Conquer Club

As far as you are concerned, is Taiwan a province of PR China or is it an independent country?

Just curious to see how people's attitudes towards this square up with the attitudes on display in the Crimea thread (or threads about other territorial disputes).

Some points to consider:

- the majority of people from Taiwan wish to be recognized as an independent country
- the ruling party of Taiwan (the KMT) used to be the elected government of mainland China, until they were overthrown by an uprising
- although elected, the KMT was rife with corruption
- the policy of Taiwan's administration is that they are the legitimate government of all of mainland China and also Mongolia
- almost every country and organization in the world recognizes Taiwan as part of the PRC

I'll have to consider my vote on this one. In EU4, it is definitely part of my vast Brunei empire. And I'll put down any revolts that try to break it away.

Also, I did know that Taiwan's administration considered themselves the legitimate government of all mainland China. I did not know they also considered themselves the legitimate government of Mongolia.


--Andy

mrswdk wrote:As far as you are concerned, is Taiwan a province of PR China or is it an independent country?

Just curious to see how people's attitudes towards this square up with the attitudes on display in the Crimea thread (or threads about other territorial disputes).

Some points to consider:

- the majority of people from Taiwan wish to be recognized as an independent country
- the ruling party of Taiwan (the KMT) used to be the elected government of mainland China, until they were overthrown by an uprising
- although elected, the KMT was rife with corruption
- the policy of Taiwan's administration is that they are the legitimate government of all of mainland China and also Mongolia
- almost every country and organization in the world recognizes Taiwan as part of the PRC

KMt is only for Americans who don't know the real term Guanmin Dong (GMD). Otherwise in My East Asian History course, Taiwan has been historically part of China Traded with the Japanese, as the Japanese solidified their hold on the Okinawan Islands. Japan had control over Taiwan for quite a long time, but it is mostly inhabited by Chinese people. Though that has been late 1800's to mid 1900's so maybe, the Chinese originally there might be able to claim independence. The GMD however... who knows.

rishaed wrote:KMt is only for Americans who don't know the real term Guanmin Dong (GMD).

You're thinking of Guomin Dang (国民党)

AndyDufresne wrote:Also, I did know that Taiwan's administration considered themselves the legitimate government of all mainland China. I did not know they also considered themselves the legitimate government of Mongolia.


--Andy

Yah. The KMT lost power in mainland China due to the armed uprising by the Communists, so they would say it was an illegitimate seizure of power and that they still have moral authority over the whole country. In a similar vein, Mongolia was Chinese territory until the Communists gave it independence so, in the KMT's eyes, an illegitimate government seized power and then gave away Chinese territory that they had no right to give away.

[quote="mrswdk"]As far as you are concerned, is Taiwan a province of PR China or is it an independent country?
quote]

Both.

PRC's claim to Taiwan is 'legit' enough, and Taiwan is de facto an independent country.

Cop.

Out.

mrswdk wrote:Cop.

Out.

Hm? It's still true. Or did you want me to be contentious by saying, "Taiwan is the rightful territory of the People's Republic of China. The PRC must wrest control of the island from the KMT/whoever gets elected there, so that they can finally recover from this serious loss of face!"?

Taiwan cannot simultaneously have its status set to both 'independent country' and 'province of the PRC'. It is either an independent country being illegitimately claimed by China or it is a province of China currently behaving as if it is a separate entity.

Or, secret third option: there is an ongoing civil war between the CCP and KMT which has yet to be resolved.

mrswdk wrote:Taiwan cannot simultaneously have its status set to both 'independent country' and 'province of the PRC'. It is either an independent country being illegitimately claimed by China or it is a province of China currently behaving as if it is a separate entity.

Or, secret third option: there is an ongoing civil war between the CCP and KMT which has yet to be resolved.

So what if China claims it? It doesn't mean that Taiwan is dependent (I'm still not sure what "dependent nation" means). Taiwan's got a government, its military, and a bunch of people. That's independent enough. With the support of the most powerful nation in the world, Taiwan's independent status is pretty much secured and clear.

And China can call it a province of the PRC because China can simply state that. There's nothing preventing it, and it's not like its territory claim is based on nothing. Their claim is legit enough because Taiwan used to be unified under the various imperial banners of Emperor Whoever of the What Have Not Dynasty (since roughly 1400 AD? I forget).


If there's an ongoing civil war, then why do their officials meet every so often to expand trade between their countries?

Both sets of leaders are simply dodging the question and kicking the ball down the road. Taiwan acts as a separate entity for now, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a question mark hanging over its status. Both parties have over-lapping claims, and eventually it is going to reach a point at which a decision needs to be made.

The fact that Taiwan operates autonomously doesn't mean that Taiwan is automatically a sovereign nation. Hong Kong has its own government, legal system, economy etc., and for all intents and purposes acts separately from the mainland (visitors who are from the mainland even need to get a visa before they can go). However, HK's status is 'part of China', not 'separate country'.

Btw, what reason does the US give for the military protection it gives Taiwan? It just seems a bit contradictory, seeing as US government policy says that Taiwan is a province of PRC.

You appear to be confusing 'has lots of autonomy' with 'is a separate country'.

mrswdk wrote:You appear to be confusing 'has lots of autonomy' with 'is a separate country'.

What is a country without autonomy? I wouldn't call Xinjiang a country.

Taiwan isn't at all like Xinjiang, so...

mrswdk wrote:Both sets of leaders are simply dodging the question and kicking the ball down the road. Taiwan acts as a separate entity for now, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a question mark hanging over its status. Both parties have over-lapping claims, and eventually it is going to reach a point at which a decision needs to be made.

The fact that Taiwan operates autonomously doesn't mean that Taiwan is automatically a sovereign nation. Hong Kong has its own government, legal system, economy etc., and for all intents and purposes acts separately from the mainland (visitors who are from the mainland even need to get a visa before they can go). However, HK's status is 'part of China', not 'separate country'.

Btw, what reason does the US give for the military protection it gives Taiwan? It just seems a bit contradictory, seeing as US government policy says that Taiwan is a province of PRC.

I agree that politicians on either side are reluctant to publicly relinquish territory claims and that Taiwan's future is less certain than Japan's or the US's, but deciding to be indecisive on the issue seems optimal. The issue has great potential for mobilizing nationalist sentiment of either side, so why bother settling the issue? The current strategy seems good enough.

(I don't think the gains of reducing uncertainty offset the costs of potentially mobilizing nationalist sentiment. And who knows, if the PRC has a huge political crisis, the GMD might be able to leverage that to their advantage--maybe even retake the motherland. It's a small chance, but from GMD's point of view, why not keep it open as a possibility?)

Hong Kong lacked a large enough military, conceded to recognizing the UK's returning it to PRC, and failed to secure a military alliance with any powerful country. This explains well enough why it got subsumed into the PRC. Taiwan didn't fall victim to those circumstances, so Taiwan is independent/autonomous/sovereign enough to be its own country. We can banter on about defining these terms, but that's a de jure issue. Regardless, Taiwan is de facto a sovereign country. PRC can't tell it what to do as it can with its 'autonomous' regions like Xinjiang, Tibet, and Southern Mongolia.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

mrswdk wrote:You appear to be confusing 'has lots of autonomy' with 'is a separate country'.

What is a country without autonomy? I wouldn't call Xinjiang a country.

Taiwan isn't at all like Xinjiang, so...

lol. What's Xinjiang got to do with it? I said autonomy does not equal independence (i.e. Taiwan's autonomy does not mean it automatically qualifies as a country).

Btw, what reason does the US give for the military protection it gives Taiwan? It just seems a bit contradictory, seeing as US government policy says that Taiwan is a province of PRC

I'm not highly certain why US foreign policymakers behave as they do, and I'd need to see a source to believe the underlined, but here's a few guesses:

1. Taiwan can be used as leverage versus the PRC. For example, if the PRC publicly bullies Taiwan, the US and its media can print stories about how PRC is a belligerent, so this way US can turn public opinion against the PRC. This helps bolster support for some range of actions which the US might take against PRC expansionism--especially for the 'rocks and reefs' issue. In short, Taiwan can be used as a tool to constrain China's expansionary policies.

2. Taiwan's a profitable trading partner. Why upset that trade network by allowing the PRC to interrupt it--e.g. through a PRC blockade? (I don't think the Taiwanese would give into PRC control as easily as Hong Kong).

3. Taiwan buys US military equipment. This is great for US arms dealers who rent seek for such privileges, and it's another 'good' justification for US bureaucrats to expand/maintain military budgets.

4. International liberalism: "the US must defend democratic, free market nations from the clutches of the bad guys" (or so the rhetoric/idea goes).

mrswdk wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

mrswdk wrote:You appear to be confusing 'has lots of autonomy' with 'is a separate country'.

What is a country without autonomy? I wouldn't call Xinjiang a country.

Taiwan isn't at all like Xinjiang, so...

lol. What's Xinjiang got to do with it? I said autonomy does not equal independence (i.e. Taiwan's autonomy does not mean it automatically qualifies as a country).

see last paragraph:
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=203815#p4460405

Actually, the CCP doesn't use Taiwan as a topic for stirring up nationalist sentiment. It's too risky. What if they get people angry and the public demand a military intervention? The CCP would either have to weasel their way out of it and look horribly weak or would be pushed into attacking Taiwan. The hellfire and brimstone is usually saved for Japan.

Oh, I know how it benefits the US to protect Taiwan. I just wondered what their official justification is (seeing as they are, according to their own policy, encroaching on Chinese territory if they send their military to Taiwan).

mrswdk wrote:Actually, the CCP doesn't use Taiwan as a topic for stirring up nationalist sentiment. It's too risky. What if they get people angry and the public demand a military intervention? The CCP would either have to weasel their way out of it and look horribly weak or would be pushed into attacking Taiwan. The hellfire and brimstone is usually saved for Japan.

Good point, which is why I said, " potentially mobilizing nationalist sentiment."

If domestic issues become extremely difficult, then the PRC might be able to rally support by antagonizing Taiwan. It's very risky, but it might be better than the risk of losing the whole country, and would the US realllllly defend Taiwan by retaliating with nuclear weapons? China makes this possibility greater by expanding its naval capabilities, so that they can better deter US naval retaliation.

But that's the long game, and it's just one card of many, but it's still useful to keep, which is why the PRC shouldn't relinquish its claim on Taiwan.

mrswdk wrote:Oh, I know how it benefits the US to protect Taiwan. I just wondered what their official justification is (seeing as they are, according to their own policy, encroaching on Chinese territory if they send their military to Taiwan).

" US government policy says that Taiwan is a province of PRC"

sauce plz.

An official justification would harp on about free trade, democracy, and credible commitments to the allies/friends of America.

I agree that it operates as a de facto country. The point of this thread is more to determine who has the legitimate claim: the KMT or CCP? Waddya reckon?

As for US policy:

www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35855.htm

The US supports the CCP's policy of Taiwan as part of China.

I cannot answer this question, as FOX News hasn't sent their cue cards in yet.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

mrswdk wrote:Oh, I know how it benefits the US to protect Taiwan. I just wondered what their official justification is (seeing as they are, according to their own policy, encroaching on Chinese territory if they send their military to Taiwan).

" US government policy says that Taiwan is a province of PRC"

sauce plz.

An official justification would harp on about free trade, democracy, and credible commitments to the allies/friends of America.

So, this: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35855.htm

'confirms' what you say while confirming what I said (mainly, the commitment to allies).

Long story short, the US is playing lip service to the PRC's ineffective demands while keeping Taiwan essentially independent. Sure, the paper said, "The United States does not support Taiwan independence," but it doesn't mean that's true, nor is it true that "The US supports the CCP's policy of Taiwan as part of China."

If the US really supported it, they wouldn't have ensured Taiwan's independence from PRC by offering Taiwan military equipment, an alliance, and the nearby threat to the PRC from US fleet (7th fleet, IIRC).

mrswdk wrote:I agree that it operates as a de facto country. The point of this thread is more to determine who has the legitimate claim: the KMT or CCP? Waddya reckon?

As for US policy:

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35855.htm

The US supports the CCP's policy of Taiwan as part of China.

As far as political organization goes, both have a legitimate claim because each belongs to a nationality which has historically sat on the land. Nevertheless, in this case there can be no objectively correct ruler. It's an issue that appeals to a history of underlying violations of people's property rights by various political organizations. CCP says, "CHINA IS OURS," and GMD says, "CHINA IS OURS." Then they fight over other people's property, destroy their stuff, confiscate people's labor (conscription), and eventually this results in an unsatisfactorily split. That about sums it up.

Each side will say they are the sole 'heirs' of China, and of course they'll deny that the other one is because they want all of China for themselves. It's basically a turf war.