Public sentiment around Taiwan's relationship with China is highly polarized. Many comments support Taiwanese independence and express pride in national identity, rejecting the 'one China' policy. However, there are significant fears about Taiwan's democratic freedoms being compromised if ties with China are strengthened, and concerns about foreign intervention leading to conflict. While a fraction advocates for closer ties to China for stability, the dominant sentiment leans toward support for Taiwan's sovereignty and self-determination.

Taiwan

China

United States

/u/EasternHo (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.

All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1niz45h/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_china_will_attempt_to_take/), in /r/DeltaLog.

Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.

^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)

DeltaBot

A few things lean in the other directions

1. Taiwan is an island fortress with only a few accessible beaches and those are across one of the stormiest, roughest waters in the Pacific; it would take a massive invasion force, one several times larger than D-Day, to carry out the assault.  Such a force would be impossible to assemble in secret or quickly and there would be no way China could justify it as a simple war exercise, making the mustering points easy pickings for Taiwanese missiles.
2. A failure (or even a pyrrhic victory) would be politically disastrous for Xi; losing enough ships, men and materiel in a military action is a quick way for a military dictator to get his ass ousted.
3. Taiwan's chip foundries are the foundation of the modern world, including China's own economy and military.  Taiwan has very publicly stated that if they are in danger of being overrun they will blow the fabs themselves, effectively crippling the global economy and everyone will know it was Xi's fault, leading to massive geopolitical blow-back.
4. Even if they have diversified their export markets, they still have to actually *get* their shipments there...past the first island chain and all the nations (South Korea, Australia, Japan, the Philippines, the US, the British) who will absolutely come to Taiwan's aid and likely enforce a blockade of their own to strangle China's exports.
5. China's already dealing with a lot of internal problems with its stagnating economy and mass youth unemployment.  A full-scale war could trigger massive internal instability at the worst possible time, i.e. when most of the military is engaged in invading Taiwan.
6. Xi's not stupid; he's seen how badly Russia has fumbled its own imperialistic resurgence in Ukraine and how Putin is holding on for dear life.  If I, some rando on the internet, could come up with the above you can damn well be sure he and his military brass know the same.

BowlEducational6722

I don't think folks know how close the business ties are between Taiwan and China and other countries.

"Blow the Fabs" - why? China isn't going to jail the Taiwanese. In fact, if China makes it a "special economic zone", odds are the econmy will boom.

Remember, many families - blood relatives - live in both places. 

I'd say, unless the US does something really stupid, it could be a relatively bloodless takeover. Why would China land on the beaches? This isn't Korea! 

A couple good demostrations of what Chinas missile could do.....without hurting anyone (for example, prove how they could largely escape detection with their aircraft and missiles)....

Then sit at a bargaining table. 

It's hard to imagine Taiwan being an independent nation forever - too small and too closely related to China. After all, it's not some foreign nation! It might be another thing if China hadn't turned capitalist and economically boomed. 

It would be ignorant to have a military situation because we already know who would win.

RosieDear

I am going to address this from a slightly different any angle. Which is to say that China will most likely attempt to use its military to attempt to coerce Taiwan's reunification before any actual military takeover is attempted, and if China does feel the need to attempt to seize it militarily. It will not be anything like what most people who haven't examined the South China Sea in detail will think it is. 

First, China, or rather the PRC, people's republic of china, over the next few years or decades will continue to leverage the PLA, people's liberation army, specifically the PLAN (PLA navy), PLAA (PLA airforce), and the PLARF (PLA rocket force) to show their dominance over traditional domains in the region (Air, Sea, Strait etc). The goal is to push Taiwan's only real defender, the US, out of the region by showing that the cost of conflict has gone beyond being too high to being unwinnable for the available US forces in the region (accounting for factors such as basing, readiness rates, and ammunition depths). What you can expect if this is successful is something like the rumored leaked new strategic proposal for the Department of War for the US to pull back its expeditionary focus in the pacific to reorientate more towards immediate regional defense.   
  
US wargames from the CSIS and other institutes already show that, based on current-day estimations, the US Pacific forces would likely lose most, if not all, of their available assets in the region, including fighters, bombers, ships, and carriers, within the first 30 days of the conflict due to missile strikes and interdiction by PLA assets. Meanwhile, the same stockpile reports show we would run out of critical ammunition like missiles after the first two weeks of serious fighting. The entire goal is to make the US give up before the fight begins.

Once this has been done, the PLAN and PLAF will rapidly spread their domain over the area that the US abandons, projecting power over and outside the First Island Chain. The goal here, at this step, is to deter potential Taiwanese allies like Japan and South Korea from joining into any potential conflict. 

After that, the pressure would turn on Taiwan, starting with forceful diplomacy and moving towards things like embargo of goods and other imports with sanctions if the Taiwanese do not comply. It is possible that, at this step, which can be decades down the line, the conflict ends there and the Taiwanese capitulates as the world stands by, unwilling or unable to step into what has effectively turn into China's backyard. In that outcome, the Taiwan crisis would end relatively bloodlessly, but it is also the best outcome for China. What is more likely to occur is scenario 2.

Single-Braincelled

1 - it has always been known leaders want Taiwan, it’s not an argument that they’ll attempt. Trump wants Canada, you don’t think he’ll attempt would you? 
2 - There is no need to spend on Himalayan cover, because Himalayas is a cover. A natural one! And all countries spend on military it’s not necessarily to attack, but posture position as leverage for deals 
3 - there has been trade war with USA which made them want different partners, for negotiation power. Literally Same with how India’s doing with Russia, doesn’t mean they’re about to capture a country! 
4 - isn’t an argument

easycoverletter-com

Taiwan could potentially respond to a Chinese invasion by attacking the Three Gorges Dam.

Destroying it (or damaging it enough to cause a major breach) would cause 30% of China's entire population to be dead within a few hours. That's a cost that is absolutely too high for Xi Jinping to accept - and that's the entire point of Taiwan's defense strategy. There's no way that Taiwan would ever *win* in a war with China - but what Taiwan can do is make the cost of militarily conquering them so great that the mainland will think twice about actually doing it.

Morthra

That would be suicide for China they rely too heavily on Taiwanese industry and trade

Public-Departure7478

Please name the last country that invaded another country then:


A: Didn't not go back to original people once military force left


And


B: Didn't not create new freedom fighting organization that are causing more violence internally 


Countries just do not surrender to invaders any more, so yes, China is able to level Taiwan to the ground using force but they know the invasion will fail because no one have been able to successfully gain land this way in very long time.

23667

I don't think China is interested in even risking kinetic conflict with the U.S., even its its not very likely.  As long as there's U.S. ships/troops stationed all over the South Pacific, I think they'll continue to posture and try to eventually absorb Taiwan in other ways.  China historically makes very long term plans, they don't normally make hostile short term decisions.

ludachr1st

China’s not stupid, they want Taiwan but they also enjoy Taiwanese technology. Taiwan is on record saying they would burn everything to the ground to prevent China from gaining access to its microchip technology. It’s unlikely we’ll ever see a true invasion mainly because of that.

rcbz1994

There are several downsides to the point where I think Xi is smart enough to not invade.

There is basically zero natural resources on the island. The only economic incentive to invade would be the chip foundries and Taiwan will blow them up or sabotage them in the event of an invasion. If they don't the Americans will have some very strategically placed Missile launches that "accidently" hit chip foundries.

There are possibly major military and civilian consequences to starting a war with Taiwan. The Three Gorges Dam is easily within range of missiles on Taiwan. One missile striking the Dam could easily inflict hundreds of thousands of casualties. This is also would impact China's energy infrastructure which would slow the war machine.

I think even just these two points are reason enough for Xi to not invade.

There is also the impact of geopolitics. Russia is already bogged down in Ukraine and wouldn't be in a position to help. With the weakening of Iran's uranium enrichment, the Iranians would be unlikely to fund or even send more than usual energy resources to china as they need to re-build their defence infrastructure. Not to mention all the economic and trade sanctions that would be levied on China due to this.

Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on your viewpoint, Xi is smart enough to avoid all of this.

manbearpig073

What sort of evidence would you accept? Let me try to refute each point:

Point 1 - Xi Jinping Thought does not include military aggression, and notably neither does broader modern Chinese political philosophy. Not even military aggression that disrupts the status quo. The only compatibility between Xi Jinping Thought and military moves in Taiwan is outside disruption of the status quo.

Point 2 - China really doesn't do military aggression. Even in the border disputes that it HAS had which experienced some military component, notably with Vietnam and India, China took really unusual measures to limit the scale of the conflict, like in the case of India with both sides [requiring their troops to eschew modern weapons entirely and go back to fighting with sticks and swords only](https://www.newsweek.com/china-india-clash-video-nuclear-weapons-geopolitics-1911017). Chinese culture is generally fairly antithetical to the kinds of behaviors that are required to militarily colonize outsiders, and the memories of the 20th century remain vivid in the minds of Chinese people. 

Point 3 - BRICS is an economic alliance, not a military one, and its value outside of the context of war is proven prescient by recent global events centered around Western institutions and their detonation by their own operators.

Point 4 - Taiwan is a natural point of contention for China, just as Hong Kong was, and for identical reasons. It is quite simply a Western colonial foothold in what China considers its sovereign territory. The costs of opposing this politically were largely sunk by previous leaders, and the strategic value of the territory for China's national defense remains extremely high.

&gt;The amount of political, human, and financial capital all point to an attempt by China to take over Taiwan militarily

China must present a credible threat, at all times, of military invasion of Taiwan, in order to stave off a Western imposition of a change in the status quo. As long as the status quo does not change, China is comfortable to win over the course of 25, 50, 100 years, through cultural victory. The second the status quo is changed intentionally by Western powers, China will invade with a credible amount of conventional force to dissuade any intervention by those Western powers.

jzpenny

"Resource investments; one of the key weaknesses to the Chinese economy is that they need to import significant amounts of food and energy resources . They are one of the largest importers of food and energy in the world. If a conflict in the Taiwan straight occurs, China would be blockaded, cutting them off. As a results, their heavy investment in green energy, and the warming relations with Russia have largely solved their energy problems and to some extent their food problem."

Okay, but this **isn't true**. China's energy and food needs are still critically vulnerable to any disruption in imports. A hot war with the US would lead to a closing of the Strait of Malacca and widespread oil shortages and famine in China. They just **literally do not** have the capacity to sustain themselves in the absence of global ocean trade.

  
That may change! But until it has *actually* changed, rather than just hypothetically, China cannot go to war with the US.

HadeanBlands

A pro-China Taiwanese government that attempted to start a peaceful reunification could easily get Maidaned or military couped. China building a countercoup response force would look a lot like China building an invasion force except smaller and with things like strategic bombers probably omitted entirely.

While China has been very effective about developing most of the rest of its modern military hardware in a fairly short time, their attitude toward the H-20 seems to be "meh, it'll be done sometime, I suppose we should have one though." That points in the direction of not really intending a military solution but wanting to be prepared for intelligence fuckery.

Fucking_That_Chicken

The only people here that are trying to change your mind are Chinese. But due to the rules of the sub I will pose this to you

China would only try to take Taiwan if they want to break out of the net they are in. This would allow them to project their power far and wide, as America does now. They obviously don't want to do this because... uhm... China is not keen in it? /s

xyakks

I am not 100 percent sure they would try. China has had a number of issues economically and if the invasion was a success but the Chinese military was hit hard Xi would probably find a gun at the back of his head. I don’t think he would survive long if it goes bad and he knows that. So he threatens Taiwan for optics but wouldn’t do it

Vcheck1

No, you can see how China Navy setups. China will take over east Asia, and force US Navy move away. We can see day by day US move the military assets farther. Taiwan is in China's pocket now, there are China Coast Guard around Taiwan already.

linjun_halida

When Trump changed the Gulf of Mexico, he was telling China the South China sea region belongs to them.

Apprehensive-Fun4181

[deleted]

You need to separate ethnicity from nationality. Taiwan’s population is 95% Han. China’s population is 91% Han. 

But being of the same ethnicity isn’t the same thing as having the same nationality. Countries  have different politics, culture and economics.

ElectronicDeal4149

Chinese identity is “dying” because the perception of Mainland China and the institutions there (separate from the CCP) are cooling. At one point it was plausible for most people to hold onto the “one country, two systems” promise the CCP was saying, but after Hong Kong’s democracy protests, the illusion is gone for the more civic-minded folks.

As other people mentioned, ethnicity is not nationality. But also at the same time, Chinese ethnicity is not monolithic either. There are many sub-cultures and Taiwan’s roots come mainly from Fujian (Southern Chinese) rather than the Northern China-prestige Mainland government. That’s a minor point of contention, but still one that would make some Taiwanese uncomfortable. There’s also a bit of cultural chauvinism in Taiwan because the some here believe that China lacks a deeply rooted culture because of their Cultural Revolution. Alas, a cans of worms that I have no desire to open, the chauvinism or the Cultural Revolution.

I think it’s easier to think of both the KMT as the more pro-business party (granted that both are extremely business friendly) and the DPP as the more populist party (again, both are very populist in character too). Because of the KMT’s network of companies/industries, it tends to favor cooperation with China in order to access China’s market. The DPP is more wary of Mainland China and I interpret this policy standpoint as the party historically being the opposition to the KMT, but has since developed into the main issue dividing the country during national-level elections.

At more local levels, the China question matters less. Voters are still mostly concerned about bread and butter issues. The China question does tie into bread and butter issues, but this isn’t something that prefectural or mayoral elected officials can do much about aside from supporting their own side at the national level.

With regards to actually being in China, I think most Taiwanese have the position of “we got our own good thing going on here, no need to complicate it by trying to go over to the Mainland”. There are some hardcore people who believe that Taiwan and the Mainland should be reunited (which system of government is in charge shows you where they are on the extreme side of the political-delusional spectrum) and there are the hardcore supporters of Taiwanese independence (again, to varying degrees of detachment from reality).

At the end of the day, the major gripes in TW society are 1) low wages 2) corruption and 3) foreigners. TW politics has the added dimension of the China question/threat, but it’s just like any other small country with low levels of corruption.

muvicvic

I think like the other comment said ethnicity and nationality are two different concepts. Many Taiwanese will identify as Han Chinese ethnically but that is different from being nationalistically linked to ‘’China’’ as a country. The main reason for this is a dislike of China's political system, it simply is the difference between being able to choose your leaders and not, therefore they reject being nationalistically tied to China as a political system.

It is a common misconception by foreigners that independence is a popular concept in Taiwan. The reality is that the majority of Taiwanese support "maintaining the status quo" this is neither pro-reuninfication or independence. It just suggests both countries should continue the situation as it currently is, each interpreting their own idea of what that means.

The idea that the KMT is "pro-reuninfication" is too simplistic, the KMT believes friendly relations with China will bring economic opportunities and is safer for Taiwan, their official position is to maintain status quo, but many Taiwanese fear they will compromise Taiwan's political freedom to Beijing.

The situation is complicated and the foreign press and online information is way too simplistic sometimes. Also I think just focusing on the China issue when considering Taiwanese politics is kind of a problem in itself there are a ton of other issues affecting Taiwan right now from wage stagnation, to the cost of housing etc.

Competitive_Yoghurt

I'll turn this question around: Do you identify more as Russian, Prussian, or Austrian instead of Polish? Or would you say you identify as... A specific type of German, due to the, ah.. "Occupation" during the 1940's? As you've introduced yourself as a Pole, I don't think you identify as something that has less to do with your current identity rather than past identity, especially one that might have been instrumental in a lot of bad blood. 

I cannot comment with any accuracy on KMT, but that one is potentially less politics and more of a flaw in any democratic system during time of strife - a lot of the times the party not in power will use whatever is popular with the opposition to unite people. Common tactics include exclusion of "Others", to inciting xenophobia. If those things don't work, look for things that make young people angry, especially if it can be victim-blamed on others. The idea is, "It's never your and our fault, it's always the current power's fault" and "Vote for us, we totally got solutions" - and unfortunately the solution are often trite, if not outright horrible (See: Genocide), and often the tactics is just used to gain power and individual benefits rather than for the betterment of the country. This worked very well for MAGA movement, and many American benefits are being heavily slashed as a result, with their global image ridiculed.

tl;dr hate is easy, doing work is hard, and hatred is easy to manipulate into political power.

I personally believe KMT is walking on a thin wire, thinking that being closer with China will give them more power, in term of political soft power as well as hard, cold cash. They might be correct, but they might also not be thinking about the consequence. There are no free lunches, much less in global politics, and I really have no idea what sort of lion's maw they are trying to wrestle benefits out of.

... Basically, I think you have a view of Taiwanese politics that's very biased due to propaganda, instead of one where you actually engage with what gives the most comfort and quality of life to people in the country. It's neither joining China or going independent, as an aside - it's this state of limbo that people want, often on both sides. Status quo and peace, preferably without the constant threat of violence.

For the Taiwanese that calls themselves Chinese and wants to rejoin China, you'll notice that a lot of them are fatally idealistic - they think they can retain all the benefits of being a democracy, or just otherwise isn't really aware of what they are losing in exchange. See MAGA for example, and the recent wave of regrets in the youngest American voting population strata as they realize that hey, nothing's being solved and everything's getting worse.

Again, hate is easy, doing work is hard. And unfortunately, hate is the prime motivator for a ton of opposition party in democracy, because A: It's easy B: It works C: Nobody holds them responsible after they win.

KogasaGaSagasa

Taiwan has a complex history as a borderland about a hundred miles off the Chinese coast: for thousands of years, its main inhabitants were indigenous Austronesian-speakers (related to other Pacific island peoples like the Maori and Hawaiians); in the early 1600s, it was also a base for small communities of Chinese fishermen and traders, and Japanese and Chinese pirates. The Dutch and Spanish claimed different parts of Taiwan as colonies in mid-1600s so they could use the island as a base for trade. In 1661, Zheng Chenggong -- a half-Chinese, half-Japanese heir to a smuggling dynasty in China's Fujian Province -- attacked the Dutch and drove them out of Taiwan. He wanted to use the island as a base to attack China's Qing Dynasty rulers and restore the previous Ming Dynasty. But the Qing conquered the Zheng regime and took over Taiwan. (Before this, China's rulers had not been very interested in Taiwan; it was referred to as “Land of the Eastern Barbarians” in Chinese travel records like 東番記, and considered a kind of wild borderland between civilization -- i.e. China -- and the outside world.) From 1683 to 1895, Taiwan was part of the Qing Empire, until Japan claimed Taiwan as spoils in the first Sino-Japanese war. Taiwan was a Japanese colony for fifty years (1895-1945), and Taiwanese were forced to speak Japanese and follow Japanese customs. When Japan was defeated in World War II and control of Taiwan passed to the Republic of China, led by Chiang Kai-shek, most Taiwanese at first welcomed mainland Chinese as brothers and liberators. But Chiang and his Nationalist Party (KMT), who were driven out of mainland China by the Communists in 1949, ran a corrupt dictatorship in Taiwan and often treated local Taiwanese (most of whose ancestors had migrated to Taiwan from south China centuries earlier) as second-class citizens. Chiang declared that he would soon "take back" mainland China (called the People's Republic of China under the Chinese Communist Party) and with funding from the anti-Communist United States, he executed and jailed thousands of people. If you ask Taiwanese now about whether they feel Chinese, some talk about the Chiang dictatorship as an example of why they have mixed feelings, or feel more Taiwanese than Chinese.  

In any case, many Taiwanese I’ve spoken with as a journalist, especially the younger generations who are not products of KMT party-state education, do not think of ethnicity as the basis for political unity.  (One told me: "Look at Singapore; they're mostly ethnic Chinese, but they don't belong to China.")  To them, Taiwanese identity can include Chinese culture and ethnicity, but that's not the same thing as belonging to the political entity called China.  Many of them embrace Taiwan’s complex history – Han Chinese and indigenous and Japanese cultural influences – as something unique.  And they’re proud of being a tolerant, progressive society (the first country in Asia to legalize gay marriage), and of the sacrifices that all Taiwanese, including mainlanders, made to create it.  Even Taiwanese who like the idea of being part of China (because it’s a world power with a large economy, or has a long history connected to their own, or both) do not necessarily like the idea of giving up the freedoms they've enjoyed since Taiwan democratized in the 1990s.  Some are fatalistic about a Chinese takeover, but only a small minority support it.  (The KMT, as you point out, is the more “China-friendly” party, but mainstream KMT candidates shy away from supporting unification with China, because it is not politically viable.)

Ultimately, I think the question of Taiwan and China and independence/reunification is driven by geopolitics, not ethnicity.  The Chinese government’s repeated message to Taiwan – that blood is thicker than water, so we are all one big family – is quite different from many of the slogans I heard in China when I was living there.  I remember the propaganda song, “Fifty-six ethnicities, fifty-six flowers,” meaning that Tibetans and Mongolians and Koreans and dozens more different ethnic groups living there are like flowers in one big, beautiful garden – that they are all Chinese, regardless of origin.

FeeCheap9817

&gt;why is Chinese identity dying? 

So.... are American in America still saying "oh yeah, i'm a proud (x country)"?

&gt;Taiwan independence really popular? 

Nah, its the people from /r/Taiwanese pushing BS like this. They don't like Taiwan being called ROC "officially". They want Taiwan to be called "Taiwan".

I know its complicated but this is geopolitics now

&gt;Why KMT became so keen to have better relations with PRC

Can't beat them? Join them, i guess. Or they're trying the more peaceful route but its looks like they are sucking dick.

hong427

1. Chinese identity wasn't even a thing before the ROC government retreated to Taiwan. The concept of "Chinese nation" was formed during the late Qing Dynasty and World War II, after Taiwan was ceded to Japan (in 1895). Unlike the mainlanders, the Taiwanese didn't politically identify as "Chinese" before the KMT regime forced its Chinese nationalism ideas on us. We still consider ourselves cultural "Chinese" (well, more or less), but we see no point in rejoining the Chinese nation, which is, sadly, an oppressive autocracy.
2. It depends on who you're asking. Contrary to popular belief in the West (probably due to CCP propaganda), the idea of Taiwanese independence is more like a nationalist movement. It's mainly about gaining independence from the ROC (the current Taiwanese government) instead of the PRC (the China recognized by most countries). They want a Taiwanese nation, instead of a Chinese one. The movement was formed during the KMT autocracy, which was considered a brutal foreign regime. But as the country democratized in the 90s, most people saw no point in overthrowing the current democratic government, just because it's "Chinese."
3. The vast majority of Taiwanese are satisfied with the status quo (de facto independence) and hope to maintain it. However, the CCP usually labels anything except unification as "Taiwanese Independence" in propaganda to fit its narrative. Some Taiwanese Independence supporters are also making use of CCP propaganda to try to link their political stance with concepts like patriotism and anti-annexation, making the situation even more confusing to foreigners.
4. Many of the Weishenren (refugees who came in 1949 from the mainland and their descendants) are Chinese nationalists, making them more easily influenced by China's nationalist propaganda. Many KMT politicians, their families, or their supporters have business or factories in mainland China (which was common back then when we had nice relations with them) and could be blackmailed by the Communist Party. Also, people who want to avoid direct conflict with China tend to support the KMT's more dovish cross-strait policy. Nobody cares about reclaiming China anymore since it's unrealistic, and we're doing fine on our own.

BTW, may I ask you what modern-day Polish people think about the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth? Do the people consider it part of the "good old days," or do they not care about it anymore?

KotetsuNoTori

There was a much larger predominately Han Chinese population on Taiwan that emigrated from China generations earlier than the group of KMT refugees that fled to Taiwan after losing the mainland. Then the KMT killed a lot of people to force and maintain KMT power over the island.

OrangeChickenRice

Taiwan is not China. Get that into your head now.

Medium_Bee_4521

The Democratic Progressive Party authorities previously launched so-called "education reform" policies and and now have censored the curriculum at military academies on the island, depriving students of the history of the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the wisdom of ancient China. 

They are attempting to sever cross-strait historical and cultural ties through various means, deceiving the Taiwanese people and deceiving young Taiwanese into fighting for "Taiwan independence" and becoming cannon fodder. 

Currently, over 96% of Taiwan’s population is Han Chinese. Their ancestors migrated from mainland China to Taiwan over the past few hundred years. From the Zhangzhou and Quanzhou merchants and farmers who followed Yan Siqi and Zheng Zhilong to Taiwan to open up new land in the Ming Dynasty, to Zheng Chenggong’s army that expelled the Dutch colonists and relocated to Taiwan; from the large number of Han immigrants during the Qing Dynasty to the millions who crossed the sea to Taiwan in 1949, they constitute the majority of the Han ethnic group. “This denial of history, and even the denial of the present, is only to satisfy the DPP authorities’ ideology.

CommonDraft2993

&gt;Chinese identity dying?

This has more to do with the DPP position of destroying the Republic of China to establish (ROT) Republic of Taiwan.

So, in their quest, they became very allergic to the terms Chinese and China.  They changed the name of a few national companies from China to Taiwan.

They started labeling Chinese people as "Other" in the official census.

To some it seems pretty ridiculous.  To others it seems necessary.

But in reality, the people of Taiwan speak Chinese, write Chinese, and follow Chinese customs.  When the Taiwnese go abroad, they are usually just lumped with other Chinese.

&gt;Taiwan Independence popular?

This one gets a little confusing.  The DPP wants to pursue de jure Independence.  To officially declare Taiwan province/island/territories no longer part of China.

The issue is that the ROC Taiwan government controls territories that are part of Fujian Province and in the South China Sea.

So to say other parts of China, besides Taiwan island, are not part of China get complicated.  Especially, when those other parts of ROC controlled territories want to reunify with PRC China.

The other problem is the KMT redefine "Taiwan Independence" as Status Quo.  So basically, the current condition of ROC Taiwan.  A neutral territory between the US and PRC China with no official recognition of the ROC government by any other powerful government in the world is Taiwan Independence.

So is Status Quo and de jure Independence both considered Taiwan Independence?

Needless to say, it's a voting wedge issue in Taiwan.  That won't be resolved by the ROC itself.

That why a 3rd party TPP has emerged recently.  They say, "You know the US won't let us reunify.  PRC won't let us declare Independence.  So let's forget about the Strait Issue, because we can't solve it.  Then, just focus on Taiwan."

Sounds reasonable.  But the DPP saw the TPP as a threat and has placed the leader Ko-P in jail without a trail for 6 months now.

&gt;KMT wants good relations with PRC?

Well, the KMT is the pro-unification party.  But their original idea was to destroy the CPC and take over all of China.  In 1949, they stole all the gold reserve from China and participated in the embargo of China.  Killing millions in the process.

They kept the PRC out of the UN for 30 years.

Well, obviously, none of that worked, and under the CPC, China has become an economic superpower and the most powerful military force in Asia.

So why does the KMT pursue unification and deescaltion?

To me, the answer is 2 fold. The KMT has a long history of being betrayed by the US.  The US stole money from the ROC era on China, and the KMT forced the US to open a Chinese TsingHua university in China with the stolen money.  The US advised the KMT to kick out the CPC from ROC Congress, which started the Chinese Civil War.  After WWII, when the Civil War resumed, the US put the ROC on a lend/lease program instead of providing man power.  Not to mention, the US CIA destroyed the ROC nuclear weapons program.

The 2nd part is both the ROC and PRC, which believe in a modern China free of foreign influence advocated by Dr.Sun Wen.  One has to admit the CPC isn't doing a bad job

random_agency

Taiwan is China. It’s literally in their official name, the Republic of China.

redditreadreadread

I‘d say it wasn’t really about specific geopolitical events but about the continuous rise of china as the next contender for global hegemony (whether that is the intended goal or not). 

The steady advances in technology, the sheer economic power (both as a market almost no global
Company can do without and as an investor in many parts of the world) and the steady built up of the Chinese military simply became more and more threatening for the US whose power (at least relatively speaking) has been in a (not always quite as) steady decline for some decades now. 

The economic interdependency of the two countries has led to a great deal of nervousness since both sides suspect, in case of open hostility breaking out, the other side could use that interdependency for devastating strikes on the economy. Trump‘s tariff tantrums probably shifted that felt power balance toward china to some degree, it also shows however, that decoupling is viable at best as a long term strategy and attempts to quickly use economic influence might only backfire (though the Chinese leadership seems a bit to clear headed to attempt that in such a rash way.

Furthermore, i‘d say the geopolitical hotspots and crises you mentioned are less defining points for the relationship and work better (especially for IR) as indicators on how good or bad the relationship actually is. Taiwan is an excellent example for this, when one looks at the history of the 2nd half of the 20th century, it was never an issue that defined the US-Chinese relationship but became a point of contention when the relationship soured and relaxed when relations became more amicable (think of Nixon). The stakes might be higher nowadays because of Taiwans rise as the leading center for chip production, speaking long term though, china probably doesn’t really need Taiwan for anything but symbolism. While internal politics does play a role in both countries, this seems more of a hegemonial struggle and and a lot of reactionary behaviors in its context.

GibDirBerlin

Have you heard the policy of pivot to Asia under Obama administration? America intended to contain China since early 2000s, but was delayed until Trump’s time. 

Culture differences didn’t stop America to be partners with China in the 70-90s. It didn’t stop partnerships with Saudis either. 

Also, cultural differences didn’t give Americans the right to be hostile towards other nations.

Pointfun1

China us relations did a nose dive when trump announced the first round of China tariffs in 2018, along with sanctions on huawei and the scandal involving the (illegal) arrest of meng. After that the sanctions were strengthened and continued under biden because a) a large part of the u.s. establishment views china as a threat to us hegemony and b) it was popular with the us public. Over this time period US policy did a total 180 towards china but chinese policy didnt change at all or only changed in response to us changes.

freaknbigpanda

As an outsider to both, it looks more like internal US politics has drive the rift to me. The Chinese actions that people interpret as adversarial seem like reactions to the "Pivot to Asia", the trade war, etc.

ReadingPossible9965

US hoped to turn China into a capitalist state that is heavily influenced by and dependent on the western capitalism and on the US itself, just as it happened with many other developing countries, reinforcing US dominance in the world.

This did not happen. China not only chose its own path but developed itself so much that it went on a path to become a major global power itself, that is not dependent on the US, and possibly THE dominant world power in the future, to replace the US in this role.

Notice that most of the hostilities are coming from western countries towards China, not from China towards west. These hostilities are just the old dominant power realizing that their position is being threatened and trying to prevent that.

In geopolitics, If you're in the 6th place, if the runner up at the 7th place is not your ally, they are your rival. If you're in the 1st place with an enormous gap to the 2nd place for decades, a sudden rising contender that has the potential of replacing you is not a rival but an enemy. There's too much to lose falling from the 1st place.

Maysign

"Talks about war in Taiwan are ever present."

Only in the US. China isn't talking about invading Taiwan, and it hasn't fought a war in half a century. There is zero reason to think China is gearing up to invade anyone.

General_Problem5199

As a Chinese person, let me reply.


China and the US have always had friction, but the earliest event I can think of is Obama's “return to Asia-Pacific”, which is 100% directed at China.


It was Trump's trade war in 2018 that really put the US-China relationship at a turning point.


That was followed by the Anchorage, Alaska meeting, where Biden inherited Trump's China policy and further expanded it to include economic sanctions, political pressure, and military blockade.


Then came Pelosi to Taiwan.


And when Trump took office it was “Liberation Day”.


The China-US problem is structural. The United States believes that other countries must be subordinate to itself, while China believes that a country's fundamental right to develop itself cannot be taken away.


As far as worldviews go, I think it's pretty simple - you just have to put up with it.


By equality, I mean tolerating each other.

bjran8888

Early 2010s. China studied what pivot to Asia meant especially after seeing the invasion of Middle East in the prior decade. They understood they have to take control of their own backyard because might equals right. Its neighbours and US then sees this expansion as aggressive. Sprinkle in some racism getting trump 1 elected and you have escalating tensions for the foreseeable future.

IceShaver

I think the tension was always there, going back to when U.S. manufacturing jobs started moving to China for cheaper labor. Even if the government didn’t show concern, resentment was building, especially among Republican voters. When Trump ran for president, he tapped into that frustration and brought anti-China sentiment into the political mainstream.

Sapling-074

It’s just the natural geopolitical result of China becoming wealthy and threatening (just because of their potential not any policy) towards the US. Most views of this being because China or the US being hostile is just propaganda. 

The same thing would happen if Europe or Russia became powerful again. There was a mistaken belief in the US that if they helped China economically they would for some reason become liberal and an American ally.

Particular-Star-504

This is not limited to the US. China's reputation in the West has plummeted due to covid. China is still pretending that covid is not their fault, but no one believes it.

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/10/PG_2020.10.06_Global-Views-China_0-01.png?w=640

testman22

Shift since the discovery of the massive CIA network that was dismantled by chinese counter intelligence in 2011

Many-Ad9826

An imperialist hegemony seeks to maintain its so-called rule-based "economic colonial system" and contain the emerging power, nothing new in history.

Wuaner

The recent stance can be traced back to the pivot to Asia under Obama and then the more hostile trade war under trumps first term.

But the structural determinism perspective is that China continued and still is rising, and it way past the conditions people thought were possible at the time. It convinced the politburo to vote in positions to cement Xi  to transition China, as well as raise the sensitivity the west has to China’s practices.

ekw88

2018 trade war. Trust between two side completely shattered after the trade-war. Pro-US leaders are layed off, and Hawkish leaders are now in high position. Since then china is preparing for de-coupling with no force to slow it down. 

With trade completely decoupled, military confrontation is a natural outcome.

Slow_Echo1478

itsheadfelloff

Since China overtaken US in many aspects of the economy plus garnered many allies. US scared of losing power to any country. So late 1980's.US is warmongering country that has a massive propaganda media machine. Remember WMD or Gulf of Tonkin.

Any-Ad-446

Started with Obama when the oligarchs realized they were on a trajectory to overtake America (pivot to asia). I remember reading that tandem thinking, "Yep, we are walking right into the Thucydids trap." 

They were getting out of the low-cost manufacturing trap and moving up the value chain, threatening Western economic and military  dominance. 

Scientifically, militarily, and economically, you can not have a near peer in real politik, or it will represent an existential threat to your dominance.l and as world history has shown if your not at the top you are potentially subject to all kinds of horrors.

Tzilbalba

They are a direct competitor to the US and as a result the status quo. The China a few decades ago is completely different than China now. Before they weren’t really seen as a threat by the US so relations were for the most part pretty cordial.

That being said under Obama in 2011 they started a pivot towards Asia, focused on China. As time goes by and China developed more and more it became even more of a closer rival than the US and arguably surpassed the US in some key fields. As a result the US has a vested interest in trying to prevent China’s rise. The amount of money the US has spent on anti-China propaganda is massive.

Multicultural_Potato

ShadowSniper69

When US found out China is not a pushover.

HorrorFriend1228

There is a genuine difference in way of thinking between China and America. 

The American way of thinking is always about competition and getting to the top (hegemonic), and is willing to do so even though it meant upsetting others. There is always a clear cut winner and loser in American way of thinking. 

The Chinese however, tend to look at things at a more wholesome approach. They are more open to sharing of power if situation warrants so and they tend to believe a win-win scenario is the best for everyone instead of duke it out till the last man standing.    

This difference in way of thinking create huge suspicion from the US, when China is slowly rising and catching up. China always propose a concept that the world is large enough for two super power to co-exist. But the Americans believe that China would be a hegemonic power like them when they become no.1 because of their inherent way of thinking.

statyin

look when did china start to making their own phones that are not far behind apple's flagship... thats when the relationship pretty much start to decline

  
ps this is not just a phone example, this is when china is able to produce some shit that are competitive enough to mess with US corporate profits...

Its always been hostile. there are brief years of closer relations, but its always been hostile.

Americans just don't like the Chinese, they are afraid of them.  Reason why they enacted the Chinese Exclusion Acts, committed to propaganda to paint them as a yellow peril, and commit massacre's of Chinese settlements and towns.

Rights were not given to Chinese settlers till during or just after WW2. And this was all before the CCP were even relevant.

CynicalGodoftheEra

The US proactively attempts to create dissent and chaos behind the scenes to governments that won't ally/ bend their knees/ pose a threat in some kind. If that doesn't work they become the targets of the multi billion dollar  propaganda machine, which then provides the US gov with justification/citizen approval to constrain said governments via trade or proxy war.

Chinas bullying actions in the SCS most likely escalated this tension and then taco man turned it up another notch

Peon01

Salty yanks think that they should be on top till the end of universe. That's all. 

https://youtu.be/y28w6ob_V9k


This video sums it up. China did not liberalize as our esteemed End of History space cadets predicted. Because they never read a word of Marx in their lives, sadly. They do not understand communism or the Chinese ideology. And because it is now clear the Chinese will not liberalize, their system is a threat to the capitalist order.


If anyone had bothered to read Lenin, for example, it would have been apparent that China would use the contradictions inherent in capitalism to try to use the communist party to control global manufacturing, baiting our elite with attractive profit motives and cheap labor and resources. Our ruling class assumed the Chinese leadership would become compradors. But their leadership has read Lenin and understood his plan for this situation.

MonsterkillWow

The military-industrial complex always needs a new “big bad.” We’ve been at war for 93% of our history since 1776. 

U.S. feels threatened by China’s continuously improving economic and geopolitical position, and has been acting ever more aggressively towards China ever since the so-called Asia pivot.

America has managed to sway its western allies, and both Democrats and Republicans are rushing headlong to embrace the propaganda and eventual conflict.

randomuser6753

Wow, not a lot of good takes ITT. Generally this subreddit is pretty good.

IR Realist take:

As soon as the power relations started getting closer to 'Among Equals'. 

Prior to the 2010s, China was an inferior power to the US. No one could reasonably argue that China was among equals. Their economy was picking up, but they lacked high tech industrial and a powerful military. 

In the 2010s, China had started creating high end tech independent of the US + built a significantly stronger military. This placed China (debatably) 'Among Equals'. They threatened the US's worldwide hegemony/unipolar world. Now we are (debatably) a bipolar world.

Morgenthau calls this 'Imperialism'. And for non-readers, that simply means they were trying to change the power dynamic. They did not need to conquer territory to change the power dynamic, but rather change the status quo power dynamic by building a large military with a strong economic base. 

&gt;the unformulated conflicts of power (are) “tensions” and the conflicts which are formulated in legal terms (are called) “disputes.” 
 
The tension is there. ITT people are mentioning the legal justification.

read_too_many_books

After the financial crisis of 2008, China started to buy less and less of American debt. I know they hold significant American debt. But they started to slow down on buying new debt. Then couple of years later, after upgrading their own (China) infrastructure with that money, China started the grand BRI program. This was around the time new Chinese president Xi came into power. US started to see the writing on the wall. This was around the time Trump stepped into running for president. That cemented the sour relationships between them.

Aladdin_Man

It is a distraction. The government has and will not attempt to find a solution to the many problems in our society.  The United  States is not a country but place where corporate entities can exist. People and their lives are not prioritized. The corporate run government is just creating an enemy out of China so that we don't create a movement around changing this dynamic.

Impressive_Mouse_477

Early 2010s for multiple reasons.

* China is a direct and the biggest economical and military competitor of the United States. 
* China has not liberalised, thus it is ideological opponent. 
* China threatens the existence of Taiwan, while US with its support of Taiwan threatens the monopoly of power of the Chinese Communist Party. 

Basically, US hoped China would become a member of the liberal status quo, kinda like Japan. Economic competition must have been expected but military one and ideological maybe were not. Instead, China became a force that is threatening the status quo and the US doesnt like that. I dont think the collective West would care that much about China rising if one of the goals wasnt the takeover of liberal Taiwan. 

Think of India for example, the West doesnt have a problem with it. It is a future economic superpower and a military great power, but its still a liberal country, so its not seen as a big threat, as China is, by the West.

Tricky_Weight5865

Because those people interested in “great power competition” have no other credible rival to focus on.

diffidentblockhead

Xi’s island building in the South China Sea was the turning point.

piscator111

China play a textbook level, tit for tat gaming theory strategy, that means if US choose to cooperate, China-US relationship will be back to normal in no time.

But international politics is not a 1vs1 game. Other players see the relationship deteriorate, take the chance to act. Russia and Israel benefit from the chaos, India tried but failed, and a lot of other potential players would like to try, the world is not going back.

Future-Theory

When the U.S. essentially replaced China as the regional hegemon and their tributary system post WW2, China became very anti-US. Basically China sees the United States as an encroacher on a natural and long lived tradition that saw China as the top dog. As if the U.S. is an invasive species.

These other posts are more targeted at recent events and do fall within recent flare ups in China-U.S. tension but to answer your question fully, using actual IR publishings, you have to go back to the early post war era.

Limp-Ad-2939

It's Xi being part of a revanchist movement in the CCP, pretty much.

mikiencolor

In the 2010s, as China’s economy grew significantly, they also became much more assertive militarily

Actual_Nothing988

Since China decided to go back deep into mao style communism. So around ~2012

HarambeTenSei

China is economic competition now, and not an economic ally. That's all it is. The economy is the foundation of society. So when something disrupts that, bad things happen.

savetinymita

The US and China were bitter ideological enemies from the defeat of Chiang Kai-shek and the end of the Chinese Civil War (1949) until Nixon visited China (1972). The US still didn't recognize the PRC until 1979, instead formally acknowledging the the ROC (Taiwan).

The rapprochement was made possible by the Sino-Soviet split, but the US and China were never exactly buddy-buddy. It was more a triangulation / allies of convenience thing.

Now, China represents the greatest (arguably *only*) meaningful rival to the US as global hegemon.

Able-Distribution

When they started producing counterfeit Disney items en masse in the early 90s.

That's not a joke. It's when their manufacturing and ability to replicate started ramping up. They would use that to produce what the US was making at a fraction of the price and then sell it back to them.

Bannedwith1milKarma

Communism...Taiwan issues...North Korea issues...all the technology theft, hacking, espionage, intellectual property and trade practices complaints have been the same complaints had for decades, just always building...expansion in south China sea...supports Iran and Russia...Japan issues.  Just never have been confrontational in addressing any of it before.

Confident_Row7417

China continued to grow fast and critically it moved into sectors that placed it in direct competition with the U.S, it also did not converge to "neoliberalism" as some expected.

Now China is advanced enough and has a sufficiently different economic and political system that it is now seen especially by neoconservatives as representing a Cold War style strategic competitor.

fluffykitten55

Maybe if CCP stops bullying all its neighbors US would not have any buyers for their fearmongering. Hell CCP is even gradually invading Bhutanese land which is such a peaceful country. Then their consistent threats to Taiwanese

IndividualSociety567

North Korea is not China's agent.



The pro-China North Korean forces were purged by Kim Jong-il in the 1960s.



Later, North Korea even destroyed the cemetery of Chinese volunteer soldiers.

coludFF_h

The root cause is that the United States hopes that China will always be poor and that China's GDP will not surpass that of the United States. However, China's population is four times that of the United States. If it reaches the level of the United States, its per capita GDP will only be one-fourth of that of the United States. Therefore, China's GDP must exceed that of the United States. The United States regards this as the ultimate threat to it.

Both-Manufacturer419

by western accounts china is basically playing the world. They take advantage where they can (international mail subsidies) and steal what they want (IP theft) all while playing the peaceful friendly flute. 

  
The idea of peace each country brings is a bit different. Ukrainians and eastern Europeans talk about the Russian peace as something they do not want to return to.

Chinese peace is a peace with the general idea that people need to be controlled. Jackie Chan agrees and says "chinese people need to be controlled."

  
So the general mantra of the US and China are opposite. If they reach parity to each other they will consider each others ideology a threat to their own.

OPcrack103

The reality is that China stopped buying US bonds after being scared by the GFC in 2008. In fact, you can completely map bond holdings and detiorating relations between the two countries. What many people do not understand is that Chinese and Japanese purchases of US bonds in the 2000's partially kept interest rates low before QE. China also never fully opened up their financial markets to the US, which Wall Street always wanted in order to continue the house of cards. This in turn turned China into the great enemy of the west. In fact, much of what Trump is doing is to persuade China and Japan (with heavy-handed tactics) to continue to fuel the American debt machine (i.e. to lower interest rates).


The version you receive is that China got powerful and they steal...or some other neoliberal word salad that you can see everywhere in this thread. If China continued to buy US bonds to fuel US spending habits and opened up their financial markets to the west, the US would not care at all.

PreparationMost7116

When the US realized China wouldn't become their lapdog and submit to western capitalist hegemony, which they thought it would happen after reform and opening up

LeDurruti

Consequence of globalization. Most of US manufacturing jobs are outsourced to China, leading to a shrinking middle class in the US, growing inequality that led to a growing substantial unhappy group of voters, who allows conservatives to take power and enact protectionist policies.

I traveled through the Rust Belt; I saw empty factories and even big name like IBM abandoned  their manufacturing buildings. Yet, the sign of what used to be a prosperous place was still there.

last_stand_000

Since forever? China always saw America as a component to bypass, and America always hated China for a multitude of reasons (and so as any other country/organisation that is different and/or won't bow down to their supremacy).

Key-Clock-7706

The Death of Engagement by The Wire China is a pretty good read to learn more about it.

TLDR: US-China relations were pretty cool up until Obama since China wasnt powerful enough to challenge US primacy yet. During Obama, China had reached 2nd biggest economy and now had enough hard power to challenge the US. Relations further deteriorated when Trump took office and started calling China public enemy #1.

AdIcy1845

Its simple geopolitics, two major powers will have conflicts of interest inevitably.

Ok-Hunt7450

When China got strong enough to be able to challenge the US. 

The other important factor is that the US left realized that their industries are all going overseas, so they joined the right to fight globalization.

species5618w

All these comments only focus on the results but not the causes. You literally had 2 populist leaders come into power that undermined or reversed what made their respective nation great in the last decades

Leaper229

You say more or less, it's significantly less. China isn't just growing peacefully, it's growing aggressive and hostile. If China was growing peacefully your argument would make sense that it's only about financial dominance.

Activeenemy

China is incredibly aggressive, deny it all you want.

China is a rival super power that America can’t control. Since the Bush neocons after the 11/9 attacks, America has wanted ‘full spectrum dominance’ over the entire world, as it was put in PNAC.

Any country that stands in the way of American hegemony has therefore to be portrayed as an enemy and (in the case of small countries), potentially subjected to invasion to install pro-Western regimes that obey American and Zionist wishes.

China also is the only major power that offers a working alternative to neoliberal capitalism.

DigitalDroid2024

Ms4Sheep

You are on the internet. Find a book or a book or a video. There is over two hundreds years of complicated history. What do you really hope to learn from a reddit post? 

  
You are struggling because you have made no fucking effort. The fact you are looking for answers here is part of your problem.

Dense-Pear6316

Started somewhere in the 2010s - for decades the US and The West thought if they integrated China with the world economy enough, rising living standards would lead to democratisation. Instead it's left their manufacturing base becoming increasingly hollowed out along with rampant IP theft and an increasingly autocratic regime that has flexed its muscles literally every opportunity it's had. What's thrown everything off kilter of course if Ukraine - it showed the CCP what could happen to inexperienced militaries beset by corruption attempting to invade against modern western military technology. So now there's increased tension as China is running against the demographic clock to reunify, then who knows what will really happen.

Snoo30446

Honestly, the way you try to make me spell it out for you, even though it’s obvious to fucking everyone makes me too suspicious and annoyed to answer. I hope Chinese officials are better diplomats than you, because if not, they carry a lot more blame than I thought.

I’m not sure you realize that through most of history in the United States hasn’t even had much of a relationship with China so….. what do you think the relationship with China was like in the 80s?

It’s much better today than it’s been most of my life

Specific-Peanut-8867

因为美国已经没有能力对中国玩弄霸权，政治不是游戏，中国不是日本和韩国这些婊子国家，我觉得美国人要反思，为什么美国会妄想控制世界上的其他地区？你们甚至连内部不同派系的人群都控制不了，中国不会为了控制蒙古、中亚和东南亚，而轰炸这些地方的牧民和农民

Tasty-Purpose-1762

No, it's not that the U.S. doesn't care about China anymore. They're just bringing up old issues from their relationship and talking about going their separate ways. China wasn’t ready to split at first, but now, who knows?

AssistanceMundane724

Became hostile when China started getting stronger economically and the US didn't like it. Simple as that.

Hostile relations would have started earlier if America wasn’t distracted with the ME wars and great financial crisis, as is the nature of great power politics. Like Rome and Carthage or Sparta and Athens.

sadboyoclock

Xi Jinping has urged stronger ties between China and Taiwan's political parties amid rising tensions over national reunification.

Taiwan Politics and China Relations

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want