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?
I don’t see what you’re confused about. If you can throw out 96% of responses in a poll and call it an “interpretation,” then why can’t I throw out 99.88% of votes and call it an interpretation too? Is there a line somewhere between 96% and 99.88%?
This is true, but quote me where I said this.
“Taiwan is a sovereign and free country.” “Taiwan is independent.” “I believe the age of strategic ambiguity should be over.” A clear and direct deviation from the status quo of strategic ambiguity.
I didn’t “throw them out” - I simply stated that I think the country would be on a process to independence now if the pressures from China weren’t there. More people clearly support eventual independence as compared to unification by current polling, and the current setup is de-facto independence already. Moreover, most people in Taiwan by the same polls self-identify as Taiwanese.
“Plenty of people in the US ruling class, but I don’t see how that’s relevant. I’m criticizing your position.”
That isn’t telling Taiwan to do anything. That’s just him running his mouth. US politicians say that without specifically petitioning for or directing Taiwan to officially repudiate their historical claims and declare independence.
That was after you started this irrelevant line of questioning.
You arbitrarily excluded their responses. Again, “if this” “if that” it doesn’t matter. Taiwanese people are answering the polls based on what they think is best for them in the situation as it actually exists, and we should be looking at the situation the same way. Not basing opinions based on imagined hypotheticals with nothing to do with reality.
The US formally recognizing Taiwan would be a huge deviation from the status quo.
Sure, and given that China very much implies, if not threatens a war if they try to go independent officially - that’s likely to temper many responses.
Him doing that wasn’t the USA doing that though.
Cool, that sounds like a great reason why maintaining the status quo is a good idea. We should probably listen to the majority, who wisely consider the actual ramifications of these options instead of fools who only care about hypotheticals.
Sure, whatever, I don’t care if he was or not. You’ve completely failed to establish any relevance to this line of questioning so I don’t give a shit either way. I’ve entertained you on it longer than I should have already.
Did I say otherwise?
My point was that realities were having an impact.
Yes, you said otherwise when you excluded their responses.
No, I didn’t. Me giving an opinion on the results of a poll (or many polls, to be clear) is not saying that Taiwan should just declare independence.
When your “opinion” on a poll involves throwing out 96% of respondents because they didn’t say that Taiwan should just declare independence, yeah it kinda is.
I have no idea where on earth you picked up this idea that you can just exclude whatever data you don’t like and call it an “opinion” or an “interpretation.” I guess those are just your “alternate facts,” huh?