China issues

[Dunenewt]

After Kosovo proclaimed its independence, the Republic of China supported it.  However, now the People's Republic of China is getting all agitated.

RoC, no longer under the control of the KMT, has considered joining the UN under the name Taiwan, thereby renouncing its claims to the mainland.  Obvioualy not everyone is happy with that on both sides.  What do you lot think?

What I find rather interesting, is that a Hong Kong based business bought an old aircraft carrier from Ukraine, saying that they were going to convert it into a casino floating off Macau.  However, the whole time Macau was saying they wouldn't allow it.  Nevertheless the company went through with the deal, and after a couple of years rusting away with no attention,  it is now being maintained by the Chinese military, and rumour has it, given the name Shi Lang, who was a Chinese Admiral who conquered Taiwan in the 17th Century.  Some say they're going to use it as a training ship, which would make sense, for when they develop their own aircraft carriers.

[Caid Ivik]

These things aren't new, actually the communists had always kept a finger on a trigger against Taiwan. However, sometimes it may help having a neutral country, you know, if you would lose support of the government at the continent, you may flee there. It would be pity to harm such a maritime Switzerland.

[Dunenewt]

Yes, I know this issue has been going one since 1949, and will go on for much longer.  PRC will undoubtedly have its finger on the trigger for a long time to come as well, but if RoC changes into Taiwan, and stops its  irredentism towards mainland China, do you think there will more worldwide sympathy for its plight, and more support?

[Tatar Khan]

I don't think US will let China take Taiwan anytime soon. If Taiwan will declare itself a state, than any hostile actions by China against it would be violation of UN Charter by China. Whether that will matter depends on the image China wants to have in the world.

I guess the aircraft carrier purchase is done in order to start preparing the Chinese navy personnel to serve on aircraft carriers. This also means that most likely China already has its own aircraft carriers being build. Something that it is expected from a country that wants to play a greater role in global politics. With relations with african nations are becoming better and better it will be easier for China to have its fleet patrolling the world's oceans. To do that effectively aircraft carriers are needed.

[Kokiri-Mentat]

Maybe I read wrong or didn't understand correctly....but RoC is not neutral to China.....

Citizens of RoC either hate  chinese people/PRoC  or they entertain the idea of re-joining the mainland. it seems to me that if people were serious about re-joining PRoC they would just move back to the mainland, but i've never met a pro-PRoC Taiwanese citizen, so not entirely sure.  Most of my Taiwanese friends seem to be in favor of independence, but I make a point not to ask them about it, because it seems to be a touchy hush/hush topic with them.  The main politico divide is re-join china or become Taiwan.  If they ever make a decision (which they do have, or just had, a huge election in the govt. for president i believe) it will probably not be pretty.

China is hosting the Olympics this summer, so there will be no annexing territories before then. lol. They have been patrolling and flooding the media (Chinese as well as foreign media)as much as possible w/ how great their people are and how much they have adjusted to the wester idea of civilization. (cars, skyscrapers, capitalism, etc.......)

also, i agree, US will not let China take Taiwan.  George W. especially likes to make sure of that. He gave the Dali Lahma of the Exiled Government of Tibet a Congressional Medal, or something like that when China was like hell no Georgy Porgy. lol. China was not happy.  But, in general, US foreign policy (not just GWB  admin) will not jive w/ China annexing Taiwan.

Hard to tell if world support will be there for the RoC to Taiwan transition.  I know it was the the UN that took the RoC spot on the UN council and signed it over to PRoC and gave them the seat on the security council, but this may have been for practicality.  It seems that westerners tend to sympathise w/ smaller countries trying to break free from mainland china, so if the card are played right, then Taiwan/RoC should be able to muster decent global support.

[Edric O]

Both the RoC and the PRC seem to be a little stuck in fantasyland - they love pretending to be something they are not. The RoC still pretends to be the government of all China and even calls Taipei a "temporary" capital (with the official capital being Nanking, I believe), even though they are in effect the independent state of Taiwan. A declaration of independence would only be an acceptance of reality.

The PRC, for its part, still pretends to be governed according to communist principles even though just about everyone in the world knows it is a completely capitalist country.

I suspect that both the PRC and Taiwan will leave their own personal fantasyland at the same time, though I am not sure exactly what that event might look like.

[Caid Ivik]

Mythical dimension is always very important for a preservance of state. During WW2 there were many exiled national governments in London from countries subdued by Germany, which held an aura of legitimity about, supported by the Allies, although in effectu they did not control the state territories. It depends on what the others accept, not only the "fightning" parties.

[Andrew]

Looks like Tibetans are protesting with the military/police putting a stop to it. I think I read 100 were dead so far.

If Chinese people want independence, the Olympics would be there best time to do so.

[Tatar Khan]

There is a lot riding for China on Olympics. The performance of athletes, the actual grandness of their projects and the beauty of opening and closing ceremonies all would be used for the propaganda purposes. This things matter a lot in Third world countries and so if China wants to be a greater power in the world it needs the well oiled Olympics to accomplish that.

[Edric O]

Mythical dimension is always very important for a preservance of state. During WW2 there were many exiled national governments in London from countries subdued by Germany, which held an aura of legitimity about, supported by the Allies, although in effectu they did not control the state territories. It depends on what the others accept, not only the "fightning" parties.

True, but that only lasted for the six years of WW2 (1939-1945), and in the cases of some exiled governments it lasted for even less time (four years for De Gaulle, for example).

By contrast, the RoC based on Taiwan has been pretending to govern all of China since 1949. After 59 years, I'd say it's about time to quit. The PRC itself turned capitalist in the 1980s (it's hard to set a fixed date because it was a gradual process), so they've been pretending to have a different economic system than the one they really have for the past 20 years or so. Again, that's long enough. It's time to give up the act - besides, no one believes it anyway. The PRC government maintains its legitimacy in the eyes of its people through three things: (1) raw power, (2) the ability to deliver economic growth, and (3) nationalism. Maoist ideology no longer plays any part in it.

[Caid Ivik]

Well, I don't know what were the key points of Mao's ideology; in certain points many institutions exceed their tradition deep into history (as everywhere). The dominant institution was then and is still now the Party, ideology is secondary to it. Both had own symbolics and myths, which don't reflect the reality and our categories, but ideals. The same situation was for Communists as well as Nationalists...although on Taiwan these don't rule any more. The present ruling party is Taiwan-born, use of old symbolics would lower their support ;)

[Kokiri-Mentat]

mao's ideology's are no longer used, but odly enough he still receives plenty of worship from citizens. probably due to the way history is taught in schools.  As far as i can tell, mao's ideology's somewhat followed or were inspired by Marx (or at least started out that way).  It's been a while since i read any of the book of Mao or read up on him at all.  Cultural revolution was an attempt to put his idealogy into practice and to maintain his power in the party.

yea, Tibet's all over the news.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7299597.stm

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/03/16/tibet.unrest/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

[Egeides]

Mythical dimension is always very important for a preservance of state.

I think it has to do with differing views regarding the long-term. Experimental sciences (pragmatic politics/else) are about experiences made, but there are many still to be made. "Time settles infinity"?

There are some disagreements there about "what is" China, but it's true China or elsewhere.

[Tatar Khan]

Taiwan keeps the claim because it is necessary to keep it. It is a political weapon that can be wielded when it would be possible. If the opportunity and need comes for replacement of government in Beijing there is another fully legal government (by law) that can take its place. Taiwan government knows this that US is keeping it for that and it had no objections to this.

Communist party well they don't want to change the mythos due to carry the momentum so people continue to believe, and I don't mean today but tomorrow, in the "bright future" (A Russian term here).

There is another possibility. Marx said that communism can happen only in fully industrialized nation. The question is: What has China been doing since 1970s?

[Edric O]

Looks like Tibetans are protesting with the military/police putting a stop to it. I think I read 100 were dead so far.

Yes, it has been all over the news, but information is very scarce. The Chinese government is keeping a tight lid on things. Do you happen to know what the Tibetans are demanding, or what caused the protests? I haven't been able to find out.

Well, I don't know what were the key points of Mao's ideology; in certain points many institutions exceed their tradition deep into history (as everywhere).

Well, let me put it this way:

- Marx argued that socialism could only be built with the support of the urban working class in a developed capitalist country.

- Lenin argued that socialism could also be built with the support of an alliance of workers and peasants in a developing capitalist country, as long as this country had either foreign help or the potential for rapid industrialization on its own.

- Mao argued that socialism could even be built by peasants alone in a mostly feudal country that had not even started to industrialize properly yet. He strongly opposed outside interference in the affairs of poor countries, believing that they should rise on their own. He argued that the task of the Party was to guide a poor agricultural country through its industrial revolution; he further argued that it was necessary to rapidly eliminate old customs and traditions for the sake of modernizing society and that the Party bureaucracy could and should be kept in check by a continuous grassroots movement of armed peasants and students. These last two ideas came together in the Cultural Revolution.

You can see how modern Chinese policy evolved out of a twisted and perverted version of Maoism. Mao said that it was the task of the Party to carry out in China, in the context of a "socialist" society, the kind of industrialization and development that capitalism carried out elsewhere. Deng Xiaoping decided that this provided a great excuse to reintroduce capitalism. After all, why try to reproduce capitalist development when you can just go for the real thing, right? And the fact that Party leaders got filthy rich in the process was of course just a "coincidence..."

The dominant institution was then and is still now the Party, ideology is secondary to it.

But the ideology was the thing that justified the Party's continued existence. Without its ideology, what is left of the Party? It's just another hierarchical organization with no apparent purpose or direction. It has no reason to exist.

mao's ideology's are no longer used, but odly enough he still receives plenty of worship from citizens. probably due to the way history is taught in schools.  As far as i can tell, mao's ideology's somewhat followed or were inspired by Marx (or at least started out that way).  It's been a while since i read any of the book of Mao or read up on him at all. Cultural revolution was an attempt to put his idealogy into practice and to maintain his power in the party.

Well, Mao still gets a lot of respect in China because he did a lot of good in his time (as well as a lot of evil, but that was mostly the result of two massive mistakes - the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution - rather than genuine malevolence). Mao ended the Civil War that had ravaged China for decades, and he did what no one else had done in China for about a century - he actually established a functional government that maintained law and order.

I tried to give a very brief overview of Maoist ideology above. I'm actually not all that knowledgeable about it, though, so I'm sure there were important parts that I missed.

The Cultural Revolution was supposedly an attempt to remove old and obsolete customs that were holding China back, while at the same time keeping the Party and government honest by threatening them with the power of the armed people if they became corrupt. It didn't work, because it quickly degenerated into chaos and random violence - as you should expect when you gather a bunch of untrained young men, give them guns and tell them they are the supreme force in society.

Taiwan keeps the claim because it is necessary to keep it. It is a political weapon that can be wielded when it would be possible. If the opportunity and need comes for replacement of government in Beijing there is another fully legal government (by law) that can take its place. Taiwan government knows this that US is keeping it for that and it had no objections to this.

That is an extremely unlikely scenario. Even if a power vacuum formed in Beijing, it would most likely be filled by a faction from the mainland rather than by Taiwan.

Communist party well they don't want to change the mythos due to carry the momentum so people continue to believe, and I don't mean today but tomorrow, in the "bright future" (A Russian term here).

There is another possibility. Marx said that communism can happen only in fully industrialized nation. The question is: What has China been doing since 1970s?

Yes, they've been industrializing. Official Party propaganda claims that all the free market stuff going on in China at the moment is just a temporary measure intended to develop the Chinese economy to the point where socialism can be introduced.

Bullsh*t. Party leaders are corrupt as sin, they own huge private companies and thanks to capitalism they are making enormous sums of money on the backs of their workers. They are filthy rich and have no intention of ever giving up their wealth, power, or lifestyle.

[gunner154]

I wouldn't trust the US with having anything to do with any UN charter after they decided that stepping into Iraq was a good idea. Besides, a huge trading partner, beneficial to your purposes or not, would be a bad idea to get rid of or disturb, and the US definitely has bigger ties with PRC than with RoC.

[Tatar Khan]

Nobody is going to replace the Beijing government right now. You keep such things for when they are needed. Same way foreign princes that were exiled or run away from their countries due to family feuds found refuge in other royal courts. It did not mean that the country is going to try to put that prince back on the throne immediately, but they would do so if they needed and opportunity arises.

[gunner154]

Well, it's going to be a loooong time before we see anything really new then. I don't know what the US would be like in future without PRC.

[Kokiri-Mentat]

Deng Xiaoping decided that this provided a great excuse to reintroduce capitalism. After all, why try to reproduce capitalist development when you can just go for the real thing, right? And the fact that Party leaders got filthy rich in the process was of course just a "coincidence..."

Ah, yes.  I had forgotten the name of Deng Xiaoping.  If I'm not mistaken his political career (as well as his life) was in jeopardy while Mao was in power due to the power struggles within the party.  They were rivals for power at one point and Mao had him stripped of power out of fear of Xiaoping's growing popularity. Later after mao's death Xiaoping reemerged as a leader in the party and introduced his less drastic economic/social policies(aside from other small splinter factions).

Yes, it has been all over the news, but information is very scarce. The Chinese government is keeping a tight lid on things. Do you happen to know what the Tibetans are demanding, or what caused the protests? I haven't been able to find out.

From what I can tell, the Dahli Lahma simply claims that the people have grown less that complacent with being treated as second class citizens in their own home country.  People questioned him as to whether the exiled government of tibet had anything to do with encouraging these protests, to which he replied no.

here's a quote from the CNN link in my last post.

"Another protest took place in Machu County in northwestern China, Tibet Watch said. It was started by Tibetan students distributing fliers.

They were later joined by monks and laypeople. During the demonstration, several shops and a security headquarters were burned, Tibet Watch said. An estimated 2,000 Tibetans were using firecrackers in the streets, the group said.

The Dalai Lama said China, as the world's most populous nation, deserves to host the Olympics but it must look seriously at repairing its human rights record "in order to be a good host."

He laughed at suggestions that the exile government was fueling the anti-Chinese protests, saying it was the natural result of deep resentment caused by China's treatment of Tibetans as second-class citizens in their own land."

I wouldn't trust the US with having anything to do with any UN charter after they decided that stepping into Iraq was a good idea. Besides, a huge trading partner, beneficial to your purposes or not, would be a bad idea to get rid of or disturb, and the US definitely has bigger ties with PRC than with RoC.

hehe, yea, even if it came to that, I would question the UN's ability to try and establish a new governing body over 4 billion people.  It's like that one quote from a dialog between mao and president...carter? anyway, the pres says "why don't you let your people be free and do what they want?" to which mao replies "OK Mr. Pres.  Let us say that I allow all my people who wish to follow you back to the US to do so. and let us say that 5% of our people wish to leave to the US.  Are you prepared to handle a flood of 20 million chinese immigrants?  I think not. this is why we must control our people, Mr. president."

the numbers are probably off, but that's the general idea of the quote.  (if anybody can find that original quote, let me know)

[Tatar Khan]

ROARING ECONOMY BOOSTS STATE-OWNED COMPANIES

[Dunenewt]

China moving into Africa isn't a new thing, and to be honest it is the only place the Chinese can spread their influence, as the U.S. isn't too bothered about stopping it, although perhaps the E.U. will.

Tibetan focus on Taiwan elections - rather predictable, but it'll be interesting to see how it plays out.

[gunner154]

Hype does a lot to figures by multiplying them. And not in an arbitrary way.

[Tatar Khan]

Actually US has an interest in controlling China's involvement in Africa. Bush had made a tour of Africa. China is also getting close with the new socialism movement in Latin America.

[Caid Ivik]

Well, let me put it this way:

- Marx argued that socialism could only be built with the support of the urban working class in a developed capitalist country.

- Lenin argued that socialism could also be built with the support of an alliance of workers and peasants in a developing capitalist country, as long as this country had either foreign help or the potential for rapid industrialization on its own.

- Mao argued that socialism could even be built by peasants alone in a mostly feudal country that had not even started to industrialize properly yet. He strongly opposed outside interference in the affairs of poor countries, believing that they should rise on their own. He argued that the task of the Party was to guide a poor agricultural country through its industrial revolution; he further argued that it was necessary to rapidly eliminate old customs and traditions for the sake of modernizing society and that the Party bureaucracy could and should be kept in check by a continuous grassroots movement of armed peasants and students. These last two ideas came together in the Cultural Revolution.

Mao himself soon found out that the poor countries around would be soon becoming jealous of chinese wealth and become hostile in the same way like Chinese to Japanese. Or like chinese peasantry to nobility. Or like he against the Nationalists. And thus it was the same Mao who intervened in Tibet and Korea. The main goal of his and perhaps of any politician in the communist world was to 1.produce enough that Party can live, 2.produce enough that people can live, 3.ensure the borders. A party serves to preserve a continuous process of changing generations of government, that one may prevent foreign control or bloody revolutions. That is the goal, everything else was just means (ideology, army, education).

But the ideology was the thing that justified the Party's continued existence. Without its ideology, what is left of the Party? It's just another hierarchical organization with no apparent purpose or direction. It has no reason to exist.

Existence is an ontological category; justification a legal one. A correct conclusion would be, that the original ideology of Marx isn't the reason, why the Communist Party exists. The fact, that Marx' ideas aren't the reason doesn't mean the Party has no purpose. What is use of PNL in Romania? It is to win a few seats in parliament, not to get Romania into the EU. The problem of the original communist ideology is, and I repeat it for at least thousandth time, that it doesn't sufficiently reflect the human nature. Communists tend to interchange meaning of opinions and objective reality. If any thought should be useful for someone, it has to be reinterpreted for the actual situation.

[Dunenewt]

The US says it has launched an investigation after four fuses for intercontinental ballistic missiles were mistakenly sent to Taiwan.

The shipment, which should have been helicopter batteries, was made in 2006 but only discovered last week.

The Pentagon says no nuclear materials were shipped and the parts have been returned to the US.

The issue of US arms sales to Taiwan is sensitive as China regards the island as a renegade province.

Second blunder

The BBC's Jane O'Brien in Washington says senior officials have described the incident as "disconcerting" and "intolerable".

Taiwan had pointed out the error, but owing to a two-year miscommunication the US administration remained unaware of it until last week.

The shipment had been sent from a US airbase in Wyoming.

Our correspondent says the components are not in themselves nuclear material but do form part of a long-range missile system that could deliver a nuclear weapon.

Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne said: "It is a component for the fuse in the nose cone for a nuclear system. We are very concerned about it."

President George W Bush and the Chinese government were informed about the error.

Beijing vehemently opposes US arms sales to Taiwan and has threatened to attack the island if it declares independence.

The mistaken shipment is the second blunder in recent months.

Last August a B-52 bomber flew across several US states mistakenly armed with nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.

That was from the BBC.  Rather worrying!