Trump tells Chinese president US will honor 'one China' policy

I think it’s possible Trump is quickly discovering that there are many things he can’t do- he’s not a dictator. I think it’s also possible he’s discovering the situation is much worse when it comes to international diplomacy. Look at his very toned-down remarks after the North Korean missile test (something about the US supporting Japan). If I were one of his advisers, I would tell him to focus on the domestic economy. This is something he understands (unlike the situation outside of US borders), and is an area he can probably be the most effective.

Trump threw China off balance because it now looks like the US One-China policy is a matter of “favour” extended to China and is up to the United States. Which is true anyway, but now it’s being made public. It’s something that US can agree or disagree to, something that is always up for review and renewal, and China has to request it on a regular basis. Basically it is exactly what Trump said in the TV interview.

That is hardly toned-down. North Korea hates bringing in Japan, even more so than bringing in China. Bush negotiated with North Korea via six other nations, when North Korea only wanted to negotiate face to face with the USA. It was a smart move, because Japan and others have many more grievances with this arrogant nation than just nuclear issues. And being in closer proximity, more vehement about the nuclear issues and testing over their countries, etc. They are much more a thorn in NKorea’s side than the USA.

When the news broke, I think most would have expected something much more from Trump. Remember, this was not long after Trump put Iran “on notice” after their missile test, and that was followed by a conspicuous silence and no action (he didn’t follow through on his strong words). And remember also that Trump tweeted about how North Korean missile capability improving so that America could be hit was that “it won’t happen.” At the end of the day, there’s not a damn thing Trump can do about North Korea. And the North Koreans are well aware of this. All talk. All I hear is bullshit coming from our president, sadly.

I think you’re right regarding how Japan is a bigger thorn in N. Korea’s side than the US is. But you sure wouldn’t know hearing how they talk: “American fuckers” this and “American fuckers” that. I can understand Korean okay, and it doesn’t sound good. The lights go out because of power shortages and North Koreans blame the “American fuckers.” No kidding.

I think this is a really good point. I wish it were all planned, but I have my doubts.

7 posts were merged into an existing topic: Let’s talk about Trump

I don’t think so. Maybe it looks like something we can put up for review and renewal for about five minutes before we get cold-shouldered and have to go crawling back for cover. In all likelihood it was just a big fuckup which accomplished nothing except making us look like jackasses. Maybe even we had to pay a price, who knows?

I’ve always told my Taiwanese friends, how can you expect the nations to recognize Taiwan if Taiwan is afraid to recognize Taiwan. In the light of this, I think the fact that One-China is in the cards is being very magnanimous to a nation that rarely sticks up for itself for fear of trouble/war/China.

And how do you think the rest of the world would react if Taiwan decided to “stick up for itself” (how exactly is it supposed to do that anyway? meet them on the playground after school?) They wouldn’t do anything. When Taiwan has taken even minor steps in that direction in the past, the only nation who might care at all gets all snippy. It’s like telling a little kid he’s a coward for not sticking up to the biggest guy on a block with a gun, when no one cares about him and truth be told would probably rather see him dead, and his only “friend” is telling him to shut up and stay locked in his living room. That makes no sense. I guess China is magnanimous by not stomping on us under your formulation, while Taiwan is simply a prisoner of its “fear”. It’s a brave new world.

In American experience, we paid for our independence with our blood. It was costly, but freedom was that dear to us. If freedom isn’t worth dying for, it isn’t worth living for.

Where the rubber meets the road, most Taiwanese are not willing to fight a war with China, rather they think it’s not so bad being a satellite of China after all; their personal life wouldn’t be so much affected. China understands the power of this, which is why they always use the issue.

Lot of this is changing, Taiwanese votes get jaded with it and appear to be bolder, this is expected as democratic tendencies take root in the whole national character. Taiwan is only what…20 or 30 years democracy. The old people still have authoritarian mindset, which they transmit to children and grandchildren, it takes time to develop democratic and liberty thinking, but probably will start with the very young as they grow up and have kids and slowly that authoritarianism gets all rooted out.

That’s not a realistic comparison under the circumstances. Without active French intervention ultimately intended to serve their own political goals, it wouldn’t likely have succeeded either.

What makes you think Taiwan would be alone? US would definitely be involved because it’s our law. If Taiwan declares it’s status as a country, which is reality, and China invades, which is the most outrageous behavior? Which action will the nations most likely rebuke?

I can’t imagine anyone saying, well, that insolent Taiwan, they had it coming, they deserved that. No one identifies with China’s philosophy on this posturing, making everyone believe what isn’t. They go along with it because China is big, but if Taiwan started feeling its oats and rightly expressed indignance at these obvious violations on their sovereignty, nations understand this, democratic ones, it wouldn’t be long, they would stand by you as long as you stand for yourself. But if you’re not willing to risk it, why should they risk anything for you?

The reason US has been nippy about your moves toward independence in the past is because our law commits us to war with China in the event of invasion. But when Taiwan cares deeply enough about their country that they are willing to fight for it and there’s no changing this course, this technicality will be ironed out and we’ll be right behind you. As it is now, US doesn’t want to fight China on behalf of your independence for you.

[quote=“jotham, post:29, topic:158195, full:true”]
What makes you think Taiwan would be alone? US would definitely be involved because it’s our law. If Taiwan declares it’s status as a country, which is reality, and China invades, which is the most outrageous behavior? Which action will the nations most likely rebuke? [/quote]

The law doesn’t say that we’ll “definitely” be involved. I’ve always felt we would definitely be involved if China took unilateral action (don’t ask me now with this shit going on.) But Taiwan unilaterally declaring its status as a country would mean all bets are off. If Taiwan did so, and China invaded, it would be totally outrageous. A “rebuke” would be all Taiwan could count on though, and it would be absolutely useless as should be obvious.

I can’t imagine anyone saying, well, that insolent Taiwan, they had it coming, they deserved that. No one identifies with China’s philosophy on this posturing, making everyone believe what isn’t. They go along with it because China is big, but if Taiwan started feeling its oats and rightly expressed indignance at these obvious violations on their sovereignty, nations understand this, democratic ones, it wouldn’t be long, they would stand by you as long as you stand for yourself. But if you’re not willing to risk it, why should they risk anything for you?

Never mind what they’re going to say. Are they going to do something? Now, not later? Again, the US has made it clear in the past that they don’t want Taiwan to rock the boat, even with minor things. Taiwan trying to “risk” anything would just be seen as irresponsible and wouldn’t be rewarded. That sucks but that’s the reality. And if that’s the way Taiwan wants to go, then it is. But I won’t be blaming them if they don’t.

The reason US has been nippy about your moves toward independence in the past is because our law commits us to war with China in the event of invasion. But when Taiwan cares deeply enough about their country that they are willing to fight for it and there’s no changing this course, this technicality will be ironed out and we’ll be right behind you. As it is now, US doesn’t want to fight China on behalf of your independence for you.

I don’t see it that way at all for the reasons I’ve said. We’re not going to fight for Taiwan’s independence under any circumstances. We’ll definitely fight (at least I used to say definitely) in the case of unilateral action by China to change the status quo. Also, you’re misinterpreting the law. The most directly stated portion says:

Section 3. 3.
The President is directed to inform the Congress promptly of any threat to the security or the social or economic system of the people on Taiwan and any danger to the interests of the United States arising therefrom. The President and the Congress shall determine, in accordance with constitutional processes, appropriate action by the United States in response to any such danger.

It doesn’t commit us to anything and certainly not in the case of unilateral action by Taiwan to change the status quo. That was never the intent of it. That’s why the US has been snippy in such cases. Put bluntly, it’s fair warning that our friendship comes with a leash. And I say that believing that we’re the best friends Taiwan has and the only one who would do anything concrete in the case of unilateral action on China’s part.

The problem is more about various states wanting to or agreeing to transfer the control of Taiwan to China, in order to appease China and to cajole China into becoming a good neighbour. It’s not about a Chinese province seeking to kick out the central government of China to establish a new state.

Even if there’s no human population on Taiwan, the same intention to appease still holds, regardless. And actually the world is mostly fed up with China that’s why it seems easier to throw a piece of something at China and hope China will shut up.

Am I right?

The Chinese tried to annex Taiwan in 1949 and 1958 and 1996. They paid with their blood in 1949 and 1958, but in the case in 1996, the Chinese decided they did not want to pay with their blood. In all three cases they did not pay with enough blood to achieve meaningful results.

So I am not sure why you are talking about. It doesn’t make much sense.

They TRA authorizes the President to conduct kinetic or non-kinetic operations on Taiwan without having to go through Congress. For example if a US drone is ordered to strike a target in the littoral area near or on Taipei, it wouldn’t really entail a war between US and any state. As we know, not all states have historically declared war against US even while they were attacking US military in the process. Vice versa too.

Taiwan has proclaimed independence (albeit without specifying from whom) many times in various ways, but still nobody in China was willing to pay with enough blood by coming into Taipei. It is true though, instead of paying with enough blood, the Chinese proclaim they will annex Taiwan. Various states find the prospect of such event horrible and scary, and therefore these states assure China that Taiwan is not yet independent of China.

China is currently against any state on Taiwan because China is currently not ready and not capable of defending its military on Taiwan against potential US-Japan military strike on Taiwan. By constantly threatening to annex Taiwan, China can convince US & Japan to give China more time to prepare for defending Taiwan. If China agrees to a Taiwan state now, a Taiwan state would then be free to enter into a military alliance with US or Japan, and that will make it even more difficult for China to prepare for Taiwan’s defence against US-Japan. That’s why China opposes to a Taiwan state.

Once China feels it is ready to defend Taiwan against any US-Japan attack on Taiwan, China wouldn’t be against a independent Taiwan, because whether there is a state or not, China can and will still just go ahead and annex the territory, wipe out that state, and hold the territory against potential US-Japan airstrike on that territory.

The key factor is Chinese ability to defend Taiwan against US-Japan strike on Taiwan. Taiwan’s declaration of independence on January 1st is not a factor because China can still convince various state that Taiwan is not yet independent. Various states would agree that Taiwan is not yet independent despite Taiwan’s declaration, therefore giving China more time to prepare for military actions and defence capability. Once China is ready to defend Taiwan, say on December 31st of the next year, China will still annex Taiwan. The thing about statehood is that, China can will annex another state. The idea that just because a state is a state, it is immune to being annexed or wiped out, is purely a European idea. China is not morally bound by that kind of idea.

[quote=“tempogain, post:30, topic:158195, full:true”]
The law doesn’t say that we’ll “definitely” be involved. I’ve always felt we would definitely be involved if China took unilateral action (don’t ask me now with this shit going on.) But Taiwan unilaterally declaring its status as a country would mean all bets are off. If Taiwan did so, and China invaded, it would be totally outrageous. A “rebuke” would be all Taiwan could count on though, and it would be absolutely useless as should be obvious.[/quote]
What do you mean all bets are off? TRA says nothing about Taiwan’s declaring itself. Reagan’s six assurances, which every administration has confirmed, even says we don’t recognize Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan.

USA is nippy about Taiwan declaring itself precisely because the TRA strongly militates against a forceful resolution to the problem. That materializes into military invention. Only a Democrat like Obama would look at technicalities to get out of it, and I wouldn’t doubt that he would. I think Trump would be more respectful about executing the “spirit” of the law.

Never mind what they’re going to say. Are they going to do something? Now, not later? Again, the US has made it clear in the past that they don’t want Taiwan to rock the boat, even with minor things. Taiwan trying to “risk” anything would just be seen as irresponsible and wouldn’t be rewarded. That sucks but that’s the reality. And if that’s the way Taiwan wants to go, then it is. But I won’t be blaming them if they don’t.

Perhaps as things are now, with Taiwanese unwilling to fight for their independence. If there is a revolution in thinking here, if there is a movement, if Taiwanese get jaded enough and something arises, a pride, a consciousness, a heartbeat for Taiwanness, which I believe is getting stronger, it will naturally express itself with declarations that no nation could think to rebuke. I don’t think it’s quite there yet, but I’m encouraged by the last election, first time Taipei area voted for green president, that’s a milestone. If you move Taipei, the greater part of Taiwan is already there.

I do think enough nations are wary of Chinese agression, such as Korea and Japan, that were USA to get involved, they would be there too, not so much in support of Taiwan, as to counter a huge out-of-control China. You have no idea how outrageous China invading is, you have to figure even China knows that invasion is not really an option.

The intent of the TRA was in response to Carter recognizing Beijing as China, when we hadn’t before. The Congress was angry at Carter for leaving Taiwan vulnerable and quickly drew up these acts to protect Taiwan from China coming in and taking their possession that Carter seemed to give them. Again, only a Democrat would look at technicalities to get out of a responsibility. But Trump most likely would execute the spirit of the law.

Funny how you say that lots of Taiwanese ppl still have authoritarian mindset (not that it’s untrue). America is a democracy of 200-300 years and look where you are now.