Are countries finally going to start pushing back against China?

Well he said you can only dominate your backyard and Taiwan is too far away from the United States.

He also said this on page 4:

But it is difficult to imagine American policy makers purposely choosing to fight a war in which the U.S. military is not only going to lose, but is also going to pay a huge price in the process.

Maybe that’s why he didn’t reply.

Well, that is difficult to imagine, isn’t it?

If a costly defeat or letting China just have Taiwan were the only two options, and either way China gets Taiwan, seems like a no brainer.

Of course, the smart policy move is to make losing not a certainty. Which is what is being done more and more since 2014 :man_shrugging:

1 Like

It struck me today: why was the ROC able to be kicked out of the UN if they were a permanent member of the security council? I asked ChatGPT:

If the Republic of China was a member of the Security Council, a permanent member in the UN, then how were they able to be removed? Don’t members of the Security Council have veto power over anything?


The Republic of China (ROC), which had the seat for China at the United Nations (UN) and was a permanent member of the Security Council, was indeed removed and replaced by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1971. This happened despite the ROC having veto power. Here’s how it occurred:

  1. General Assembly Vote: The change was accomplished through a vote in the UN General Assembly, not in the Security Council. Resolution 2758 was passed by the General Assembly on October 25, 1971, recognizing the PRC as “the only legitimate representative of China to the United Nations” and expelling “the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the place which they unlawfully occupy at the United Nations.”
  2. Context of Veto Power: The ROC, as a permanent member of the Security Council, did have veto power. However, the General Assembly, where every member state has one vote, does not operate under the same rules as the Security Council. In the General Assembly, resolutions require a two-thirds majority vote on important questions.
  3. Political and Diplomatic Shifts: By the early 1970s, international sentiment had shifted significantly in favor of the PRC. Many countries had established diplomatic relations with the PRC, recognizing it as the legitimate government of China. This shift was part of broader geopolitical changes, including the Sino-Soviet split and the desire of many countries to engage with the PRC economically and politically.
  4. U.S. Position: The United States, which had been a strong supporter of the ROC, eventually adjusted its stance. In 1971, the U.S. proposed a “dual representation” plan, which aimed to give both the ROC and the PRC seats at the UN. However, this plan did not gain sufficient support.

Despite having veto power in the Security Council, the ROC could not use it to prevent the General Assembly from passing Resolution 2758. As a result, the PRC took over the seat on the Security Council and the ROC was effectively expelled from the United Nations.

So then if there was a vote to allow Taiwan into the UN, could the PRC veto that?


Yes, if there were a vote to allow Taiwan (officially the Republic of China) into the United Nations, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) could veto it in the Security Council. Here’s how that works:

  1. Membership Process: For a new member to join the United Nations, the application must first be approved by the Security Council. This requires at least 9 out of 15 votes in favor, including the concurrence of all five permanent members (the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, and China).
  2. PRC’s Veto Power: As a permanent member of the Security Council, the PRC holds veto power. This means that if the PRC opposes Taiwan’s membership, it can veto the application regardless of the number of affirmative votes from other members.
  3. Political Stance: The PRC consistently considers Taiwan to be a part of China and opposes any efforts that would imply recognition of Taiwan as an independent state. Therefore, it is highly likely that the PRC would veto any proposal to admit Taiwan as a separate member state of the UN.

In summary, the PRC’s veto power in the Security Council provides it with a significant means to block Taiwan’s membership in the United Nations.

So a member of the Security Council can veto allowing a new country in, but they cannot veto having a country removed?


The ability to veto in the Security Council does not directly apply to decisions made by the UN General Assembly regarding the removal of a member state. Here’s the distinction:

  1. Admission of New Members: Admission of new member states to the United Nations requires the recommendation of the Security Council, where any of the five permanent members (including China) can veto the application. After the Security Council’s recommendation, the application must be approved by a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly.
  2. Removal of Members: The removal of a member state from the United Nations is not a straightforward process and is generally considered under extreme circumstances, such as gross violations of the UN Charter. This process would also require action by both the Security Council and the General Assembly.
  3. Replacement or Recognition: The case of the Republic of China (Taiwan) being replaced by the People’s Republic of China in 1971 was a unique situation. The change was not about the removal of a member state but rather about recognizing the PRC as the legitimate government representing China. This decision was made by the General Assembly through Resolution 2758, which does not fall under the veto power of the Security Council.
  4. General Assembly’s Role: The General Assembly can make decisions regarding the representation and recognition of governments without the direct involvement of the Security Council’s veto power. This was the mechanism used in 1971 to transfer the seat from the ROC to the PRC.

In summary, while a Security Council member can veto the admission of a new country, the process of recognizing or replacing the representative of an existing member state, as seen in the case of China, falls under the purview of the General Assembly, where the veto power does not apply.

He said essentially the same things in 2018.

Smart guy, then