NationStates Jolt Archive

Should the world recognize the de-facto independence of Taiwan (RoC), and is it even possible to do so while maintaining relations with China (PRC)?

From the BBC:
UN rejects Taiwan membership bid (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6913020.stm)

Taiwan's bid to join the United Nations for the first time under the name Taiwan, rather than the official title Republic of China, has been rejected.

A UN spokesman said the application had been rejected in line with a 1971 resolution, under which the UN switched recognition from Taiwan to China.

Taiwan, which has tried to join the UN more than 14 times, said it deeply regretted the world body's decision.

China views Taiwan as a breakaway province of the mainland.

Though both have been governed separately since the civil war in 1949, China has vowed to use force if it ever moves towards independence.

The Chinese foreign ministry last week said Taiwan's UN bid was "doomed to failure".

Referendum plans

Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian submitted a letter of application to the UN Secretary General last week, arguing that Taiwan, as the world's 18th largest economy and seventh largest investor, should not be excluded from the body.

Rejecting the application on Tuesday, the UN cited its adherence to the One China policy agreed under the 1971 resolution, which acknowledges Taiwan is a part of China.

Map showing Taiwan and China

Until 1971, the government in Taipei held the UN seat for China rather than Beijing.

Taiwanese Foreign Ministry spokesman David Wang said the government regretted the UN move, saying it had been blocked "for political reasons".

"The 1971 resolution should be reviewed, as it fails to address the question of the right of representation and participation by the Taiwanese people," he said.

The decision to apply to the UN under the title Taiwan for the first time rather than the Republic of China reflects efforts by the independence-leaning President Chen to stress the island's distinctiveness from mainland China, the BBC's Caroline Gluck in Taipei says.

Despite the setback, the government still plans to push ahead with a referendum on joining the UN alongside presidential and legislation elections next year, despite concerns from Washington and Beijing, our correspondent adds.

Of course it was rejected. China is a member of the UNSC, which is the body that has the most power in the UN, to be honest.

Good call, can you imagine the reaction if California applied for UN membership? Come on Kuomintang, you lost, get over it.

I bet you morons also are "liberals" if so then where is your sense of liberty? Taiwan is a seperate country and until people quit trying to force their governments on others who do not want or need them we shall always be in a state of war. It is ok to help others find their road to freedom from tyrany though which i assume you idiots are also against. Keep watching "reality" telivision and stay disconnected from actual reality.:upyours:

They should, but no one will as the PRC will wreak havoc with their economy.

They should, but they can't and won't.

Should the world recognize the de-facto independence of Taiwan (RoC)


Of course it should. Unfortunately the neoliberal capitalist world market has its nose so far up the "communist" tailpipe...the upper ruling class sticks together, democracy or self-determination be damned.

They should, but they can't and won't.

This sums it all up.

...can you imagine the reaction if California applied for UN membership?

False analogy. The Republic of China is not a "state" of China. It is a de-facto independent political system, nevermind a founding member of the United Nations to begin with.

False analogy. The Republic of China is not a "state" of China. It is a de-facto independent political system, nevermind a founding member of the United Nations to begin with.

Also, there isn't exactly a massive Californian independence movement, to my knowledge.

Good call, can you imagine the reaction if California applied for UN membership?
Except that California isn't its own country.

Come on Kuomintang, you lost, get over it.
It's not so much the KMT as it is popular opinion that is against a reunification. The majority of Taiwanese (and that's the only thing that counts, right) is in favour of continuing the status quo.

Oh, and despite risking embarrassing you...the KMT isn't actually in power in Taiwan right now. The DPP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Progressive_Party#Policies) is.

Oh, and despite risking embarrassing you...the KMT isn't actually in power in Taiwan right now. The DPP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Progressive_Party#Policies) is.


Marxism describes a train of historical progression. Sometimes it gets stuck.

Except that California isn't its own country.


It's not so much the KMT as it is popular opinion that is against a reunification. The majority of Taiwanese (and that's the only thing that counts, right) is in favour of continuing the status quo.

Oh, and despite risking embarrassing you...the KMT isn't actually in power in Taiwan right now. The DPP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Progressive_Party#Policies) is.

I was referring to the Nationalists (Kuomintang) having lost the civil war, and now the RoK refusing to become part of the PRC, I mean look at Tibet and Hong Kong, they are benefited amazingly economically for being autonomous regions of China.

Should the world recognize the de-facto independence of Taiwan (RoC), and is it even possible to do so while maintaining relations with China (PRC)?

From the BBC:

In a way the Question sounds similar to should the world recognize
a de-fecto Palestinian state and is it even possible to do so while
maintaining relations with Israel?

I say yes to both Taiwan and a Palestinian State on the West Bank,
The Gaza Strip is now an interesting question, that said we should all
keep in mind this thread is about Taiwan, which I as a native born Cuban anti communist support and admire very much the strenths of thier economy,
and thier more democratic evolution.

I dont want to change the subject of the this Thread, perhaps someone can do a Thread on a Palestinian and Israel defacto state recognition with a Public Poll with one or more options like Other Please Post if it fits the question.

I was referring to the Nationalists (Kuomintang) having lost the civil war, and now the RoK refusing to become part of the PRC, I mean look at Tibet and Hong Kong, they are benefited amazingly economically for being autonomous regions of China.

Thats hilarious.

I was referring to the Nationalists (Kuomintang) having lost the civil war, and now the RoK refusing to become part of the PRC, I mean look at Tibet and Hong Kong, they are benefited amazingly economically for being autonomous regions of China.

The Taiwanese GDP per capita is four times as much as the PRC's. Taiwan does perfectly well on its own, thank you very much.

Tibet might have benefited economically, but it's not the best example to use to rally support for regions joining the PRC...

I was referring to the Nationalists (Kuomintang) having lost the civil war, and now the RoK refusing to become part of the PRC, I mean look at Tibet and Hong Kong, they are benefited amazingly economically for being autonomous regions of China.

In the case of occupied Tibet, that was at the cost of purges, cultural destruction, oppression and imperialism, of course

In the case of occupied Tibet, that was at the cost of purges, cultural destruction, oppression and imperialism, of course

Please accurately source above claims.

And I spose being in a backward agrarian hellhole, being nothing but a serf to the Dalai Lama, in extreme poverty under extreme religious dogma was better than Tibet is now? China brought Tibet out of feudalism and into the future.

Please accurately source above claims.

And I spose being in a backward agrarian hellhole, being nothing but a serf to the Dalai Lama, in extreme poverty under extreme religious dogma was better than Tibet is now? China brought Tibet out of feudalism and into the future.

Oh boy....

According to the 2007 CIA Worldfact Book :

Economy Taiwan Top of Page
Economy - overview:
Taiwan has a dynamic capitalist economy with gradually decreasing guidance of investment and foreign trade by government authorities. In keeping with this trend, some large, government-owned banks and industrial firms are being privatized. Exports have provided the primary impetus for industrialization. The island runs a trade surplus, and foreign reserves are the world's third largest. Despite restrictions on cross-strait links, China has overtaken the US to become Taiwan's largest export market and, in 2006, its second-largest source of imports after Japan. China is also the island's number one destination for foreign direct investment. Strong trade performance in 2006 pushed Taiwan's GDP growth rate above 4%, and unemployment is below 4%. Consumer spending recovered following a slowdown early in 2006, when banks tightened lending to address a sharp increase in delinquent consumer debt.

GDP (purchasing power parity):
$680.5 billion (2006 est.)

GDP (official exchange rate):
$346.4 billion (2006 est.)

GDP - real growth rate:
4.6% (2006 est.)

GDP - per capita (PPP):
$29,500 (2006 est.)

GDP - composition by sector:
agriculture: 1.5%
industry: 25.2%
services: 73.3% (2006 est.)

Labor force:
10.46 million (2006 est.)
Labor force - by occupation:
agriculture: 5.5%
industry: 36%
services: 58.5% (2005 est.)

Unemployment rate:
3.9% (2006 est.)

Population below poverty line:
0.9% (2006 est.)

Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 6.7%
highest 10%: 41.1% (2002 est.)

Inflation rate (consumer prices):
1% (2006 est.)

Investment (gross fixed):
18.4% of GDP (2006 est.)

Budget:
revenues: $67.33 billion
expenditures: $77.93 billion (2006 est.)

Public debt:
34.6% of GDP (2006 est.)

Agriculture - products:
rice, corn, vegetables, fruit, tea; pigs, poultry, beef, milk; fish

Industries:
electronics, petroleum refining, armaments, chemicals, textiles, iron and steel, machinery, cement, food processing, vehicles, consumer products, pharmaceuticals
Industrial production growth rate:
6.5% (2006 est.)

This Page was last updated on July 19, 2007.

Please accurately source above claims.

And I spose being in a backward agrarian hellhole, being nothing but a serf to the Dalai Lama, in extreme poverty under extreme religious dogma was better than Tibet is now? China brought Tibet out of feudalism and into the future.

What did you do, snag that out of the PRC's Book of Catchy Propaganda phrases? Shouldn't you give credit when you do something like that?

Well, we could discuss the rampant destruction of thousands of sites of cultural importance during the Cultural Revolution. If I can recall, some six thousand historic sites were defaced or destroyed by Maoist fanatics during that time period.

Or the detention of nearly a million Tibetans in labor camps over the period of the occupation.

Or the PRC program to, essentially, blot out the Tibetan national identity, by important millions upon millions of Han Chinese (something that is explicitly forbidden by the Geneva convention).

Furthermore, China brought Tibet out of feudalism and into 1806, at best, hardly what I'd call the future.

Please accurately source above claims.

And I spose being in a backward agrarian hellhole, being nothing but a serf to the Dalai Lama, in extreme poverty under extreme religious dogma was better than Tibet is now? China brought Tibet out of feudalism and into the future.

http://hrw.org/doc/?t=asia&c=china

In Tibet, China is building roads, rails and other infrastructure in an attempt to push people into choosing prosperity over religious and cultural identity. Tens of thousands who fled into exile can still cling to their language, culture and religion, but the millions who remain, after years of arrests and killings, have largely been forced into compromise. Many Tibetans believe they are ignored by the international community because their movement was peaceful.

From the first link.

There is also the little matter of the 300,000-1 million Tibetans dead as collateral damage of the Great Leap Foward.

Please accurately source above claims.

And I spose being in a backward agrarian hellhole, being nothing but a serf to the Dalai Lama, in extreme poverty under extreme religious dogma was better than Tibet is now? China brought Tibet out of feudalism and into the future.

You're avoiding addressing the fact that Taiwan is doing fine by itself, without PRC interference. The ROC has already brought itself out of feudalism and into the future, it doesn't need the PRC to take it over.

I'm one of the strongest supporters of the ROC I know and even I have to admit one thing.

TAIWAN IS NOT A COUNTRY.

Just because the majority of territory the ROC controls consists of Taiwan does not make it Taiwan. Calling the ROC Taiwan is as incorrect as calling the UK England, or the USSR Russia.

But this refusal to put the ROC in the UN is ridicolous. If they put both Koreas in, they should put both Chinas in.

And about Tibet: They act as if Tibet is the only part of China that suffered under Communist rule. Every part of China controlled by the Communists suffered greatly, including Tibet.

Should the world recognize the de-facto independence of Taiwan (RoC), and is it even possible to do so while maintaining relations with China (PRC)?

From the BBC:

Yes the world should recognize the de-facto independence of Taiwan. Over a dozen nations have already done so (including Switzerland) and it is time for a complete recognition.

Good call, can you imagine the reaction if California applied for UN membership? Come on Kuomintang, you lost, get over it.

If they lost then there will be one china and not two.

If Taiwan wants independence, they should get it. And if they want it they should do it soon. China's only set to get more powerful, but right now the fear of US intervention and lack of Blue Water capability means they probably wouldn't do shit. Even economically, it would be suicidal for China to cut ties with the West for endorsing Taiwan as a sovereign state. What, and throw out all that trade?

So I say, declare independence unilaterally, Taiwan. When China doesn't invade, the west will recognize you, and we might all end up happy, except for the Communist Chinese.

I was referring to the Nationalists (Kuomintang) having lost the civil war, and now the RoK refusing to become part of the PRC, I mean look at Tibet and Hong Kong, they are benefited amazingly economically for being autonomous regions of China.

You mean the same Tibet that has been ravaged by the Chinese? Where the Dali Lama is banned? The same Tibet that wants to be free from Chinese rule? As for Hong Kong, they pretty much left it alone for the most part which was smart of them to do so.

If Taiwan wants independence, they should get it. And if they want it they should do it soon. China's only set to get more powerful, but right now the fear of US intervention and lack of Blue Water capability means they probably wouldn't do shit. Even economically, it would be suicidal for China to cut ties with the West for endorsing Taiwan as a sovereign state. What, and throw out all that trade?

So I say, declare independence unilaterally, Taiwan. When China doesn't invade, the west will recognize you, and we might all end up happy, except for the Communist Chinese.

Best time to do it would be during the Summer games in Beijing next year.

The PRC has no legitimate claim to Taiwan whatsoever. It should be up to Taiwan what their title, policy, and ultimate relationship with China are considering their status as a sovereign nation.

If Japan used the same justification for its territorial claims as China does for Taiwan, they'd control all of Asia.

I think many have failed to recognize that most residents in Taiwan do not view Taiwan a separate country from China because they still believe (for good reason), that the Republic of China has a far more legitimate claim to all of China than the Communist government. The chance of Taiwan declaring itself independent is equal to the chance of South Korea declaring itself independent of Korea. It's impossible to declare independence from a state you claim!

I think many have failed to recognize that most residents in Taiwan do not view Taiwan a separate country from China because they still believe (for good reason), that the Republic of China has a far more legitimate claim to all of China than the Communist government. The chance of Taiwan declaring itself independent is equal to the chance of South Korea declaring itself independent of Korea. It's impossible to declare independence from a state you claim!

Except that South Korea is an Independent nation. Do they want to see a reunification of Korea? Yes they do. Does Taiwan want to see a reunification with China? That is debatable under current conditions. Same as it is in Korea.

Even economically, it would be suicidal for China to cut ties with the West for endorsing Taiwan as a sovereign state. What, and throw out all that trade?


The CCP has sacrificed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Leap_Forward) the masses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution) for the sake of its own political power (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989) and gluttony before. It can do it again. In the eyes of the CCP, even economic development comes second to maintaining the power of the Party. This is how the authoritarian "mind" works.


So I say, declare independence unilaterally, Taiwan. When China doesn't invade, the west will recognize you, and we might all end up happy, except for the Communist Chinese.

Or all able bodied U.S. males receive a card in the mail from their local activated draft board, in a more likely case. The United States continues to maintain (and/or increase) its military presence in the East Asian theater. Nobody is scared of North Korea.

EDIT: In order for your scenario to have a hope to work, the entire rest of the planet must be behind Taiwan 110%, and willing to back it with military force, before any declaration of independence. The CCP must believe that resisting militarily is to commit suicide outright; crushing dissent isn't so easy when all the tanks are pointed in the wrong (that is correct) direction, after all. At the moment, such support in the international community doesn't even come close to existing (which is entirely bizarre, but the "market will cure everything" economic argument is popular and the almighty dollar speaks louder than anything)

Except that South Korea is an Independent nation. Do they want to see a reunification of Korea? Yes they do. Does Taiwan want to see a reunification with China? That is debatable under current conditions. Same as it is in Korea.

Technically speaking, South Korea isn't actually a nation, it's just a colloquial term used to describe the areas of the Korean peninsula, considered one country by both the ROK and DPRK, that are still under the control of the Republic of Korea.

To assume that the Republic of China is not an independent nation is asinine. And the Republic of China isn't stupid, they wouldn't unify with the mainland when the mainland is still under the oppressive Communist government. They're not going to sign their freedom away. The Republic of China is already a de facto independent nation separate from the People's Republic of China in the same way the ROK and DPRK are independent from each other. While the Communist government stands, reunification will not stand.

And there's a reason the KMT fled to Taiwan. In the event of collapse of Communist power, it would allow the ROC to assert it's legitimacy on mainland. The existence of the Republic of China gives the international world a Chinese alternative to a communist government and an alternative government who claims China (in contrast to the PRC) who does not espouse authoritarian Communism.

You'll be hard-pressed to find citizens of the ROC happy that the KMT had to flee the mainland. There are very few people in the Republic of China who would mind if China was unified under ROC control again. Which is quite possible seeing as the Communist government is quickly losing control of the populace and in event of communist collapse, the Republic of China would be the sole legitimate Chinese government....

Technically speaking, South Korea isn't actually a nation, it's just a colloquial term used to describe the areas of the Korean peninsula, considered one country by both the ROK and DPRK, that are still under the control of the Republic of Korea.

Be that as it may, they have two seperate armies, two seperate governments, recognized borders,different currencies...yep, they are two seperate countries by definition. They even have two different flags.

I do understand what you are saying and a one Korean Republic is desirable. Attaining that though is going to take along time considering both sides are still at war with one another.

To assume that the Republic of China is not an independent nation is asinine. And the Republic of China isn't stupid, they wouldn't unify with the mainland when the mainland is still under the oppressive Communist government.

Samething with the Korean Peninsula.

They're not going to sign their freedom away. The Republic of China is already a de facto independent nation separate from the People's Republic of China in the same way the ROK and DPRK are independent from each other. While the Communist government stands, reunification will not stand.

So what are we arguing about?

And there's a reason the KMT fled to Taiwan. In the event of collapse of Communist power, it would allow the ROC to assert it's legitimacy on mainland. The existence of the Republic of China gives the international world a Chinese alternative to a communist government and an alternative government who claims China (in contrast to the PRC) who does not espouse authoritarian Communism.

Agreed.

You'll be hard-pressed to find citizens of the ROC happy that the KMT had to flee the mainland. There are very few people in the Republic of China who would mind if China was unified under ROC control again. Which is quite possible seeing as the Communist government is quickly losing control of the populace and in event of communist collapse, the Republic of China would be the sole legitimate Chinese government....

It will be very interesting to watch.

It's quite disturbing that many people, even anti-communists are labelling the communist government as the sole government of China. It makes absolutely no sense because it only increases the legitimacy of the Communist government. The Republic of China has been an independent Chinese government since 1912 but many people personally refuse to recognize it as such. It is understandable why governments would not do so officially simply due to economic reasons, but it is not understandable why people, especially anti-communists, would personally and privately still not recognize the legitimacy of the Republic of China to the mainland.

Plus, in all honesty, Taiwan is more Chinese than most of China is. :D

I really do hate the PRC

It is understandable why governments would not...officially [recognize the Republic of China] simply due to economic reasons...

No, actually it isn't.

No, actually it isn't.

Think about it this way. Official recognition is officially nothing. Communist China, with a bit of brinkmanship, has forced many nations to cut off their official relations with the ROC. The PRC will not have relations with any country who recognizes the ROC. The USA does not recognize the ROC officially, but it still has de facto relations and aids it extensively. Official diplomatic recognition is simply a formality and has no actual value. It only allows the Communist Chinese government to feel good. Trade with the PRC is the only way to defeat it because by trading with the PRC, its subjects will grow more affluent, and by extension, more concious, and by extension, will feel more resentment toward the Communist government.

Authoritarian governments will always fall, often peacefully, if the population in it grows affluent and conscious enough. The ROK, ROC, Spain, and Portugal were all authoritarian dictatorships that peacefully gave way to democracy when the population in those nations grew more affluent and distrustful of the government. The rich (by Chinese standards, not American) protestors at Tienanmen Square would have never protested if American trade had never gotten them their riches (which isn't much by American standards, but a lot by Chinese standards.) When people don't have to worry about starving to death, they'll worry about oppressive governments. A Chinese peasant who is starving has his mind set first on food, not on the oppressive government.

Trade with the PRC is the only way to defeat it because by trading with the PRC, its subjects will grow more affluent, and by extension, more concious, and by extension, will feel more resentment toward the Communist government.


Actually, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long seen economic development as a means to increase its power by increasing its legitimacy. This outlook goes all the way back to Mao, after all (people think it was something new with Deng Xiaoping; not really, Mao was just incompetent is all). Besides that, the capitalist business persons and such that are supposed to liberate the PRC have actually been filling up membership positions in, and falling in line to, the CCP. China hasn't actually been communist since the 1970s, possibly even earlier. It's still pretty damn authoritarian, however.


Authoritarian governments will always fall, often peacefully, if the population in it grows affluent and conscious enough. The ROK, ROC, Spain, and Portugal were all authoritarian dictatorships that peacefully gave way to democracy when the population in those nations grew more affluent and distrustful of the government.


Singapore, Saudi Arabia, and China all can be considered evidence to the contrary. EDIT: It is entirely possible to maintain an authoritarian government even in the presence of relatively large wealth and successful market economies (or interaction with [or manipulation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OPEC) of] the international markets). The precarious assumption being made in the capitalist version of socioeconomic determinism described is that those with political/economic power desire to share that power with the rest of the population. They might. But then, they might not. In the PRC, they most certainly do not.


The rich (by Chinese standards, not American) protestors at Tienanmen Square would have never protested if American trade had never gotten them their riches (which isn't much by American standards, but a lot by Chinese standards.)


Tienanmen was just one example. The students have been doing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Character_Poster) their thing since day one, 1949. It doesn't seem to me like it has gotten them very far.

Again, the history of the PRC shows that the CCP places its political survival and dominance at the foremost. Time (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_flowers) and (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_revolution) again (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Wall) it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Shield) has been willing to begin to open up and liberalize, only to crack down again when things go "too far." Economic development only comes second, and will NOT be allowed to proceed unless the primary directive is protected and safe. So long as the international community is willing to cooperate, by bowing to the security and political interests of the CCP in order to maintain economic trade, the CCP will continue to stand it's jackboot on the throats of the people of the PRC.

Marxism describes a train of historical progression. Sometimes it gets stuck.
:D

I was referring to the Nationalists (Kuomintang) having lost the civil war, and now the RoK refusing to become part of the PRC, I mean look at Tibet and Hong Kong, they are benefited amazingly economically for being autonomous regions of China.
The Economist just ran a big special on Hong Kong ten years on. I think it's safe to say that the place is still in good shape despite, not because it joined the PRC. The reason being that Beijing kept out of most things.

Their recommendation was that if HK is to remain prosperous and important, the PRC needs to take steps to allow more democracy (which you value so highly of course and the PRC doesn't allow).

ust because the majority of territory the ROC controls consists of Taiwan does not make it Taiwan. Calling the ROC Taiwan is as incorrect as calling the UK England, or the USSR Russia.
Taipeh doesn't rule the mainland any more than Beijing rules Taiwan. Sorry, but that's the reality of it. Each side can claim the moon for all I care, it doesn't make it true.

I think many have failed to recognize that most residents in Taiwan do not view Taiwan a separate country from China because they still believe (for good reason), that the Republic of China has a far more legitimate claim to all of China than the Communist government.
Proof?

China should just nuke those damn rebs and end it all.

China should just nuke those damn rebs and end it all.

China would be nuked in return.

This discussion makes me think of the two Germanies, BRD and DDR (a.k.a. FRG and GDR, respectively); one democratic state, and one communist state. When the government of DDR fell, the country simply became a part of BRD. Admittedly there were great cultural and economical differences which took some time to overcome - and some of the traces are still visible. The unification was possible because BRD was slightly larger than DDR and an economical powerhouse able to absorb and disperse the Eastern drag.

This has been suggested as a model for reunification of the Korean peninsula, though ROK and DPRK have been separated for much longer than BRD and DDR had been, and the differences between the Koreas are much more profound.

I would hardly be possible to apply that model to ROC and PRC. PRC is freaking huge compared to anything. A Chinese reunification would require that PRC and ROC developed into comparable economies, and of course that they both recognized that they are separate countries before becoming one.


China would be nuked in return.

That is what is called "solving problems". Luckily, there are no adverse effects to nuclear war whatsoever. [/irony]

Taiwan's problem is that it is not some backwards tyrannical filth-hole. Had it been the UN would no doubt have welcomed it with open arms. (As well as most of the west's chattering classes screaming for its inclusion).

The US should support Taiwan again.

But they won't support Taiwan is because Walmart said so.

****ing Walmart.

I hope that China wakes up one day and realizes that Taiwan is really its own nation. It has its own government, military, economy, and every other trapping of a nation-state for over sixty years. And really, China and Taiwan already cooperate in a lot of things. It'd be a silly shame if they let politics get in the way of their relationship.

It's all a game, a dangerous game but a game all the same.

The first part has to do with the issue of face - the CCP has to maintain its aggressive stance towards Taiwan because it was the main unifying plank of their regime in the early days. It was galling to have the KMT sitting in Taiwan, it meant the CCP couldn't claim a complete victory for the people. The CCP can't afford to back down on this because it would question their authority - it's called 'face', or 'mianzi', Asia is a shame-based emotional system as opposed to the western guilt-based emotional system - it would cause great shame to the CCP to back down and they can't afford that.

On the other side it's pretty much the same.

Yet in pragmatic reality, both sides work quite well together and if you don't think there's high-level contact between the two arms of politics and military you'd be mistaken.

Going out on a limb, I've always felt it's been a useful way to gather US military technology - China tends to go aggressive when Taiwan is having trouble closing a buy for US weapons technology but that's a conspiracy theory I hesitate to endorse.

Why did the U.N. switch in 1971? China was hardly a power back then being, as it was, in the thralls of the Cultural Revolution. Could it have been a deal between the US and China over Vietnam? Both in Korea and Vietnam, the real trouble was the hordes of Chinese conscripts providing unlimited manpower to N. Korea/N. Vietnam, which stopped the US from gaining complete victory. Was there a deal whereby the U.N. would switch if China would stop sending their damn troops down to N. Vietnam? Was it something to do with Russia, which China already mistrusted greatly? How come Nixon was able to visit in 1973, was it off the back of that, I'd love to know what was going on in those days behind closed doors.

It's all a game, a dangerous game but a game all the same.

China would be nuked in return.

No.

The Taiwanese GDP per capita is four times as much as the PRC's. Taiwan does perfectly well on its own, thank you very much.

Tibet might have benefited economically, but it's not the best example to use to rally support for regions joining the PRC...

GDP per capita doesn't mean much.

I'm one of the strongest supporters of the ROC I know and even I have to admit one thing.

TAIWAN IS NOT A COUNTRY.

Just because the majority of territory the ROC controls consists of Taiwan does not make it Taiwan. Calling the ROC Taiwan is as incorrect as calling the UK England, or the USSR Russia.

But this refusal to put the ROC in the UN is ridicolous. If they put both Koreas in, they should put both Chinas in.

And about Tibet: They act as if Tibet is the only part of China that suffered under Communist rule. Every part of China controlled by the Communists suffered greatly, including Tibet.

No, there is only one China and the breakaway Taiwan province that thinks it's independent.

It's all a game, a dangerous game but a game all the same.

The first part has to do with the issue of face - the CCP has to maintain its aggressive stance towards Taiwan because it was the main unifying plank of their regime in the early days. It was galling to have the KMT sitting in Taiwan, it meant the CCP couldn't claim a complete victory for the people. The CCP can't afford to back down on this because it would question their authority - it's called 'face', or 'mianzi', Asia is a shame-based emotional system as opposed to the western guilt-based emotional system - it would cause great shame to the CCP to back down and they can't afford that.

On the other side it's pretty much the same.

Yet in pragmatic reality, both sides work quite well together and if you don't think there's high-level contact between the two arms of politics and military you'd be mistaken.

Going out on a limb, I've always felt it's been a useful way to gather US military technology - China tends to go aggressive when Taiwan is having trouble closing a buy for US weapons technology but that's a conspiracy theory I hesitate to endorse.

Why did the U.N. switch in 1971? China was hardly a power back then being, as it was, in the thralls of the Cultural Revolution. Could it have been a deal between the US and China over Vietnam? Both in Korea and Vietnam, the real trouble was the hordes of Chinese conscripts providing unlimited manpower to N. Korea/N. Vietnam, which stopped the US from gaining complete victory. Was there a deal whereby the U.N. would switch if China would stop sending their damn troops down to N. Vietnam? Was it something to do with Russia, which China already mistrusted greatly? How come Nixon was able to visit in 1973, was it off the back of that, I'd love to know what was going on in those days behind closed doors.

It's all a game, a dangerous game but a game all the same.

They switched because they realized that the real China was going to become a very powerful country and a valuable trading partner. And also to piss of the USSR more.



Also, what about the great things the "Taiwanese" did to the indigenous people of Taiwan?

No.

GDP per capita doesn't mean much.

No, there is only one China and the breakaway Taiwan province that thinks it's independent.

They switched because they realized that the real China was going to become a very powerful country and a valuable trading partner. And also to piss of the USSR more.

Also, what about the great things the "Taiwanese" did to the indigenous people of Taiwan?

All opinions expressed here are simply that.

China would be nuked in return.

Thanks for your excellent contribution to this thread.

Translation: NAAAAA MERICA IS BETTER!!!11

No.

Um yes it would.

Thanks for your excellent contribution to this thread.

Translation: NAAAAA MERICA IS BETTER!!!11

Who said anything about the US doing it?

Why must people always insist on forcing down western values upon a culture that doesn't share those values.

There were many really silly remarks but this one just stands out in its sheer ignorance of how world works.



You'll be hard-pressed to find citizens of the ROC happy that the KMT had to flee the mainland. There are very few people in the Republic of China who would mind if China was unified under ROC control again. Which is quite possible seeing as the Communist government is quickly losing control of the populace and in event of communist collapse, the Republic of China would be the sole legitimate Chinese government....

I don't mind Tartar thinking that the chinese people would love the taste of freedom (they although, don't even think its the same kind of freedom like in the west).
I don't mind him hating the CCP (Rightfully so, after many nightmarish campaigns such as the cultural revolution, you would be mad to love it)

What I do mind his absolutly false assumption that people upon mainland china love the ROC. Heck many people make mistakes but this is a very dangereous mistake to make and if western leaders think in the same line then we might aswell press the damn button to launch the nukes.

I shall have to state this clearly: The majority of the Chinese people upon mainlaind China truelly dispise the KMT. With good reason. During the civil war the KMT under chiang kai shek commited numereous violent acts against their own population in their effort to hunt down the communist and other factions opposing them. Compared to the KMT the communist guerrilla's were considered quite chilverous by the rural population.

These acts have since been blown out of poportion with historic propaganda by the current regime for the past generation. There are little or few chinese who would consider Taiwan a legitimate goverment. How on earth can they even begin to accept rule from Taiwan when the majority don't even consider them a valid goverment to begin with? Not even to mention the fact that most people can easily sum up all the crimes the KMT has commited. (Wether they are true or false is entirely moot. What matters is what the population considers to be true).

Then if that the KMT then surely the DDP can rise to the challenge? Indeed...a pro-taiwanese momevent consisting of mostely Taiwanese that dispise the rule of the KMT and their mainland leaders.

Pardon me, but I doubt the mainlanders are going along with this "masterplan".

Who said anything about the US doing it?

Umm, who else would do it? Actually my bet is, if the PRC annexed the RoC, the US would not do anything to provoke a war depending on how long it went on, if the PRC won quickly and occupied the island quickly and by the time the US reacted it was over, I doubt they would risk war with the PRC. Taiwan is no Kuwait and China is no Iraq.

I bet you morons also are "liberals" if so then where is your sense of liberty? Taiwan is a seperate country and until people quit trying to force their governments on others who do not want or need them we shall always be in a state of war. It is ok to help others find their road to freedom from tyrany though which i assume you idiots are also against. Keep watching "reality" telivision and stay disconnected from actual reality.:upyours:

*Pokes the new guy*

You're funny.

Ah, jeez.


GDP per capita doesn't mean much.



Why not? Taiwan has plenty of economic clout for such a small nation. Also, the ROC has a higher Human Development Index, whilst the PRC is beaten by the likes of Libya and Kazakhstan.

Disregarding economics, there is also the little matter that the ROC doesn't steal the damn organs of executed political prisoners.


Also, what about the great things the "Taiwanese" did to the indigenous people of Taiwan?

Lol.

"ZOMG NUKE TAIWAN!"

"The 'Taiwanese' are evil because they committed atrocities against the indigenous Taiwanese!"

Thanks for your excellent contribution to this thread.

Oh, the irony.

Umm, who else would do it?
Well the nervous Neighbors who would be afraid that China was planning on expanding in their direction perhaps? Russia, India. Take your pick.

Umm, who else would do it? Actually my bet is, if the PRC annexed the RoC, the US would not do anything to provoke a war depending on how long it went on, if the PRC won quickly and occupied the island quickly and by the time the US reacted it was over, I doubt they would risk war with the PRC. Taiwan is no Kuwait and China is no Iraq.

You really have no clue as to what would happen if the PRC invaded the ROC. We are obligated, as is Japan, to defend Taiwan if the PRC decided to get cute. Also, China does not have the capacity to invade right now and win a walk before US response to it.

In my opinion, Taiwan should formally declare independence as the Republic of Taiwan one month before the Beijing Olympics. This puts China in a catch-22.

If China attacks Taiwan (I know it will take time to prepare for invasion, but airstrikes are certainly an option), that brings the risk of war with the US. Even if the US doesn't go to war (which it could - the US can't invade China, but the Navy could easily prevent an invasion of Taiwan), it will probably protest by boycotting the Olympics, followed by every country that recognizes Taiwan, and most of America's close allies (Britain & Japan, for instance). Result: China loses major face, its good relations with the West, and quite possibly its navy.

If China doesn't attack Taiwan, it loses some face, and revolutionary movements elsewhere will be encouraged.

It seems to me that China would be better served by working with Taiwan to allow Taiwanese independence on Chinese terms. Perhaps China gets a naval base in Taiwan a la Gitmo?

You really have no clue as to what would happen if the PRC invaded the ROC. We are obligated, as is Japan, to defend Taiwan if the PRC decided to get cute. Also, China does not have the capacity to invade right now and win a walk before US response to it.

Yes we are obligated, but that doesn't mean we would actually follow through with it. I don't have the ability to see into the future, or that much information on the foreign policy of the candidates regarding China, but out of all of them and Bush, only McCain comes to mind when I try to think of who would definately defend Taiwan. I could see everyone else defending Taiwan like Britain and France defended Czechoslovakia (Note : I'm not saying China is Nazi Germany and Jintao is Hitler).

I was referring to the Nationalists (Kuomintang) having lost the civil war, and now the RoK refusing to become part of the PRC, I mean look at Tibet and Hong Kong, they are benefited amazingly economically for being autonomous regions of China.

Gaza and West Bank would also benefit amazingly economically for being autonomous regions of Israel.

Why did the U.N. switch in 1971?

China exploded nuke in 1964 and became a de-facto nuclear state and gate-crashed into the "global order". Everything else (recognition, UN seat, etc) followed soon.

In my opinion, Taiwan should formally declare independence as the Republic of Taiwan one month before the Beijing Olympics. This puts China in a catch-22.

Even better. How about they do it one minute after the leader of China declares the games open. :D

If China attacks Taiwan (I know it will take time to prepare for invasion, but airstrikes are certainly an option), that brings the risk of war with the US. Even if the US doesn't go to war (which it could - the US can't invade China, but the Navy could easily prevent an invasion of Taiwan), it will probably protest by boycotting the Olympics, followed by every country that recognizes Taiwan, and most of America's close allies (Britain & Japan, for instance). Result: China loses major face, its good relations with the West, and quite possibly its navy.

Indeed.

If China doesn't attack Taiwan, it loses some face, and revolutionary movements elsewhere will be encouraged.

Pretty much.

It seems to me that China would be better served by working with Taiwan to allow Taiwanese independence on Chinese terms. Perhaps China gets a naval base in Taiwan a la Gitmo?

Hmmm. *gives that some thought*

Yes we are obligated, but that doesn't mean we would actually follow through with it. I don't have the ability to see into the future, or that much information on the foreign policy of the candidates regarding China, but out of all of them and Bush, only McCain comes to mind when I try to think of who would definately defend Taiwan. I could see everyone else defending Taiwan like Britain and France defended Czechoslovakia (Note : I'm not saying China is Nazi Germany and Jintao is Hitler).

You mean Poland. France and Germany sacrificed Czechoslovakia. Remember Chamberlain's speech about peace in our time?

I believe thats was intended in the sense that other nations would preach peace and saving their own hides with regards to a possible PRC invasion.

Possibly but in the case of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, the neighboring nations will not like it, especially Japan.

You mean Poland. France and Germany sacrificed Czechoslovakia. Remember Chamberlain's speech about peace in our time?

I believe thats was intended in the sense that other nations would preach peace and saving their own hides with regards to a possible PRC invasion.

Also many people here seem to underestimate the wish of a considerable part of taiwan to persue reunification. Although this will remain in the realm of fantasy as long as the CCP remains firmly in the seat of power, many "Taiwanese" still feel closely linked to their original chinese identity.

Many Taiwanese people that I've met feel a mixture of fear, but also alot of pride in China's rapid rise as an economical power.

Despite it all, Taiwanese culture is essentially if not entirely identical to Chinese culture.

Do not assume to think that you know what the Taiwanese people want. They are more ambigeous about the seperation issue than most western people think. Which brings up the question if the majority of the Taiwanese even want complete seperation.

That's crazy. The ROC should be admitted to the United Nations.

That's crazy. The ROC should be admitted to the United Nations.

We all know that except for a few socialist fundamentalists on this forum but China has veto power on the UNSC

China exploded nuke in 1964 and became a de-facto nuclear state and gate-crashed into the "global order". Everything else (recognition, UN seat, etc) followed soon.

Well you can't exactly say 22% of human population doesn't exist because of their governments ideology, which is exactly what alot of conservative governments at that time wanted to do.

That's crazy. The ROC should be admitted to the United Nations.

Well saying that the RoC is just another country is a misconception, the real issue with it and the PRC is that the RoC claims sovereignty over mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau, even though that is de facto PRC sovereignty which was recognized by the UN. The RoC effectively claims that they are the only China, and obviously the PRC has issue with this, and the world obviously agrees that the PRC is the only legitimate Chinese state. If the RoC were to do away with their ideas of Chinese statehood and sovereignty, and just call themselves the Republic of Taiwan, Pescadores, the Matsu Islands, and Kinmen, or just the Republic of Greater Taiwan, and disregard all claim to mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau, then the PRC might soften it's tone and consider UN recognition.

Well saying that the RoC is just another country is a misconception,

Except to the 24 nations who officially recognize it as a seperate country so no it is not a misconception at all.

Strike one

the real issue with it and the PRC is that the RoC claims sovereignty over mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau, even though that is de facto PRC sovereignty which was recognized by the UN.

Oh and Taiwan (AKA RoC) no longer claims mainland China

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."

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/world/taiwan.htm

Strike two

The RoC effectively claims that they are the only China, and obviously the PRC has issue with this, and the world obviously agrees that the PRC is the only legitimate Chinese state.

Read above. They do not claim the People's Republic of China nor do they claim that they are the one and only China.

If the RoC were to do away with their ideas of Chinese statehood and sovereignty, and just call themselves the Republic of Taiwan, Pescadores, the Matsu Islands, and Kinmen, or just the Republic of Greater Taiwan, and disregard all claim to mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau, then the PRC might soften it's tone and consider UN recognition.

They would never consider recognition as the PRC claims to have full soveriegnty over Taiwan. Why soften that stance?

Strike three. You are out.

Your are full of crap Lancaster and you know it.

Your are full of crap Lancaster and you know it.

Prove me wrong then.

Your are full of crap Lancaster and you know it.

Wow, okay.

Can we get an intelligent response, not just insults?

Wow, okay.

Can we get an intelligent response, not just insults?

When AP's posts gets slammed, this is what he does.

The civil war gave PRC sovereignty over all that is China, including Taiwan and surrounding islands, Britain gave us Hong Kong to the PRC and not the RoC remember.

The civil war gave PRC sovereignty over all that is China, including Taiwan and surrounding islands, Britain gave us Hong Kong to the PRC and not the RoC remember.

Okay? The RoC claimed and held onto ownership of Taiwan.

The civil war gave PRC sovereignty over all that is China, including Taiwan and surrounding islands, Britain gave us Hong Kong to the PRC and not the RoC remember.

Are you ignorant of history? The deal was made with China long before the Communist revolution. So to say it was given to the PRC and not the RoC is rather inaccurate to make because the RoC DID NOT exist yet.

Hong Kong was a Crown Colony of the United Kingdom from 1842 until the British Nationality Act 1981 was passed. As a result of that act Hong Kong then became a British dependent territory. In 1997 a transfer of sovereignty returned Hong Kong to the People's Republic of China. The Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic Law of Hong Kong stipulate that Hong Kong operate with a high degree of autonomy until at least 2047, fifty years after the transfer. Under the policy of "one country, two systems", the Central People's Government is responsible for the territory's defence and foreign affairs, while Hong Kong maintains its own legal system, police force, monetary system, customs policy, immigration policy, and delegates to international organisations and events.

Now that we have that part settled, I bet you will find this even more entertaining.

In 1839, the refusal by Qing Dynasty authorities to import opium resulted in the First Opium War between China and Britain.[7] Hong Kong Island was first occupied by British forces in 1841, and then formally ceded from China under the Treaty of Nanking at the end of the war. The British established a Crown Colony with the founding of Victoria City the following year. In 1860, after China's defeat in the Second Opium War, the Kowloon Peninsula south of Boundary Street and Stonecutter's Island were ceded to Britain in perpetuity under the Convention of Peking. In 1898, Britain obtained a 99-year lease of the adjacent northern lands and Lantau Island, which became known as the New Territories.

WOW!!!

Now prove that Taiwan claims Hong Kong.

There is only one China and that is the Republic of China and the illegitimate Communist forces in control of the mainland.

According to Taiwan, there is two. They recognize the PRC on the mainland.

There is only one China and that is the Republic of China and the illegitimate Communist forces in control of the mainland.

False analogy. The Republic of China is not a "state" of China. It is a de-facto independent political system, nevermind a founding member of the United Nations to begin with.

yeah they can call themselves whatever they want, and while they're at it they want you to refer to their hookers as public servants. :p

[QUOTE=Neu Leonstein;12903354]Except that California isn't its own country.




Vatican city is though. ;)

Why must people always insist on forcing down western values upon a culture that doesn't share those values.

There were many really silly remarks but this one just stands out in its sheer ignorance of how world works.

I don't mind Tartar thinking that the chinese people would love the taste of freedom (they although, don't even think its the same kind of freedom like in the west).
I don't mind him hating the CCP (Rightfully so, after many nightmarish campaigns such as the cultural revolution, you would be mad to love it)

What I do mind his absolutly false assumption that people upon mainland china love the ROC. Heck many people make mistakes but this is a very dangereous mistake to make and if western leaders think in the same line then we might aswell press the damn button to launch the nukes.

I shall have to state this clearly: The majority of the Chinese people upon mainlaind China truelly dispise the KMT. With good reason. During the civil war the KMT under chiang kai shek commited numereous violent acts against their own population in their effort to hunt down the communist and other factions opposing them. Compared to the KMT the communist guerrilla's were considered quite chilverous by the rural population.

Pardon me, but I doubt the mainlanders are going along with this "masterplan".

To say Chinese people do not deserve the ability to choose their government or the ability to say what they want is disgusting.

I was born in Shenyang, one of the largest industrial cities in China. Does that mean I don't deserve rights or freedoms?

Who unified China under one strong government? The KMT. Who threw off 350 years of Manchu oppression? The KMT. (I'm ironically saying this as a Manchu...). Who brought China out of 4000 years of lagging behind the rest of the world and into modernity? The KMT. Who fought off Fascist Japan while the Communists were backstabbing China and leaving it to Fascist Japanese hands? The KMT. Who chased off foreign imperialists from China? The KMT. Who fought against Communist totalitarianism and Soviet imperialism? The KMT.

Just because some uneducated segments of Chinese society have been brainwashed by Communist propaganda doesn't mean Chinese people don't deserve rights like you do. Universal human rights are universal. They are for all humans. And contrary to what you may think, yes, we do count as humans.

And yes, the KMT committed violent acts. Shooting a Japanese rapist coming out Nanjing is violent. Shooting a Communist murderer is violent. Unifying China is violent. Modernity is violent.

1949 was clearly the worst year in Chinese history. It doomed all of China (except KMT-controlled Taiwan), to 58 years and counting of Communist oppression. It sealed the fate for a hundred million people who would perish under Communist rule. It sealed the fate for 4000 years of Chinese culture which would be smashed, raped, and murdered during the Cultural revolution.

Admitted, the amount of Chinese in the PRC not effected by Communist propaganda is still a minority, but a strongly growing minority. As technology (like the internet), education, and affluence becomes more widespread, more Chinese become conscious of the oppressive government looming over the vast majority of China. It's only a matter of time before the Blue Sky with a White Sun flies over all of China again, the way it should be.

Also, there isn't exactly a massive Californian independence movement, to my knowledge.

It exists, but is limited to, as the almighty Wiki says, "web groups and apparel"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Californian_independence

According to Taiwan, there is two. They recognize the PRC on the mainland.

No. The Republic of China and People's Republic of China do not recognize each other. The Republic of China merely said it would not try to challenge Communist authority on Mainland China. Which makes sense, a nationalist liberation of Mainland China would...probably...fail.

There is only one China and that is the Republic of China and the illegitimate Communist forces in control of the mainland.

Ohhhh, you don't like Communism, poor you.

If I were the Republic of China, I'd be glad to have been rejected for membership in the UN. It is stupid to give up your sovereignty to a wannabe world government.

If I remember correctly, I read somewhere that the Taiwan Independence people merely want independence so that they can reunify the ROC with Japan, against the wishes of the vast majority of their population.

However, the best solution is to permit each and every person on the planet to secede from their government and to become sovereign in their own right. Only then can we avoid disputes like the one in China.

In my opinion, Taiwan should formally declare independence as the Republic of Taiwan one month before the Beijing Olympics. This puts China in a catch-22.

If China attacks Taiwan (I know it will take time to prepare for invasion, but airstrikes are certainly an option), that brings the risk of war with the US. Even if the US doesn't go to war (which it could - the US can't invade China, but the Navy could easily prevent an invasion of Taiwan), it will probably protest by boycotting the Olympics, followed by every country that recognizes Taiwan, and most of America's close allies (Britain & Japan, for instance). Result: China loses major face, its good relations with the West, and quite possibly its navy.

If China doesn't attack Taiwan, it loses some face, and revolutionary movements elsewhere will be encouraged.

It seems to me that China would be better served by working with Taiwan to allow Taiwanese independence on Chinese terms. Perhaps China gets a naval base in Taiwan a la Gitmo?

Not bad. I like it. :)

Not bad. I like it. :)

Or they could also blockade and starve Taiwan, or atleast sanction an economic embargo enforced with force.

... nevertheless I support Sun Yat-sen's Kuomintang ideology,... so, meh.

Kuomintang doesn't really have an ideology, it's basically 'we don't like communism' and that's it.

Kuomintang doesn't really have an ideology, it's basically 'we don't like communism' and that's it.

Bah.


Political ideology :

Three Principles of the People,
Conservatism,
Anti-communism,
Centre-right,
Chinese nationalism,
Chinese reunification.


What's a Three Principles of the People you say?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Principles_of_the_People

Ohhhh, you don't like Communism, poor you.

Why poor?

(Not to mention the fact that the poor are supposed to support communism :) )

AP, I am waiting for your response to being schooled.

Taiwan will never be free as long as china is playing power politics.

this is but example #852398623462 of how all government is inherintly bad :>

Should the world recognize the de-facto independence of Taiwan (RoC), and is it even possible to do so while maintaining relations with China (PRC)?


No it isn't, because the PRC breaks off diplomatic relations with any country that recognises the RoC.

As an amusing sidenote, China and Taiwan have been "battling" for diplomatic support among the Pacific Islands, and several of the latter have a history of switching diplomatic allegiance back and forth depending on which of the two offers them most financial or infrastructural aid.

Of course Taiwan should be recognised as independent if a majority of its people want it that way. Unfortunately, the PRC has more than enough power to impose the One China policy on the rest of the world.

Who fought off Fascist Japan while the Communists were backstabbing China and leaving it to Fascist Japanese hands? The KMT.

Rewriting history won't get you very far. :rolleyes:

Ever read La Condition Humaine?

Or they could also blockade and starve Taiwan, or atleast sanction an economic embargo enforced with force.

Or you know, the Taiwanese people would immediately vote out the government that did it since support for a Republic of Taiwan is rather low. The vast majority of Taiwanese support the status quo until future notice. That future notice probably being when the PRC becomes either democratic or collapses. (With basically means the same thing, the CCP losing power.)

Rewriting history won't get you very far. :rolleyes:

Yes, the Communist attempt to rewrite history has been greatly discredited. It has been recognized in almost all historical circles that the KMT did almost all of the fighting. The KMT fought every single major battle and took all of the losses. The only reason the CCP could win the Civil War is because the NRA was weakened because the CCP just sat back as they fought the Japanese. The NRA took all of the losses because they did all of the fighting. It was Communist subversion and destabilization of the Chinese state that weakened China to the point where it could simply be invaded almost successfully by Japan. According to both Japanese, Soviet, American, and Nationalist sources, the CPC played a minimal role in fighting the Japanese. Any other lcaim is simply Communist propaganda and bullshit, bullshit that the Communist government has been trying to brainwash its people with for decades.

Yes, the Communist attempt to rewrite history has been greatly discredited. It has been recognized in almost all historical circles that the KMT did almost all of the fighting. The KMT fought every single major battle and took all of the losses. The only reason the CCP could win the Civil War is because the NRA was weakened because the CCP just sat back as they fought the Japanese. The NRA took all of the losses because they did all of the fighting.

Actually you might want to actually study up abit. Both sides were fighting the Japanese. The reason the Communist won the civil war was because of Chang Ki Check's idiocy.

And I see that Andaras decided to give up. He has not yet responded to discredit my posts. Typical.

Actually you might want to actually study up abit. Both sides were fighting the Japanese. The reason the Communist won the civil war was because of Chang Ki Check's idiocy.

Shooting blindly once at a side every three years does not count as fighting. If the Communists did fight, it was absolutely minimal. Even the smallest battles of the Chinese Communists have been proven as myths. Every single major battle was fought by KMT forces, the KMT took effectively all of the losses. The Japanese considered the KMT their only real enemy and exclusively bombed KMT-controlled areas, completely bypassing CPC areas. Third party scholars and Nationalist scholars have both agreed that the Communists played a minuscule involvement in the war against the Japanese compared to the Nationalists and used guerilla warfare as well as illegal opium sales to preserve its strength for a final showdown with the Kuomintang. Though Chiang Kai-shek was not a military genius like Mao was (the only really good thing about Mao), to call him an idiot is preposterous. His defence of China was quite competent though subverted by warlords and and what not.

Shooting blindly once at a side every three years does not count as fighting. If the Communists did fight, it was absolutely minimal.

So I guess I should just ignore all of history that states that Communist Forces and the Republic Forces had an alliance? I should ignore the guerrila actions that the Communist forces used to assist in defeating the Imperial Japanese Forces? Minimal my butt. Or how about some of the KMT actually helping the Imperial Forces of Japan? And let us not forget where Japan was fighting. They were nowhere near the Communist strongholds even though Communist forces did harass supply lines of the Japanese.

Every single major battle was fought by KMT forces, the KMT took effectively all of the losses.

Not quite true but pretty damn near it.

The Japanese considered the KMT their only real enemy and exclusively bombed KMT-controlled areas, completely bypassing CPC areas.

And yet, their invasion route took them away from Communist controlled areas. One has to look at that. Let us also look at the fact that the CPC let Japan control the entire Northern part of China.

Third party scholars and Nationalist scholars have both agreed that the Communists played a minuscule involvement in the war against the Japanese compared to the Nationalists and used guerilla warfare as well as illegal opium sales to preserve its strength for a final showdown with the Kuomintang.

Indeed but let us not underestimate the importance of Guerilla warfare.

Though Chiang Kai-shek was not a military genius like Mao was (the only really good thing about Mao), to call him an idiot is preposterous. His defence of China was quite competent though subverted by warlords and and what not.

And his book. His book did far more damage to the KMT than the warlords did.