Anyone that lives in or cares about Taiwan should read this article: tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?pid=2259
This article is really amazing. It effectively summarizes about 1000 articles that i have read over the past year or so on Taiwan -china - oil - uspolicy - eu - etc. There is hope for Taiwan, but not what most of us think.
far from impressive
I find a few things there I have some issues with.
[quote]On April 1, 2001, a U.S. navy EP-3E Aries II electronic spy plane collided with a Chinese jet fighter off the south China coast. … The Chinese jet went down and the pilot lost his life, while the American plane landed safely on Hainan Island and its crew of twenty-four spies was well treated by the Chinese authorities.
[/quote]
Biased wording, to put it mildly.
Oh, what did they have problems adjusting to? Let me guess, Germany’s land grab during WWII, japan’s ditto in Asia from 1937 onward, and the USSR’s empire building post 1945???
PPP is somewhat disputed. It can be calculated in several ways.
Fell over this tidbit too. so China is not saddled with huge amounts of debt???
Many holes in most of what he says - I would call this parachute academica - also he’s a Japan specialist, and surely does not know much about China.
There’s more:
so the US was behind the asian crisis in 1997???
News to me!
I love this one:
And there are so many, Lian Zhan talking about stability in Taiwan, Japanese rightists and US neocons behidn it all, christ, wonder what ivory tower they dug him up from. :loco:
I don’t agree with everything that is said either and could have picked it apart and made comments, but I just let it stand as is to let everyone make their own opinion. I would say that at the very least, it is a good reference to at least get some clue about how the world is being shaped. Obviously, you need to read from many sources to dig out the truth. I would have also liked to have seen more info on China debt/banking. Gordon Chang (Coming collapse of China) had alot to say about this, but his book is already 3-4 years old.
I had to gag on this one:
[i]Taiwan may try to seek a status somewhat like that of
French Canada – a kind of looser version of a Chinese
Quebec under nominal central government control but
maintaining separate institutions, laws, and customs.
The mainland would be so relieved by this solution it would
probably accept it, particularly if it could be achieved before
the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
[/i]
This Quebec-style “solution” would perhaps make sense if
China was a nice democratic country like Canada. But China
is a brutal police state, where arbitrary arrest and torture
are common. I can’t imagine that most Taiwanese would
willingly submit to this “one-country two-systems” solution
as long as China remains such a despicable violator of
human rights.
If you’re looking for an article that sums up the situation
nicely, I thought that this one from the Guardian (and
printed in today’s Taipei Times) was quite good:
taipeitimes.com/News/edit/ar … 2003247462
However, I could have done without the Taipei Times
“editor’s notes”.
cheers,
DB
This article is the most dangerous kind, one that cloaks itself in statistics and facts, in order to seem respectable when in fact its intent is to slip in biased descriptions and untenable conclusions.
“Meanwhile, Japan intends to … possibly develop its own nuclear weapons capability.”
And you have support for this ridiculous assertion?
One need only skim down to the final paragraph and read “China has just had a couple of bad centuries and now it’s back. The world needs to adjust peacefully to its legitimate claims – one of which is for other nations to stop militarizing the Taiwan problem” to see the problem.
In other words, don’t bother reading this garbage, and consider adding the poster to your “Ignore this Troll” list. Posters of stuff like this should be ashamed.
"The U.S. …has no evidence that China is doing anything more than countering the threats coming from the Bush administration. It seeks to avoid war with Taiwan and the U.S. by … authorizing the use of force in case a territory tried to leave the country. "
The ellipses are emphatically relevant; the article is so much hogwash, and the poster deserves to be on everyone’s “ignore” list.
Damn you guys, the dude posts an article you don’t agree with and so he deserves to be ignored? For linking to an article by someone else which you don’t like? Do you have to be such arseholes about it?
The author makes some good points about the overall situation of China’s growth.
To dismiss it or ignore it due to the fact it does not fit one’s personal political views is only doing a disservice to oneself.
Ok, I guess that was a bit harsh. Appreciate your input, Tetsuo. But I stand by the hogwash bit.
4nr has actually posted a few worthwile comments here before, so no need to slag him - I hope it’s understood that my comments were aimed at the article, which I find rather lame.
AC_Dropout: I question the notion that China’s economy is sounder than the one of the US, or Japan for that matter. China has a huge debt bomb under theirs as well. Add to that that Chinese statistics are known for being unreliable, and merely expressing the things the leadership in Beining wants us to see, and a few big holes are shots into your and his thesis about “China being the future”. I don’t dispute that the Chinese economy is growing, but well… Not as much as they want us to believe.
“Anyone that lives in or cares about Taiwan should read” an article which implies Japan is considering developing nuclear weapons, which takes as given the legitimacy of China’s claims to invade Taiwan, and which blames the West, and not China for military escalation in the issue!!!
How is someone posting links to such tripe and labelling it as amazing and an effective summary not worthy of the big IGNORE button?
Again, sorry, I was in a fit of pique. I hereby redirect all my ire at the article not the poster. THe article, however, is full of far too many holes to be worth reading, so I’m still going to suggest that people not bother reading this pro-communist propaganda.
Mr He,
I don’t think the article focus was about the flawed statistic and accounting. Or how relatively sound the 3 largest economies are.
It was about how the general rise of PRC will lead to direct conflict with Japan and USA, if USA does not change its foriegn policy.
He is critical that USA is trying to have our allies engage the PRC directly through political pressure and proxy military.
Although the article does have a pro-China view. The evidences cited are general enough to see how they lend to the argument.
Quite easily - he’s made other contributions, and just because he doesn’t think it’s tripe and you do makes it childish to ignore him on the basis of one, by your standards, ill-informed choice. Just because your politics don’t coincide and you don’t like the article which was written by someone else seems a stupid reason to ignore him. If your convictions are so weakly held that you feel you have to ignore someone for one post you don’t like, I pity you. On the other hand, your only two posts so far have been cries of “OMG TROLL” and “IGNOER HIM!!!11”, which seems so far not to be a good start on the “not being ignored” trip.
Yes. Ignore. Ignore. Ignore. Goooood strategy. Ignore the world.
Bush sez “No support for Taiwan independence.”
CSB/TIers: “Hit the ignore button!”
PRC sez “No independence no war. hint hint hint”
CSB/TIers: “Hit the ignore button!”
UN sez “You cannot enter.”
CSB/TIers: “Hit the ignore button and fuck you very much!”
Well, at least CSB now sez “Can’t be done. That which can’t be done just can’t be done.” But somewhere, some place, there is a cohort or two of TIers who have the world on their ignore list. They will march on Saturday. 
AC_Dropout.
By assuming that the fast growing Chinese economy is healthier than the 2 other ones, he lends credibility to a flawd argument.
also, why should US pull out of Asia?
Mr He,
Would it be fair to say their are strengths and weakness in all 3 economy cited, and the none of their interested are served by going to war over Taiwan.
To the credit of the PRC they are very self aware of their flaws and take actions on them much faster than either the USA and Japan.
I don’t think that was the author’s argument either. I think he was just citing the fact USA and Japan are not taking the lead in the region anymore when it comes to trade.
I want my ten minutes back.