I am surprised that there are some common misconceptions in this article, so I guess I will write a brief reply on this matter.
First of all, it is clear that the PLA will invade ROC soon despite the ROC refuse to be ruled by the CCP, which will trigger a military response from Japan and the US, and I expect this will happen in April 2024 under normal circumstances as Xi has implied he wish to have another purge within the CCP again.
Two, Major General Chenghu Zhu has said before that if the US intervenes the in the Taiwan invasion, the PLA should deploy nuclear weapons to the west cost of the US.
Three, history has told us the America has be a long supporter of the modernisation of China. From grant US citizenship for Dr. Yat-sen Sun to shelter him to using the Boxer Indemnities on education in China. America has a long history to assist the country to develop itself, no to mention the CCP has self-sabotaged its chances by implementing the one child policy that doom its demographic structure.
Four, I am surprised that you adapt a very CCP nationalistic view on the Yuanmingyuan. Have you asked yourself why the join expedition force decided not to ransack the Forbidden City instead? Surely once they entered Peking, with the emperor fled, it is possible for them do so. The issue was the POWs were subjected to inhumane treatment by Qing government, and the ransack of the Yuanmingyuan was used as the warning to the Qing government. Also, I am glad majority of the treasures were shipped overseas as I can’ti magine what could have happened during the Cultural Revolution.
Throughout the last four decades, the strategy of Henry Kissinger has be tried and failed, and we have let down not only the ROC, The British Chinese in Hong Kong, and now towards our own people and system. I have no problem in engagement policy , but we shouldn’t sell our soul and let our own people down as.
I respectfully disagree with quite a bit of what you write.
Firstly, China will not be invading Taiwan before 2030, the priority domestically is to resuscitate the economy and growth. Invading Taiwan would hurt China far more than could credibly be deemed acceptable within decision making circles. China is highly dependent on the international trade system, they really won't risk it to invade Taiwan. The only exception would be if Taiwan did something incredibly foolish like declare independence (which they won't)
Secondly, it is entirely unacceptable for the USA to be intervening in Taiwan, given that it is part of China. The current status quo between the Peoples Republic of China and the Republic of China is best - and can only credibly peacefully - be resolved through a diplomatic solution driven by the two parties. To quote Kissinger, the only thing more terrifying than being an enemy of the USA is being its ally, in this vein it's clear that the best thing the US can do is support the maintenance of the status quo (i.e. one China principle)
Thirdly, American support for Chinese modernisation ignores the unequal treaties and the 'open door' policy Washington was happy to promote. Sort of self serving and giving with one hand and taking with the other. Let's not exaggerate the nobility of US foreign policy interests here.
Fourthly, the destruction of the Summer Palace was and is entirely unjustifiable - as was the opium wars themselves. It represents a real mark of shame on British history that we did those terrible things. If we hadn't undermined Qing China so spectacularly in the mid to late 19th century there would not have been to CCP or cultural revolution (and it's idiotic rejection of the 'four olds'). We created the imagined monster we now apparently are supposed to fear.
I remain of the opinion, we must cooperate with China, work constructively with them where we can (trade, global economy, rules based order, anti-poverty fight and protecting the environment). Disagree where we must, but doing so respectfully and as constructive criticisms.
I guess I will try to provide some counter arguments here in this reply.
First, CCP will invade ROC earlier than that. The economic situation wasn’t the key question at all. A very good reminder that most of the western pundits believe it was impossible for the CCP to participate in the Korean War as they just manage to establish a government and still struggling to stabilise the whole country in 1950, and we all knew what happen in 1950. The key question here is whether Xi can concentrate his power by adapting a war time status and force other factions to listen to his command. We have seen the first indication of the PLA is stepping up on their preparations of the invasion as the PLA air force has reposition themselves to Fujian as there are lots of videos online to highlight the sharp increase of the high amount of sonic boom from aircrafts noticed by the local residences.
Secondly, the trouble is the CCP wish to change the status quo here, as they wish to us the military to force the ROC to under its control. Thus, the only way for the status quo to remain is for the US and Japan to military intervene here.
Third, I never said the US has no self-interest, but my point is the American contribution towards the modernisation of China is more than gain the US has received via the open-door policy. Not to mention the open-door policy is in fact helping the Chinese to level up their own knowledge as well. The trouble is most of the Chinese and their current nationalist historic view refuse to admit they were behind the west back then, unlike Japanese who embrace and celebrate it. Also, unequal treaty is another myth, as a very good reminder the first unequal treaty signed by the Qing government since they have the full control of China is the Treaty of Nerchinsk, as the Qing government took a huge advantage from Russia, but the CCP never said that in their history as it doesn’t fit their narrative.
Finally, I believe the destruction of Yuanmingyuan might be an overreaction, but certainly wasn’t as damaging as you argue. Not to mention the Opium Wars itself was come the unequal treatment of import opium as the Qing government was only targeting imported opium and had a very soft hand on the home-grown opium, which is much higher than the amount of the imported opium. I don’t believe the CCP will not rise to the power even if the western powers decide to take a soft approach on Qing unless the October Revolution never happened.
Thanks for your quick reply, and I certainly try my best to maintain our discussions in a respectful manner, at least I hope you believe I’m 😊.
Sorry for the late reply (was too late last night and I had work this morning).
To respond to your (excellent) points.
China will seek to apply pressure on Taiwan but it will fall short of outright invasion this side of 2030 and for many good reasons. For one thing, China’s export markets are drying up in Europe and the United States. If we couple this with the very serious Chinese real estate crisis deepening further its hardly the backdrop to launch a major invasion. The World Bank and the IMF are predicting a gloomy economic growth outlook of 1.7 percent and 2.7 percent respectively, the immediate key priority for the Chinese leadership is not to use force in the Taiwan Strait but to strengthen the economy.
I fully admit a key goal for Xi's "national rejuvenation" is reunification of China, but he will apply bellicose language and seek to coerce Taipei rather than risking invasion. Put simply, the CCP's claim to popular support is entirely based on their success in improving living standards and driving forward economic development, they simply can't risk this for the sake of invading the Taiwan.
Further, Xi can witness the Ukraine debacle playing out for Putin. Xi would only risk invading Taiwan if he was *sure* it would be a short brief operation guaranteed to be successful. Invading the island of Taiwan is by far a riskier and harder military ask than invading Ukraine. Beijing will pause for thought given they are still struggling to escape Xi's zero-covid lockdown policy errors (remember, the CCP mishandled lockdown so badly it led to unprecidented popular revolt on the streets. I wrote about that in an article here after talking with some former students: https://deanmthomson.substack.com/p/china-at-a-crossroads-understanding)
As for US involvement with China, the motivation is self-interested and also built on entirely false premise. Washington wanted to develop CHina and open up its economy a) to get as much out of it as possible for US business and
b) they assumed - entirely wrongly - that a liberalised Chinese economy would somehow automatically mean a liberalised political sphere. But as I point out in my article above this was *always* an entirely false premise. A 5000 year old civilisation has no interest in being lectured to by a 250 year old republic with sclerotic internal politics. Equally, when China was weak the west didn't come helping, we went to victimise them. To the Chinese mind the priority is strength, internal harmony and social betterment to avoid ever experiencing the 'century of national humiliation' again. Beijing simply doesn't interpret US contributions toward modernising in the same way. And this is understandable I'd argue.
I'm enjoying the conversation and hope you have the time to reply to my points! :D
That’s all right, as you and I aren’t full time here, so I can certainly understand that 😊
First, I believe we can all agree the PRC’s economic situation is dire and Xi’s claim on improving the living standards was rebuked in 2020 by his former prime minister Keqiang Li when Li said, ‘There are 600 million people in the PRC have less than 1000 RMB (around 146 USD) per month’.
Also, there is no doubt that the Ukraine War has a huge implication of the invasion of Taiwan, and the PRC will face a military disaster if the PLA does invade. For example, the sinking of Moskva is a huge blow to the Eastern Fleet of the PLA, the one that is supposed to be the key naval force for Taiwan invasion, as the whole fleet is using the same defence system as the Moskva.
Despite that, we have seen more indicators that the PRC is gearing up for the invasion. A few weeks ago, all two communication cables connect Taiwan and Matsu Islands were cut off by the ships from the PRC, which means it is impossible for any civilian communication between the islands and mainland Taiwan. It is very rare for all the cables lost at the same time, and I believe it is likely that the PRC wish to test the reaction of the islands and evaluate the military capabilities to communicate with the Taiwan headquarters.
The point I’m trying to raise is Xi’s decision mindset is based on whether he can have a firm grip of the party and the government machine if he presses for invasion. By allowing the war time status, this will enable him to force all the sections of the party and the society to under his control.
I’m fully aware of the White Paper Movement and the recently White Hair Movement as well, but it is clearly that some of the anti Xi factions within the CCP are not pulling all the levers. Otherwise, under the grid stabilising system, it is very easy for the government to stop it completely. I believe the anti Xi factions in the CCP is racing against the time to create revolution to the ordinary people that aren’t happy with Xi to topple Xi before the Taiwan invasion.
For the US involvement in China, I was mainly referring to the pre 1949 era, and in fact I’m against the US to establish diplomatic relationship with the PRC and Clinton’s decision on trade and WTO.
Also, I believe it is wrong for any country to believe that because of its rich history, they can refuse to be lectured by others when others are clearly better than yours. Make no mistake, I’m not saying China should copy everything from the West, things like Chinese medicine, painting, art etc are great things that should be preserve, but it is wrong for a country to not to put one’s ego aside and learn what they are clearly lack such as rule of law and democracy.
Not to mention throughout history, Chinese imperialism and expansionism is heavily rely on the weakness of the neighbours, and the lost towards the West in the 19th century was hardly the most humiliating one. A very good reminder that Qing government was a foreign government that rule the Han Chinese and the CCP was set up by USSR agents. It is a bit rich for them to claim as a victim of the century of national humiliation as this is only a narrative of the CCP to fit its own agenda.
I’m enjoying our discussion as well and I look forward to your reply when you are free to do so 😉
My initial Chinese experience in 1986 included being berated ,sino-style,by a senior,MIT educated,CNOC official on the inherent superiority of the 6000 year old ‘Chinese’ culture.What I felt then was similar to how I feel on home territory,whenever I experience over zealous ,emotional accounts of Scottish or Irish history.Namely, that this is history in the service of political justification rather than truth.For example,’Kingdom of Characters’ by Jing Tsu recounts and highlights the salience of the fact that the Qing empire did not begin to establish a standard language until after the 1911 rebellion.Elsewhere I have read that after establishment of PRC only the intervention of no less a character than Uncle Joe curtailed Mao’s intention to ditch Chinese characters altogether.This tale in particular,at the very least, suggests caution in the wholesale consumption of the 6000 yrs coherent polity myth preferred by the voice of Chinese nationalism.
Your article contains much of interest.However,I feel you do a disservice to the nature of Western concerns.Very few people now believe that the West’s concerns are nested primarily in human rights or the delusion that an economically successful China inevitably thirsts to fall in line philosophically or politically with the west. The infiltration of the West’s academic & scientific institutions enabled by projects and deals brokered by naïve University Chancellors without benefit or referral to our Intelligence services has been careless in the extreme .See,for example,Ian William’s account of interference & intellectual theft in ‘Every Breath You Take’.Xi’s increasingly bellicose rhetoric ,concerns arising over maritime appropriation and imperial expansionism in the South China Seas are appropriate.The threat to western trade presented by joint Sino-Russian monopoly of sea routes (Pacific+Antarctic) are real .The Belt and Road Initiative with it’s concommitant financial deals have caused pain and detriment to many countries and deserve comparison with wrongs arising from our Imperialist era.Xi’s relentlessly aggressive attempts to usurp and dominate our global supranational institutions such as UN ,WHO etc have to be met with efforts compatible with our will to preserve our own civilisation and direct the political form of our own future?
I am surprised that there are some common misconceptions in this article, so I guess I will write a brief reply on this matter.
First of all, it is clear that the PLA will invade ROC soon despite the ROC refuse to be ruled by the CCP, which will trigger a military response from Japan and the US, and I expect this will happen in April 2024 under normal circumstances as Xi has implied he wish to have another purge within the CCP again.
Two, Major General Chenghu Zhu has said before that if the US intervenes the in the Taiwan invasion, the PLA should deploy nuclear weapons to the west cost of the US.
Three, history has told us the America has be a long supporter of the modernisation of China. From grant US citizenship for Dr. Yat-sen Sun to shelter him to using the Boxer Indemnities on education in China. America has a long history to assist the country to develop itself, no to mention the CCP has self-sabotaged its chances by implementing the one child policy that doom its demographic structure.
Four, I am surprised that you adapt a very CCP nationalistic view on the Yuanmingyuan. Have you asked yourself why the join expedition force decided not to ransack the Forbidden City instead? Surely once they entered Peking, with the emperor fled, it is possible for them do so. The issue was the POWs were subjected to inhumane treatment by Qing government, and the ransack of the Yuanmingyuan was used as the warning to the Qing government. Also, I am glad majority of the treasures were shipped overseas as I can’ti magine what could have happened during the Cultural Revolution.
Throughout the last four decades, the strategy of Henry Kissinger has be tried and failed, and we have let down not only the ROC, The British Chinese in Hong Kong, and now towards our own people and system. I have no problem in engagement policy , but we shouldn’t sell our soul and let our own people down as.
I respectfully disagree with quite a bit of what you write.
Firstly, China will not be invading Taiwan before 2030, the priority domestically is to resuscitate the economy and growth. Invading Taiwan would hurt China far more than could credibly be deemed acceptable within decision making circles. China is highly dependent on the international trade system, they really won't risk it to invade Taiwan. The only exception would be if Taiwan did something incredibly foolish like declare independence (which they won't)
Secondly, it is entirely unacceptable for the USA to be intervening in Taiwan, given that it is part of China. The current status quo between the Peoples Republic of China and the Republic of China is best - and can only credibly peacefully - be resolved through a diplomatic solution driven by the two parties. To quote Kissinger, the only thing more terrifying than being an enemy of the USA is being its ally, in this vein it's clear that the best thing the US can do is support the maintenance of the status quo (i.e. one China principle)
Thirdly, American support for Chinese modernisation ignores the unequal treaties and the 'open door' policy Washington was happy to promote. Sort of self serving and giving with one hand and taking with the other. Let's not exaggerate the nobility of US foreign policy interests here.
Fourthly, the destruction of the Summer Palace was and is entirely unjustifiable - as was the opium wars themselves. It represents a real mark of shame on British history that we did those terrible things. If we hadn't undermined Qing China so spectacularly in the mid to late 19th century there would not have been to CCP or cultural revolution (and it's idiotic rejection of the 'four olds'). We created the imagined monster we now apparently are supposed to fear.
I remain of the opinion, we must cooperate with China, work constructively with them where we can (trade, global economy, rules based order, anti-poverty fight and protecting the environment). Disagree where we must, but doing so respectfully and as constructive criticisms.
I guess I will try to provide some counter arguments here in this reply.
First, CCP will invade ROC earlier than that. The economic situation wasn’t the key question at all. A very good reminder that most of the western pundits believe it was impossible for the CCP to participate in the Korean War as they just manage to establish a government and still struggling to stabilise the whole country in 1950, and we all knew what happen in 1950. The key question here is whether Xi can concentrate his power by adapting a war time status and force other factions to listen to his command. We have seen the first indication of the PLA is stepping up on their preparations of the invasion as the PLA air force has reposition themselves to Fujian as there are lots of videos online to highlight the sharp increase of the high amount of sonic boom from aircrafts noticed by the local residences.
Secondly, the trouble is the CCP wish to change the status quo here, as they wish to us the military to force the ROC to under its control. Thus, the only way for the status quo to remain is for the US and Japan to military intervene here.
Third, I never said the US has no self-interest, but my point is the American contribution towards the modernisation of China is more than gain the US has received via the open-door policy. Not to mention the open-door policy is in fact helping the Chinese to level up their own knowledge as well. The trouble is most of the Chinese and their current nationalist historic view refuse to admit they were behind the west back then, unlike Japanese who embrace and celebrate it. Also, unequal treaty is another myth, as a very good reminder the first unequal treaty signed by the Qing government since they have the full control of China is the Treaty of Nerchinsk, as the Qing government took a huge advantage from Russia, but the CCP never said that in their history as it doesn’t fit their narrative.
Finally, I believe the destruction of Yuanmingyuan might be an overreaction, but certainly wasn’t as damaging as you argue. Not to mention the Opium Wars itself was come the unequal treatment of import opium as the Qing government was only targeting imported opium and had a very soft hand on the home-grown opium, which is much higher than the amount of the imported opium. I don’t believe the CCP will not rise to the power even if the western powers decide to take a soft approach on Qing unless the October Revolution never happened.
Thanks for your quick reply, and I certainly try my best to maintain our discussions in a respectful manner, at least I hope you believe I’m 😊.
Sorry for the late reply (was too late last night and I had work this morning).
To respond to your (excellent) points.
China will seek to apply pressure on Taiwan but it will fall short of outright invasion this side of 2030 and for many good reasons. For one thing, China’s export markets are drying up in Europe and the United States. If we couple this with the very serious Chinese real estate crisis deepening further its hardly the backdrop to launch a major invasion. The World Bank and the IMF are predicting a gloomy economic growth outlook of 1.7 percent and 2.7 percent respectively, the immediate key priority for the Chinese leadership is not to use force in the Taiwan Strait but to strengthen the economy.
I fully admit a key goal for Xi's "national rejuvenation" is reunification of China, but he will apply bellicose language and seek to coerce Taipei rather than risking invasion. Put simply, the CCP's claim to popular support is entirely based on their success in improving living standards and driving forward economic development, they simply can't risk this for the sake of invading the Taiwan.
Further, Xi can witness the Ukraine debacle playing out for Putin. Xi would only risk invading Taiwan if he was *sure* it would be a short brief operation guaranteed to be successful. Invading the island of Taiwan is by far a riskier and harder military ask than invading Ukraine. Beijing will pause for thought given they are still struggling to escape Xi's zero-covid lockdown policy errors (remember, the CCP mishandled lockdown so badly it led to unprecidented popular revolt on the streets. I wrote about that in an article here after talking with some former students: https://deanmthomson.substack.com/p/china-at-a-crossroads-understanding)
As for US involvement with China, the motivation is self-interested and also built on entirely false premise. Washington wanted to develop CHina and open up its economy a) to get as much out of it as possible for US business and
b) they assumed - entirely wrongly - that a liberalised Chinese economy would somehow automatically mean a liberalised political sphere. But as I point out in my article above this was *always* an entirely false premise. A 5000 year old civilisation has no interest in being lectured to by a 250 year old republic with sclerotic internal politics. Equally, when China was weak the west didn't come helping, we went to victimise them. To the Chinese mind the priority is strength, internal harmony and social betterment to avoid ever experiencing the 'century of national humiliation' again. Beijing simply doesn't interpret US contributions toward modernising in the same way. And this is understandable I'd argue.
I'm enjoying the conversation and hope you have the time to reply to my points! :D
That’s all right, as you and I aren’t full time here, so I can certainly understand that 😊
First, I believe we can all agree the PRC’s economic situation is dire and Xi’s claim on improving the living standards was rebuked in 2020 by his former prime minister Keqiang Li when Li said, ‘There are 600 million people in the PRC have less than 1000 RMB (around 146 USD) per month’.
Also, there is no doubt that the Ukraine War has a huge implication of the invasion of Taiwan, and the PRC will face a military disaster if the PLA does invade. For example, the sinking of Moskva is a huge blow to the Eastern Fleet of the PLA, the one that is supposed to be the key naval force for Taiwan invasion, as the whole fleet is using the same defence system as the Moskva.
Despite that, we have seen more indicators that the PRC is gearing up for the invasion. A few weeks ago, all two communication cables connect Taiwan and Matsu Islands were cut off by the ships from the PRC, which means it is impossible for any civilian communication between the islands and mainland Taiwan. It is very rare for all the cables lost at the same time, and I believe it is likely that the PRC wish to test the reaction of the islands and evaluate the military capabilities to communicate with the Taiwan headquarters.
The point I’m trying to raise is Xi’s decision mindset is based on whether he can have a firm grip of the party and the government machine if he presses for invasion. By allowing the war time status, this will enable him to force all the sections of the party and the society to under his control.
I’m fully aware of the White Paper Movement and the recently White Hair Movement as well, but it is clearly that some of the anti Xi factions within the CCP are not pulling all the levers. Otherwise, under the grid stabilising system, it is very easy for the government to stop it completely. I believe the anti Xi factions in the CCP is racing against the time to create revolution to the ordinary people that aren’t happy with Xi to topple Xi before the Taiwan invasion.
For the US involvement in China, I was mainly referring to the pre 1949 era, and in fact I’m against the US to establish diplomatic relationship with the PRC and Clinton’s decision on trade and WTO.
Also, I believe it is wrong for any country to believe that because of its rich history, they can refuse to be lectured by others when others are clearly better than yours. Make no mistake, I’m not saying China should copy everything from the West, things like Chinese medicine, painting, art etc are great things that should be preserve, but it is wrong for a country to not to put one’s ego aside and learn what they are clearly lack such as rule of law and democracy.
Not to mention throughout history, Chinese imperialism and expansionism is heavily rely on the weakness of the neighbours, and the lost towards the West in the 19th century was hardly the most humiliating one. A very good reminder that Qing government was a foreign government that rule the Han Chinese and the CCP was set up by USSR agents. It is a bit rich for them to claim as a victim of the century of national humiliation as this is only a narrative of the CCP to fit its own agenda.
I’m enjoying our discussion as well and I look forward to your reply when you are free to do so 😉
My initial Chinese experience in 1986 included being berated ,sino-style,by a senior,MIT educated,CNOC official on the inherent superiority of the 6000 year old ‘Chinese’ culture.What I felt then was similar to how I feel on home territory,whenever I experience over zealous ,emotional accounts of Scottish or Irish history.Namely, that this is history in the service of political justification rather than truth.For example,’Kingdom of Characters’ by Jing Tsu recounts and highlights the salience of the fact that the Qing empire did not begin to establish a standard language until after the 1911 rebellion.Elsewhere I have read that after establishment of PRC only the intervention of no less a character than Uncle Joe curtailed Mao’s intention to ditch Chinese characters altogether.This tale in particular,at the very least, suggests caution in the wholesale consumption of the 6000 yrs coherent polity myth preferred by the voice of Chinese nationalism.
Your article contains much of interest.However,I feel you do a disservice to the nature of Western concerns.Very few people now believe that the West’s concerns are nested primarily in human rights or the delusion that an economically successful China inevitably thirsts to fall in line philosophically or politically with the west. The infiltration of the West’s academic & scientific institutions enabled by projects and deals brokered by naïve University Chancellors without benefit or referral to our Intelligence services has been careless in the extreme .See,for example,Ian William’s account of interference & intellectual theft in ‘Every Breath You Take’.Xi’s increasingly bellicose rhetoric ,concerns arising over maritime appropriation and imperial expansionism in the South China Seas are appropriate.The threat to western trade presented by joint Sino-Russian monopoly of sea routes (Pacific+Antarctic) are real .The Belt and Road Initiative with it’s concommitant financial deals have caused pain and detriment to many countries and deserve comparison with wrongs arising from our Imperialist era.Xi’s relentlessly aggressive attempts to usurp and dominate our global supranational institutions such as UN ,WHO etc have to be met with efforts compatible with our will to preserve our own civilisation and direct the political form of our own future?