Taiwan is a Province of the PRC

[Beachey]

Taiwan abandoned that claim back in 1991:

While much of this structure remains in place, the authorities on Taiwan in 1991 abandoned their claim of governing mainland China, stating that they do not "dispute the fact that the P.R.C. controls mainland China."

 

As much as I have always disliked Chen Shui-bian, I do think he was right on name "rectification".

 

But what does that statement really mean? Are they not disputing the PRC is the legitimate government of mainland China or are they just not disputing that the PRC has physical control of the mainland which is stating the obvious.

 

Before I came to China I did not understand the Taiwan situation and the more your read about it the more complex it becomes. I learned a little more in this thread.

 

Though I agree with Chen that if Taiwan ever wants to be independent it needs to become the Republic of Taiwan and not the Republic of China.

[knloregon]

"..The reason I think the PRC will use a financial method to force re-unification is because the Chinese don't like risk, their people won't be happy with masses of 'only sons', even in a presumed victory, and the Taiwanese have shown preference for caring more about standard of living issues than pretty much anything else (that's a long story to explain, tho)..."

 

.....and the Taiwanese have shown preference for caring more about standard of living issues than pretty much anything else (that's a long story to explain, tho)..." --AM

 

 

I'll take a stab at it.

 

Since Taiwan became the home of the exiled KMT, two aspects have evolved. Early on, the KMT were the soldiers --- and the military --- much of the reason they had to leave China. (personal history cited earlier) And that continued as the verbal hostilities, and occasional arterially and missile exchanges continued with the mainland into the 1960's (perhaps '70's as well). But as is often the case where ethnic Chinese locate, the KMT (generally well educated) began making more money than the locals----and if you go ALL the way up to the OP, you might garner some of that resentment.

 

Then came Deng, China opened, and cross straights business arrangements took off. Taiwan was the front door for the deals with the west----China was the manufacturer, and the KMT were becoming rich----EVEN as they were sending the next generation---their sons---into the military---a noble pursuit . So today, the Taiwan armed forces are overwhelmingly populated with politically KMT sympathizers, and many from the higher echelons of Taiwan society, and who, also overwhelmingly see themselves as Chinese. (and now, many of them have already visited ancestral homes in China---including some from my church, this summer). But even more importantly, for some of these relatively young military officers---much of their training has taken place in the US.

 

Witness the drama related to the F-16 deal which began in early in the year, but was resolved in September. The central issue (as reported in the liberal press) was not to piss off China by selling to Taiwan brand new F-16's (C/D --- but to rather, upgrade the existing force of older F-16's A/B's with better avionics, but nothing like the C/D's

 

But here's another take on it: What if the Pentagon, in combination with a lot of intelligence have come to the conclusion that the KMT saturated Taiwan military can't be trusted to fully engage and repulse a PRC invasion?

 

Put yourself in the position of the KMT fighter pilot --- trained in the US, his father is rich from trade with PRC, and is probably telling him----"we don't support these independence clowns---DON'T GO UP!" ---he has a wife and (two) young children, and sees his life will probably be wasted in what will likely be the equivalent of the: "Seven Days War" of the middle east.

 

--And that conversation is going on across the spectrum of the KMT dominated military.

 

So how does that F-16 (C/D) "deal" look now? Perhaps we don't want to be in a position where we might be giving the PRC some of our hottest fighters--- parked on the tar-mac.

 

But if this scenario has any accuracy----who in their right mind in the Pentagon ----would ever make the decision to risk even one American military life for such a cause?

[A Mafan]

A Mafan - as usual, your analysis of an issue is thorough and well-reasoned. One thing, however, I wasn't aware of and maybe you can enlighten me a bit. You mentioned that the Dalai Lama invited the PRC in. I wasn't aware of that. And please understand, I am not arguing the point here. I am just seeking clarification. When did he do this?

I'm having a difficult time finding the reference so far. It was about 10 years ago that the Dalai Lama said in an interview that he regretted inviting the Chinese into Tibet, because he was young and too excited about the promise of Communism.

 

Now most of the articles I can find don't even mention the 17-point agreement he signed. Those that do always put it in the context of being a forced agreement.

 

While that actually makes sense, I can't help but feel that history has been scrubbed on this topic to leave an intended impression. It is easy to find many articles about the Dalai Lama expressing his belief in Communism...and then easy to find other hagriography-ish articles that claim those are all PRC propaganda.

 

My understanding was that the Dalai Lama did fall for the glittering "promise" of Marxist Socialism/Communism, and asked the PRC to come in and help his country develop. But then things when the Communists started acting like totalitarians always do, and deeply regretted his naivety.

 

I'll keep searching, but I'm just not sure I can find actual proof.

Thanks for the effort in tracking down sources regarding the Dalai Lama asking the Chinese in. Without a doubt, the history is slanted one way or the other, depending on who is telling the story. I am trying to track down how old the Dalai Lama would have been in 1950. He was fairly young I am sure. I think he remained in Llasa until 1959, and then fled to India. Don't waste any time trying to track down the source. I was just curious as I had never heard that point made before. And Randy, thanks for your posted link. It adds to the perspective and in any case, it seems the Chinese were going to come in, invited or not.

 

*** Note: Just found out the Dalai Lama was born in July 1935, which would have made him 15 in 1950. I wonder to what depth he might have understood Communism at such a tender age??? Also, at age 15 was he actually "in control" of the country, or was there a proxy in charge until he came of age?

I don't know. But by their belief system, he was a reincarnation, and so should be trusted more than the average 15 year old.

 

...unless the Dalai Lama's "handlers" (?) at that time were merely cynically manipulating a 15-yr old boy as part of keeping power in a religious structure they didn't actually believe in...but that seems too cynical by far.

 

Anyway, the way I remember the article was he sincerely regretted the decision to invite them and considered it a mistake due to youthful inexperience. That says something to me.

 

Then again, the idea of the PRC govt saying, "Welcome us in and nothing gets broken, refuse and we come in anyway" seems par for the course for Mao Zedong.

[A Mafan]

But here's another take on it: What if the Pentagon, in combination with a lot of intelligence have come to the conclusion that the KMT saturated Taiwan military can't be trusted to fully engage and repulse a PRC invasion?

 

Put yourself in the position of the KMT fighter pilot --- trained in the US, his father is rich from trade with PRC, and is probably telling him----"we don't support these independence clowns---DON'T GO UP!" ---he has a wife and (two) young children, and sees his life will probably be wasted in what will likely be the equivalent of the: "Seven Days War" of the middle east.

 

--And that conversation is going on across the spectrum of the KMT dominated military.

 

So how does that F-16 (C/D) "deal" look now? Perhaps we don't want to be in a position where we might be giving the PRC some of our hottest fighters--- parked on the tar-mac.

 

But if this scenario has any accuracy----who in their right mind in the Pentagon ----would ever make the decision to risk even one American military life for such a cause?

Please don't take this the wrong way. The tone is nothing but confidence:

The scenario you paint has no accuracy.

 

The number/percentage of Taiwan military that would refuse to fight would be about equal to the number/percentage of US military that refused to report for the Gulf War...some, but extremely few.

 

The Taiwan military is extremely professional. They abandoned the notion of taking back the mainland a while ago...but they take the defense of Taiwan seriously.

 

They worked under Chen Shui-bian about the way the US military does under a US President that detests the US military: for the country, not for the leader.

 

There is a significant Taiwan patriotism, shared by both the Min-nans (the Pan-Green-based ethnicity) and the KMT and Hakka (the Pan-Blue-based ethnicities) for different reasons. But that patriotism results in some pretty impressive self-sacrifice:

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/14/world/la-fg-taiwan-china-spies-20110814

http://www.china-defense-mashup.com/dark-days-for-taiwans-spies-have-arrived.html

 

All that being said, there are absolutely plenty of Taiwan citizens who sell out to the Chinese government for money. It is almost 100% certain that China knows everything about Taiwan's defense plans, locations, readiness, etc. I think this is because there are plenty of people in Taiwan, and in the military, who think it will never come to a shooting war, so why not make some money?

 

But all that means is that if it ever did come to shots being fired, I think some of these "harmless" traitors (they consider their activities harmless and don't consider themselves traitors) would wake up and react with anger, outrage, a feeling of betrayal, and resolve to fight/die for Taiwan against the Chinese aggression.

 

The reason I mentioned the Taiwan military fighting for a President that detests them is that I think that when Chen Shui-bian was at his lowest level of popularity, if China had chosen that moment to attempt a decapitation strike, the Taiwan military would have rallied around the event and would declare independence and fight to the death.

 

The main evidence I have for this is that every time China rattles its sabers (like shooting missiles over Taiwan or into their harbor to try and influence an election), Taiwan votes in a manner that moves them away from the Mainland. The Mainland saber-rattling only caused Chen Shui-bian to end up with a bigger margin of victory (stronger mandate) than any of the projections had him winning by.

 

But anyway, that's just my understanding. It doesn't bother me if anyone disagrees or has contradicting evidence (I don't consider myself infallible, by a long shot!), just don't call me an idiot!

[A Mafan]

Taiwan abandoned that claim back in 1991:

While much of this structure remains in place, the authorities on Taiwan in 1991 abandoned their claim of governing mainland China, stating that they do not "dispute the fact that the P.R.C. controls mainland China."

 

As much as I have always disliked Chen Shui-bian, I do think he was right on name "rectification".

 

But what does that statement really mean? Are they not disputing the PRC is the legitimate government of mainland China or are they just not disputing that the PRC has physical control of the mainland which is stating the obvious.

 

Before I came to China I did not understand the Taiwan situation and the more your read about it the more complex it becomes. I learned a little more in this thread.

 

Though I agree with Chen that if Taiwan ever wants to be independent it needs to become the Republic of Taiwan and not the Republic of China.

It is truly a gordian knot.

 

It gets even more fun when you consider the aspect of Min-nan chauvinism:

 

Basically, Chen Shui-bian is of the Min-Nan ethnicity. They consider themselves the "true" Taiwanese (even though they aren't the mountain aborigines) because they were the first to come from the mainland. Apparently, they preceded the Hakka by less than 100 years, but there you have it.

 

When the Japanese took over, they used the Min-nans to rule the Hakka and aborigines. So the Min-nans like Japan, the Hakka hate them with the same fervor as the KMTs.

 

Which means that most Hakka end up voting pan-Blue, mostly out of dislike for the pan-Green Minnans. But many of the Pan-Green complaints of the KMT/pan-blue take-over and discrimination ignores that the Hakka have integrated with the KMT quite well.

 

But that also has an impact on Taiwan-Japan relations...Japan could/should be Taiwan's best defense against China, but Japan doesn't give Taiwan the time of day...yet the Pan-Greens still fawn/toady on Japan, but the Pan-Blues (unnecessarily, in my view) instigate Japan whenever possible.

[A Mafan]

Anyway, there is almost no PRC and/or Taiwan issue I can't at least see both sides of, even if I lean slightly to one side or the other. Neither side has covered itself with glory, neither side is completely wrong.

 

For fun, if you can understand Chinese, watch "Qian Fu", which is a television serial about the spy game from 1945-1950. It has some humor, has two of the top stars in China right now, and is almost cartoonish in the way it depicts the KMT as corrupt fools...but it also shows how the Communist Party is almost a religion that crushes individuals and individual happiness in its gears.

 

Then watch "Li Ming Zhi Qian", which is another television serial covering the same topic and the same time span. But in this case, it is two men who are as close as brothers, on opposite sides. And the KMT individuals are clever, honorable (although some are not), intelligent...but loyal and committed to a cause just like the Communists are. A much more balanced take, and much more enjoyable because of it.

[knloregon]

"...Please don't take this the wrong way. The tone is nothing but confidence:

The scenario you paint has no accuracy.

 

The number/percentage of Taiwan military that would refuse to fight would be about equal to the number/percentage of US military that refused to report for the Gulf War...some, but extremely few.

 

The Taiwan military is extremely professional. They abandoned the notion of taking back the mainland a while ago...but they take the defense of Taiwan seriously.

 

They worked under Chen Shui-bian about the way the US military does under a US President that detests the US military: for the country, not for the leader.

 

There is a significant Taiwan patriotism, shared by both the Min-nans (the Pan-Green-based ethnicity) and the KMT and Hakka (the Pan-Blue-based ethnicities) for different reasons.

 

"But that patriotism results in some pretty impressive self-sacrifice"

 

----------------------------------------------------

 

Wait a minute AM.

 

You then cite examples: Example # 1: " In the 1980s and '90s, businessmen were recruited by Taiwan's government to collect intelligence on China. Lured by money and thinking it was patriotic, they didn't know the perils of the missions". ---This guy got caught in the 1990's----a very different time between then and now as it elates to the relationship between Taiwan and PRC--and his argument in this article is that he is due---based on his "DEAL"---with the Taiwan gov. --- $630,000 (USD).

 

That supports your point?? > "But that patriotism results in some pretty impressive self-sacrifice"

 

And your second example----that the Taiwanese gov. is largely ABANDONING its mainland espionage program?? ---how does that help your position? --- Can you present something better than that before I accept your assessment of: "The tone is nothing but confidence: The scenario you paint has no accuracy."

 

Two points ---do you think PRC is ABANDONING its Taiwan espionage program? ---and if their spies get caught---do you think they are going to whine about material compensation?? ---true patriotism.

[A Mafan]

"...Please don't take this the wrong way. The tone is nothing but confidence:

The scenario you paint has no accuracy.

 

The number/percentage of Taiwan military that would refuse to fight would be about equal to the number/percentage of US military that refused to report for the Gulf War...some, but extremely few.

 

The Taiwan military is extremely professional. They abandoned the notion of taking back the mainland a while ago...but they take the defense of Taiwan seriously.

 

They worked under Chen Shui-bian about the way the US military does under a US President that detests the US military: for the country, not for the leader.

 

There is a significant Taiwan patriotism, shared by both the Min-nans (the Pan-Green-based ethnicity) and the KMT and Hakka (the Pan-Blue-based ethnicities) for different reasons.

 

"But that patriotism results in some pretty impressive self-sacrifice"

 

----------------------------------------------------

 

Wait a minute AM.

 

You then cite examples: Example # 1: " In the 1980s and '90s, businessmen were recruited by Taiwan's government to collect intelligence on China. Lured by money and thinking it was patriotic, they didn't know the perils of the missions". ---This guy got caught in the 1990's----a very different time between then and now as it elates to the relationship between Taiwan and PRC--and his argument in this article is that he is due---based on his "DEAL"---with the Taiwan gov. --- $630,000 (USD).

 

That supports your point?? > "But that patriotism results in some pretty impressive self-sacrifice"

 

And your second example----that the Taiwanese gov. is largely ABANDONING its mainland espionage program?? ---how does that help your position? --- Can you present something better than that before I accept your assessment of: "The tone is nothing but confidence: The scenario you paint has no accuracy."

 

Two points ---do you think PRC is ABANDONING its Taiwan espionage program? ---and if their spies get caught---do you think they are going to whine about material compensation?? ---true patriotism.

Okay, I can see where that came off schizophrenic.

 

What I was trying to get at was that while there are a few people who aren't willing to risk their lives to maintain Taiwan's de facto independence, there are many, many, many more who are willing to risk life and freedom to do so. There's a lot of history there, from CIA-trained U-2 pilots getting shot down, to Taiwan spies being rounded up on the mainland, to those who lost their lives in some minor skirmishes in the 70s, to those killed injured in shelling the islands close to the Chinese mainland.

 

It may help you to understand I'm seeking unclassified examples that can roughly correspond with somethings I've personally seen but can't discuss.

 

But my confidence in my opinion certainly doesn't preclude anyone's equal confidence in their opposing opinion, or providing examples that contradict what I'm asserting.

 

It's all damn complicated, anyway.

[knloregon]

"...What I was trying to get at was that while there are a few people who aren't willing to risk their lives to maintain Taiwan's de facto independence, there are many, many, many more who are willing to risk life and freedom to do so. There's a lot of history there, from CIA-trained U-2 pilots getting shot down, to Taiwan spies being rounded up on the mainland, to those who lost their lives in some minor skirmishes in the 70s, to those killed injured in shelling the islands close to the Chinese mainland...." --AM

 

Look AM, I think most of us here know ---this is your line of work---so there is an understandable emotional attachment to those who have served, and sacrificed before you. . Not being of a military background, there are things I don't understand about that attachment---but for which---I have huge respect---particularly my VN contemporaries --- And heres another: A guy I go way back with (and who I have mentioned here over the years)---and who has recently retired from American Airlines after almost 30 years (Man, did he time getting out right!) -- But flying out of Reagan International in DC, happened to know, on a professional-- and personal basis---all of the AA crew that died on 911---and their kids . I can't fathom that, and I don't try. But fortunately, our relationship goes back far enough that he opens up.

 

The risk I see, in an assessment of US intelligent officers, too close to fellow officers lost in service, is that---in the cold light of day, they tend to put too much stock in accounts of the past. I don't think anyone, Hillary Clinton on down, at State isn't exhilarated that when Hu gave the generals a little slack rope to play with, to recapture the PLA's glorious history---that they not only pissed off every country in SE Asia, but sent them running closer to the US , and in the case of Burma, may haver precipitated a Sea Change in that country's foreign policy. --and this all in the run-up to the 2012 power change. ---If there is any justice in the world (or China) this should significantly weaken the general's position in the PRC's government going forward.

[griz326]

All this talk about Tibet and Taiwan makes me wish that Tricky Dick and Henry K were still in charge. For some reason, those boys were better than others fiddling with foreign policy.

 

...but Lao Po says, "far away, far away," meaning, "Why does the USA mess with it?" That's a question all of our leaders should be asking all the time.