been to Hong Kong asking me to provide citations about what HK is like.
What ‘pre-existing’ positions exactly?
In this case? <enemy of the west> bad. They don’t feel any need to learn about Taiwan or Xinjiang or HK or Tibet beyond its utility in proving this, and certainly don’t care how it might affect the actual people living there.
You can observe the same phenomenon with Russia; no matter the data, somehow its indicative of Russia bad and justification to increase hostile action, even at the expense of Russia’s victims.
I don’t think that HK, Xinjiang or Tibet are relevant here. My own position is that the Taiwanese don’t want to be part of the PRC. And that’s all that matters.
We have polling, it says the people of Taiwan overwhelmingly want staus quo. What they want doesn’t matter to you.
They did even worse, they let them stay!
Let me guess, you don’t think they have a legal claim to the island under UN law?
Let me guess, you think the UN matters more than the people living there?
Nah, just think people who are ignorant of their own laws should think more before they make their ignorance more widely known.
Yes because the only possible reason someone might not support a law they live under, is because they are ignorant of it
Are you implying UN law is even remotely relevant here? Or anywhere?
International law is what the CCP claims gives them the right. So no, I am not implying, I am stating it is relevant. Even if you disagree with the law, how do you expect this to be resolved peacefully without international law?
I don’t expect it to be resolved peacefully. Imperialism rarely is.
Edit: also, the UN is a joke. It’s just a tool the security council uses to bully other nations. It exists entirely for their benefit. This is like pointing to law under monarchy to support the king’s position. It’s totally circular.
Imperialism? How is this imperialism?
World power attempting to subordinate and subsume its neighbor by threats of invasion? How is it not imperialism?
Arguably the US’s defense of Taiwan is also imperialist but a more benign form than the CPC’s actions here. The Taiwanese people are just pawns in the struggle for global domination.
Please consult the graph:
Because imperialism isn’t when invasion. You really should learn what words mean before you use them. Imperialism is a capitalist phenomena where high stage capitalist powers enforce(through force or other means) unequal exchange and super exploitation upon subordinate nations to extract super profits. The PRC has never done that.
Are you unaware of the history of Taiwan? How it became “independent”?
I don’t really care if they do, to be honest. I value self-determination more.
deleted by creator
A peaceful and realistic solution? Taiwan develops a strategic nuclear deterrent. They’re already a near-nuclear country and an industrial and technological powerhouse. A nuclear bomb is fully within their capability, and they already have abundant supplies of all the precursor materials in their possession. The most realistic solution to the Taiwan crisis is that Taiwan obtains nuclear weapons, and China is never able to threaten them with invasion again.
That sounds like a surefire way for Taiwan to get invaded, since I’m very certain that China does not want more nuclear missiles pointed at it, much less by Taiwan right off its coast. Taiwan might end up like Iran (who the U.S. claimed were developing nukes)
If Taiwan does end up developing nukes without the knowledge of China or other major powers, then you could argue that nuclear deterrance would work. But the intelligence systems of all the global powers is incredibly advanced now, so it would probably be difficult for Taiwan to covertly do something like that (esp given that we know both sides send spies to each other)
Taiwan trying to develop nuclear weapons would be the fastest way to get themselves invaded. China would put a stop to it before it they could even say “nuclear deterrent”.
History has proven otherwise.
It turns out, that while everyone says that arms races and escalation lead to conflict… Actually, what we’ve seen is that waiving a big stick is the only true deterrent.
Wouldn’t that mean China and US would be at war? I don’t think the Chinese would want that.
And yet, plenty of other countries have managed to do it…
Which ones were a small island country that had a massively more powerful hostile neighbour looking right over their shoulder when developing their nuclear weapons?
North Korea did it, and it had the United States, the nation with the most powerful surveillance capabilities in the world looking right over its shoulder. And keep in mind, we’re still technically at war with North Korea. And North Korea might as well be an island. But really, the island part is irrelevant here, as Taiwan already possesses all the nuclear material it would need. It has a well developed nuclear power sector. The island gets half its electricity from nuclear power. And they have several research reactors. It already has all the fissile material it needs to build a bomb.
plenty of other countries
North Korea
Have you looked into the context of how they were able to do it and how difficult stopping them would have been?
If North Korea could do it, so can Taiwan.
When I clicked on this thread I did not anticipate one of the answers being “Taiwan just needs to adopt Juche.”
A large part of why the DPRK is the way it is is because it has oriented itself around not getting invaded by a much stronger foe. They made the choice to orient their economy around self-suffiency, so that they could survive a prolonged conflict even if foreign navies completely cut them off from the rest of the world.
In contrast, Taiwan has an export economy, producing highly specialized equipment to be sold all around the world. Taiwan’s economy is intimately connected to the rest of the world. Taiwan is a much richer country because of it. But it also makes Taiwan more vulnerable to trade disruptions, for example, if China imposed a blockade.
I don’t think that Taiwan has any interest in walking the path of the DPRK. I’m also confused on how bringing a historical reenactment of the Cuban Missile Crisis into a situation that has been stable for decades is supposed to, what, bring peace?
North Korea has a million artillery pieces and like 20 million people ready to call back to service, and China would probably get involved if the alternative is a hostile puppet state on their border. The calculus of invading NK is quite different than Taiwan.
Unless Taiwan can spend the trillions upon trillions of dollars and fully complete enough MIRV ICBMs to be able to absolutely saturate the entire country of China leaving no inch of land unscathed from nuclear fire, essentially ensuring MAD doctrine to deter an invasion, all without China discovering this, China won’t tolerate a nuclear program and simply invade Taiwan so trivially with their unending human meat waves to destroy all hope of defense surrounding the island.
unending human meat waves
You know China has been building their military for this singular conflict since like 1949 right? They have an entire branch of their military dedicated to missiles.
The idea of WWI-style human meat waves getting applied to communist countries was literally nazi propaganda. China didn’t cause the longest retreat in US history during the Korean war because suddenly WWI tactics started working against a military 50 years more advanced than the one that demonstrated human meat waves don’t work.
Not Nazi propaganda. Literally what Russia does to this day…
Taiwan doesn’t need thousands of nuclear weapons to be a credible threat to China. A dozen bombs with delivery systems would be more than enough to make a credible deterrent. The goal isn’t to be able to wipe out the entire population of mainland China. The goal would simply be to make any invasion so costly that the cost would vastly outweigh any potential gains. I don’t know what all Xi hopes to gain by conquering Taiwan, but whatever it is, it’s not worth losing the dozen largest Chinese cities in a series of mushroom clouds. To the Chinese leadership, the conquest of Taiwan is not worth getting Beijing nuked. Maybe Mao would have made that trade, back when China was a rural peasant nation. But now? China is the workshop of the world. The entire economy and China’s place in the world are utterly dependent on its megacities.
I don’t know what all Xi hopes to gain by conquering Taiwan,
Might want to figure that out first, before trying to come up with a solution. Because I’d say the number one thing Xi would gain by conquering Taiwan would be, “Not having an island full of missiles pointing at us right off our coast.”
If he stopped being a hostile dictator looking to conquer Taiwan he would achieve the same thing, no invasion needed!
No he absolutely would not lmao. How are y’all this naive?
Exactly my point, he won’t calm down
No, he would not achieve the same thing if he “calmed down.” Because the reason the US wants missiles on Taiwan has absolutely nothing to do with how “calm” Xi Jinping is.
It also has nothing to do with how democratic China is. In fact, it’s the opposite. The US prefers to have anti-democratic governments because those are the governments most willing to hand over all the country’s resources.
Tell me, how did “not being a dictator” and “remaining calm” work out for Mohammad Mossadegh, the peaceful, progressive, democratically elected prime minister of Iran, who was deposed in a CIA coup in favor of a fascist monarch who hunted down anyone to his left with secret police?
You are completely delusional and ignorant of history and reality.
A dozen bombs with delivery systems would be more than enough to make a credible deterrent.
ALL of those can be trivially intercepted with military tech from the mid-90’s that China has in abundance (I love you internet armchair generals and the guile to be so wrong constantly), hence the modern necessity to create MIRVs which are impossible to track if enough are deployed.
Or there is the “send a bunch of PRC soldiers to the ROC and let’s see what will happen”
They won’t run out of people for the meat grinder, that’s fò xiù as would sunglasses-man say
China simply waits and maintains its current policy until pro-unification sentiment in Taiwan grows large enough. The balance of power in the Pacific is shifting away from the US and before this century is out they will no longer be able to offer security guarantees.
After what China did to Hong Kong that’s never happening.
What China did to Hong Kong?
You mean freed them from a council imposed by the British, elected by the crown and large businesses?
Stole their autonomy, reduced social freedoms, and imprisoned activists creating an environment of fear and oppression.
Anything’s possible when you make shit up
What autonomy, they lived in a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie imposed by Britain.
What Social freedoms? The freedom to die under bridges or in coffin apartments or to live in literal tinder boxes?
What Social freedoms? The freedom to die under bridges or in coffin apartments or to live in literal tinder boxes?
Sorry, what, you depict pre-CCP controlled Hong Kong as if it was Somalia, or something.
I depict it as living in a colony of Britain, which it literally was.
And the coffin apartments, homelessness, and lack of fire safety are pretty well known. Have you been to Hong Kong? There’s massive inequality and some of the highest rent in the world because the government blocked the expansion of housing for decades.
I depict it as living in a colony of Britain, which it literally was.
And what did the people of Hong Kong want exactly?
And the coffin apartments, homelessness, and lack of fire safety are pretty well known.
These are things all “well known” in lots of highly populated urban cities. Is Hong Kong supposed to be unique here? Are you referring to any data that specifically identifies Hong Kong being uniquely ailed by the worst excesses of urban blight in comparison to other similar cities? What does this have to do with cracking down on pro-independence movements and activism in the city?
You mean freed them from a council imposed by the British, elected by the crown and large businesses?
And so what new representation rights did they provide them after they annexed them, exactly? Or did they round up and purge the pro-autonomy and independence activists?
All polling indicates that pro-unification sentiment isn’t growing though. If China is waiting until they have consent of the Taiwanese, then why would security guarantees from the USA be relevant in the first place?
Now you’re getting it. Security guarantees from the US are NOT relevant. They are rhetorical cover for military build up inline with the US policy of encirclement. Absent from all of these discussions is that the US has military forces stationed 4 miles of the mainland because Taiwan is not one island it’s a province comprising an island chain. The CPC’s consistent policy is peaceful reunification via waiting except in the case where a foreign military uses the province to threaten the mainland.
Most likely the thought is that without US security support, Taiwanese sentiment will shift towards China by default.
This seems to be complete conjecture though.
I’m garbage in history.
Can’t we just treat it as relationships. I mean the reunification should only be done if both sides mutually agree. Forcing by any means is not good
A third option (?) would be a pseudo-unification, where Taiwan remains as a separate 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.
Theres already free movement from Taiwan to Mainland China IIRC.
The PRC’s current take is “Taiwan is an autonomous part of China”, the only sticking issue would probably be Taiwan having its own foreign policy as they aren’t going to accept having a US military base right off their coast.
Genuinely the best “solution” is reunification at an indeterminate point in the future (maybe next century, maybe the one after that, etc), avoiding anything that could disrupt the status quo.
Reunify all the islands leading up to Taiwan back with mainland China like they did with Hong Kong, and eventually Taiwan itself. Problem solved.
Very simple really…
China hasn’t finished their revolution yet. That’s their internal business and absolutely none of mine.
It will end up resolving and I’m pretty sure which side will end up winning but ya never know.
Not sure why anyone thinks they get to have an opinion.
Not sure why anyone thinks they get to have an opinion.
White saviour complex is a big part imo.
My maternal grandma was born in the mainland, back when it was still ROC in it’s waning days in 1949 just months before the proclaimation of the PRC and CCP took over
is the revolution finished yet? Where the egalitarianism? Why are there zero women out of the 28 members of the politiburo?
Grandma is about to die lol, kind weird how this revolution takes so long… its almost like we never gonna move past this Vanguardism stage…
You sound extremely comfortable judging from overseas without bothering to do any investigation into the history, current happenings or theory that explains why things are how they are.
China didn’t start in 1949 as some middle-class country waiting to “finish” a revolution. It started destroyed by war, invasion, famine, and colonial humiliation. Then it immediately faced embargoes, military threats, and nonstop pressure from the US-led order. Try rebuilding a civilization under siege from a globe spanning empire and see how fast it goes.
While you’re asking “where’s the egalitarianism,” nearly 900 million people were lifted from abject poverty. Villages got roads, electricity, clinics, schools, normal and high-speed rail links and corrupt officials actually started to get punished, including high-ranking ones.
You treat history like a vibe. Revolution isn’t a personality phase, it’s decades or more of infrastructure, education, stability, and survival in a hostile world.
And yes, strong centralized leadership still exists because capitalism didn’t disappear and imperial powers didn’t suddenly become friendly. We already saw what happens when countries relax too early, look at the USSR or if you’re too weak to defend yourself(Syria, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Peru, Palestine).
Leadership gender balance and patriarchal tendencies are still real issue. But pretending nothing has improved since your grandma’s childhood is insulting to hundreds of millions of women who now read, work, own property, and live longer fuller lives.
What’s actually “weird” is sitting safely in America, benefiting materially from the empire, then mocking a country that had to claw its way out of devastation for not becoming perfect in 75 years. You have a very interesting way of interpreting things.
你对一孩政策有什么看法？
你知不知道，我就是那个时代出生的。
我是我妈的第二胎。
我妈想要我，但是党想灭我。差点被他们灭了。
应为我犯了”做第二胎”的罪
我问你：党凭什么有权灭我？
为什么政府那么恨我？
连出生后都几乎当我不存在。
我曾经是黑户
后来要罚几万块才能拿身份。好不容易用了几年的时间我父母才能凑到那么多钱。
几乎像 blackmail 一样。
别怪我恨党恨政府，是首先党和政府把我当敌人。
你支持党这个政策吗？你真的那么恨我吗？
你觉得我存在这个世界上是个罪吗？
我真是觉得投胎投错了地方了。
I was born in the 90s. I lived through that period too. My family was rural, and because of minority status we experienced the system differently so while I understand what that era felt like on the ground, I can only sympathize with what you went through.
I don’t support the one-child policy. A lot of people on the mainland don’t. That doesn’t mean I don’t understand where it came from. It was created under extreme poverty, food insecurity, and rapid industrialization. The intention was to slow population pressure, but the execution was harsh and often cruel. What you experienced was real, terrible, and not something I would ever support or want repeated. I’m not denying or justifying those practices.
But what you’re doing now is turning personal trauma into a judgment on an entire country and decades of development and progress.
When I was a kid, my parents’ home village and surrounding villages still had no proper roads, no clinics, no stable electricity. That was normal. Look at what followed: hundreds of millions lifted out of extreme poverty, infrastructure reaching remote areas, near-universal schooling, massive housing programs, healthcare expanded nationwide. Corrupt officials actually getting investigated and punished, including high-level ones. The one-child policy ended over a decade ago but the positive policies remain, and so do their effects.
You can hate that policy. I think it was deeply flawed too. But saying “nothing changed” or that the whole project is meaningless is just ignoring reality.
You ask why the state had power over reproduction that’s a great question, why do states have that control, but you talk like this only happens in China. Western governments regulate reproduction too: abortion bans, forced sterilizations in prisons and detention centers, child removal through foster systems, welfare penalties for having kids. States everywhere control bodies in different ways. So don’t pretend this is some uniquely mainland evil.
And no I obviously don’t hate you I know nothing about you. I don’t think your existence is a crime. You’re turning my defense of China’s overall development into a personal attack on you.
Your experience deserves sympathy. I genuinely mean that. But a country isn’t built around any one person’s trauma. You judge a government by whether it feeds people, educates them, houses them, provides healthcare, and raises living standards, not only by individual suffering, even when that suffering is real and tragic.
You can resent the policy. That’s fair. But don’t erase the entire historical process because of it.
And since we’re talking about flawed policies, I also think the hukou system is deeply broken. It affected me personally too. Not to the extent the one-child policy affected you, obviously, but enough that I know what it feels like to be limited by bureaucracy and birthplace. I don’t pretend these systems were harmless or well-designed. But you also can’t let real mistakes erase the whole picture. Depending on how cynical I’m feeling, my assessment of the government ranges from 60/40 to 90/10 in its favor but even at my most critical, it’s still obvious they’ve done far more good than harm overall.
You’re focusing on one painful chapter and pretending the rest didn’t happen. That’s not honest, especially to the hundreds of millions who no longer live in desperation.
Not sure why anyone thinks they get to have an opinion.
I can have a opinion about what I want.
反攻大陆 (Counterattack the mainland) 😏
/just kidding
I think the only peaceful unification would be if CCP falls and mainland China becomes an actual democracy with free and fair elections, then mainland, HK, Taiwan can form a union, where Taiwan and HK remains autonomous regions for domestic politics (and this automony would be backed by a constitution) and have a common front for defence.
I mean another option would be complete sovereignty but a European Union type of thing where they do cooperate and sort of is like a country, but maintain the option to leave.
But regardless, I think it all comes down to what HKers and Taiwanese want, you need a referrendum for these types of things. I’d say to have legitimacy: Two consecutive referrendums in two separate regularly scheduled election with majority approval before any plan is enacted, to attempt to prevent a Brexit shenanigan.
I’m Chinese American so while I do support democracy, I am kinda leaning towards reunification assuming that there is actually democracy, but again it all comes down to what the people think, the will of the people is more important than my opinions.
Since you’re Chinese American, I have a question that’s doubly offensive but I’m actually interested in hearing your opinion. Should borders the size of China and the U.S. continue to exist at all? IMO one president or central government can’t legitimately represent hundreds of millions of people.
So your quesrion is: “Should large countries exist?”
I mean honestly idk…
I hope humanity one day grows past tribalism and we just have one big “European Union” type of thing and worldwide Schengen area and there be no wars.
But unfortunately humans are tribalistic and eventually people are gonna wanna form a bloc, whether it be military alliances like NATO, or confederations like European Union (btw I’m curious what happens if an EU country that isn’t in NATO gets invaded… EU is not a millitary alliance so it’d be very weird…) or more commonly, people form countries.
That’s just human tribalism.
If mainland China democratizes, then I could see somewhat of a “bloc” being formed between mainland China, HK, Taiwan… as for Tibet and Xinjiang… I have no idea, their culture seems very distinct, I mean they have a whole separate writing system whereas mainland, HK, Taiwan all use the same writing system and have some of the sameholidays (Lunar New Year for example).
Eventually there could be an entire “bloc” in Asia.
Like I really don’t like the idea of China being divided into separate provinces without a common military front… and that’s not because of ancestry reasons, like for example I do not have any European Ancestry and never been to Europe, but also don’t like European Union and NATO getting broken up for the same reasons… it feels weak to get separated… too much chaos, Russia could invade any time. I mean even China literally got threatened by Russia’s predecessor, the USSR. (see: “Sino-Soviet Split”)
I think forming a “bloc” isn’t an inherent issue, I think the key point is avoid centralization of powers… federalism or confederalism would try to slow down ant autocratization attempts, but ultimately, people are people and there’s no democracy that will last forever if the people insists on electing wannabe dictators.
one president
Directorial System like in Switzerland, maybe?
Or like EU where there is no one “President of EU”
central government can’t legitimately represent hundreds of millions of people.
Federalism or Confederalism (European Union)
Any reasoning based on historic belonging is entirely arbitrary. Ignoring an entire people’s factual autonomy and right to self-determination, safety, and security is nothing short of oppressive, toxic, and inhumane. Flaunting and threatening power, entitlement, military, and invasion is horrendous and violates international law, advocating for a violent, corrupt world instead of a cooperative multi-national rule of law and stability.
I watched a documentary recently about the history of China, the two opposing factions. It provided some interesting additional context and things I didn’t know about previously. I’ll refrain from mentioning specifics to keep this comment more focused and concise.
China hides its own atrocieties and history. Both parties were horrendous and sacrificed and murdered their own people. Neither is “the good guy”.
The solution is simple: Accept the status quo. That history played out as it did. China MUST accept Taiwan’s sovereignty.
Not accepting the status quo has a lot of negative consequences. The solution would be simple. Respect and cooperation instead of oppression, instability, uncertainty, and suffering.
Is that realistic? Doesn’t look like it. Possibly with a leadership change. Xi Jinping seemingly already lost some power, and his more aggressive politics have been weakened. Which should not make us think there’s no thread anymore.
Give the Taiwanese people Alabama and move them there. Then give China an empty island
That sounds like some sort of crime against humanity
Alabama isn’t THAT bad.
I mean the whole deporting populations to somewhere they’ve never been kind of crime against humanity.
An empty land with American military bases and soldiers? They’d just raze it, lol, and nothing of value would be lost. Or are you suggesting that America, who has historically seen Taiwan as their “unsinkable aircraft carrier” and has used the island to coerce China the same way it’s used Israel in the Middle East, should just freely concede the territory? I mean, ideally, sure, but I highly doubt it. I can be done, and probably will be, but not for free.
The peaceful solution is the decline of the West. Politics is rational. The CPC has no need to invade provided that foreign militaries do not build up threats on the province. As the West declines, trade with them becomes less attractive to Taiwan and trade with the mainland becomes more attractive. As the mainland develops, Taiwan will have the same calculus to do as Europe is doing now - align with the US or align with China.
It’s really just a matter of time before Taiwan fully embraces 1 country 2 systems. Materially, the only component they don’t currently embrace is the national defense component. They don’t purport to be a country independent of China, and the legal reality is that they are literally part of China. So they essentially are 1 country 2 systems with th exception of national defense being provided for by the US instead the CPC.
Peaceful reunification will happen when the US withdraws. Violence will happen if the US escalates. That’s the entirety of the spread of possibilities. The choice of peace lies entirely in the hands of the US.
