quote:Beijing, which is hesitant to get more deeply involved, is asked to provide training and even equipment to help Pakistan counter a growing militant threat.
Reporting from Washington -- The Obama administration has appealed to China to provide training and even military equipment to help Pakistan counter a growing militant threat, U.S. officials said.
The proposal is part of a broad push by Washington to enlist key allies of Pakistan in the effort to stabilize the country. The U.S. is seeking to persuade Islamabad to step up its efforts against militants, while supporting the fragile civilian government and the nation's tottering economy.
...
China traditionally has been reluctant to intervene in the affairs of other countries. However, Chinese officials are concerned about the militant threat near its western border, fearing it could destabilize the region and threaten China's growing economic presence in Pakistan.
A senior U.S. official acknowledged that China was hesitant to get more involved, but said, "You can see that they're thinking about it." He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the diplomatic sensitivity of the subject.
U.S. officials believe China is skilled at counterinsurgency, a holdover of the knowledge gained during the country's lengthy civil war that ended with a communist victory in 1949. And with its strong military ties to Pakistan, U.S. officials hope China could help craft a more sophisticated strategy than Islamabad's heavy-handed approach.
The Pakistani military has used artillery and aircraft against Taliban extremists in the Swat Valley and surrounding areas in its ongoing offensive. "They're very focused on hardware," the senior U.S. official said of the Pakistanis. But the fighting has forced more than 2 million civilians to flee, United Nations officials estimate, and a humanitarian crisis looms.
The tide of displaced people could set off a backlash against the campaign among ordinary Pakistanis, many of whom already see the fight as driven by American, rather than Pakistani, interests.
posted
The ability to prevent something from being taken does not necessarily require ownership of that something.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Ya but in any decent grand startegy game that is ALL there is to it, in realpolitik its roughly the same as well.
IP: Logged |
posted
Good thing we aren't talking about a strategy game then, we're talking about the real world. Besides the Chinese don't need to make a grab for Taiwan, the Taiwanese people may very well come willingly within 20-30 years.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Assuming the Goumindang can hold onto office for the next little while.
IP: Logged |
quote:Kinda is, all they have to do is withdraw the 7th fleet and stay quiet in the UN resolutions.
Heh. This is definitely a strange statement coming from you, Blayne. Good heavens, you're not suggesting the PRC would annex Taiwan by force, are you?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:U.S. officials believe China is skilled at counterinsurgency, a holdover of the knowledge gained during the country's civil war that ended with a communist victory in 1949.
Huh. I'm not really sure what they are getting at here, but that was 60 years ago. Is the implication that our asses are still stinging from that defeat?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: Assuming the Goumindang can hold onto office for the next little while.
You mean the Pan-Blue coalition. But even under the Democratic Progressive Party, the legislature with support from the populace blocked President Chen's most obvious separatist policies.
Unless a new undercurrent emerges I think Chen Shui Bian was the high water mark for independence policy.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
well the fastest way for unification to happen is by the pan blue staying in power consecutively if the pan green manage to say get into power which could happen considering the margins for victories in 2 party democracies which is only 1 corruption scandal away then itll probly cause a setback for a while pushing back for like 4-8 years.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: well the fastest way for unification to happen is by the pan blue staying in power consecutively if the pan green manage to say get into power which could happen considering the margins for victories in 2 party democracies which is only 1 corruption scandal away then itll probly cause a setback for a while pushing back for like 4-8 years.
I'm still not so sure. The Pan-Green party is not unilaterally against closer ties with China, but then again the Pan-Blue party is not unilaterally for reunification. The Pan-Green coalition has to somehow jump the hurdle of promoting Taiwanese independence while simultaneously dealing with the fact that China and Taiwanese economical relations have never been so close and so prosperous. Despite their political differences it's hard to fight against the fact that the Taiwanese people like conducting their business with other Chinese people who have a nearly identical language, and share a very deep cultural heritage with only relatively little variance.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
well I don't live there so maybe they've had an official restructuring to be more in favour of economic ties but like how the Republicans are becoming more extreme and regional isn't it possible the pan green would also go more extreme in its separatist leanings? I think you lived there once or still do whats the current political image and stances of the pan green? Just because pragmatism says one thing doesn't mean yuo dont have ideologes going "rawr!"
IP: Logged |
posted
I lived there from 2001-2003. So Chen Shui Bian was serving his first term which nobody was expecting as it only happened because there was a split in the KMT that year. Chen barely secured reelection in 04, and it was after that that he started making his biggest attempts to separate. During his first term, as a response to mainland uproar he was alot more careful and guarded in his speeches. His constitution referendum motion (during his second term) couldn't hold water because of a Pan-Blue walkout. Like US presidents, there is a two term limit in office, so second term seems to be the "legacy building" term. The mainland obviously voiced it's displeasure at Chen's referendum, but it was not nearly as loud as you'd think because the Taiwanese people themselves were blocking it.
China and Taiwan's economic ties have been developing a very long time (Since the very late 70's actually). Early in Taiwan's history, politicians on both sides quickly realized that trade was the most important thing they could both promote. It was often used as a lever to engender good feelings when the political scene was not so friendly. Eventually the economic realities caught up with the political scene, and now Taiwanese politicians who threaten further trade prosperity are hard pressed to win election. Instead, they promote Taiwanese separate identity while still making overtures to the mainland via trade.
When polling Taiwanese people about how they feel concerning reunification or independence there are some interesting dynamics. If you simply ask them if they prefer the status quo, or reunification they strongly support the status quo. If you ask them if they could have independence without repercussions they most support that, but if you ask them if they could have reunification with the assurance that politically they could retain their rights they then support reunification just as strongly. If all options are put on the table they split evenly amongst reunification and independence, but maintaining the status quo still wins.
Long story short, they will go where prosperity leads them. I think China will eventually offer them a Special Administrative Region deal much like Hong Kong, but probably a bit less constricting as the party that will set it up will be quite different from the party of 1997. If trade continues to expand, and I see no reason why it shouldn't, the mainland can read the writing on the wall too, Taiwan and China will continue to get cozy.
Look at section 1.4 scroll down to Taiwan's trade relations with its' largest 4 trading partners and just below the current state of things. Taiwan and China have been growing closer for a very long time.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:U.S. officials believe China is skilled at counterinsurgency, a holdover of the knowledge gained during the country's civil war that ended with a communist victory in 1949.
Huh. I'm not really sure what they are getting at here, but that was 60 years ago. Is the implication that our asses are still stinging from that defeat?
I don't think so, and why would US officials now be bitter? No, I think it is more of a case of "takes one to know one," as in having recently (recently compared to the American one anyways) fought as an insurgency the Chinese may have a better idea as to how to fight one.
That would seem to be the American idea anyways.
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: ... Besides the Chinese don't need to make a grab for Taiwan, the Taiwanese people may very well come willingly within 20-30 years.
To be honest, I always found this idea dubious. You can have almost complete economic domination as in the case of Canada and the US and still not have unification. Plus, the examples of a country willing merging with another in modern history are not that common, I can think of Newfoundland and West/East Germany (maybe a couple more), but it should be obvious that separation is actually more common.
But whatever, it seems to me that the Taiwan issue is almost like the "Hitler" of China threads wherein every American thread about China eventually turns to the Taiwan issue
No, I think further co-operation between the US and China in the "global war on terror" is one that could have profound intended and unintended consequences. Plus even what limited co-operation there has been so far seems to have been pretty corrosive for citizens of *both* countries actually.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder what the Indian government's response to this gesture will be. On one hand, anything that leads to a more stable Pakistan is probably good for India, given their military history and the fact that both players have nukes now. On the other hand, India sees China as its biggest long-term worry, both economically and militarily. China's supply of weapons to Sri Lanka's government, and their development of a port in Sri Lanka is already troubling India. Closer ties between China & Pakistan - or China & the US generally - would add to that worry.
Posts: 2409 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Mucus I'm pretty sure you know that is not a good analogy, Taiwan was the fleeing remnants of a pseudo fascist regime the people of Taiwan were a part of China originally split off by foreign invasion, Canada is not an offshoot of the states or a splinter, we were independent and distinct the only tie was language culturally we were much different. Taiwan and China are culturally virtually identical the primary difference is they kept Traditional script, the Mainlanders simplified it to promote literacy.
Separation is generally more common between distinct ethnic groups not in countries of homogenious cultural and ethic identities.
IP: Logged |
posted
Not really. Both the founding populations of Canada and the US are largely British and largely free immigration even relatively early helped this along especially with the burst of immigration after the Loyalists fled the US for Canada.
Besides, we're not even really talking about straight separation, we're talking about maintaining the status quo of an effectively separate state which is different. i.e. if even separation is common, why must unification be inevitable?
Additionally, I'm not even convinced that it would necessarily be a good thing for either party involved to unify anyways. But as I said, this is just a tangent.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mucus: I *think* reunification will eventually take place. I wouldn't bet the farm on it though. I think it's still possible that Taiwan might remain independent forever, but I think if it does it will be because the Mainland doesn't make the cut as far as the Taiwanese people are concerned. If it makes you feel any better it's only because Hong Kong is now part of China that that doesn't come up about as often as Taiwan in Chinese discussions.
I'm not sure China is well suited to assist the United States in the War on Terror. Not that they can't physically, but culturally that doesn't fit the Chinese model very well. I think they are better suited to help out with North Korea, and they can certainly secure their borders with South Asian countries, but beyond that I'm not sure what else. I suppose they could sell arms to Pakistan and that would probably be of little negative import as far as Chinese politics is concerned.
edit: Further, looking at trends for supporting reunification I'm not seeing a stronger and stronger push for independence, instead politicians are expected to increase economic prosperity by being friendly with the Mainland. I'm not so certain people in Taiwan would prefer being apart if China becomes a super power. Say China indeed becomes a juggernaut of economic and militaristic power. Can you see Taiwan as it is now remaining in that future?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally, given even odds I wouldn't bet on it either way. I just think it is a bit of an unpredictable situation and I don't think we're assured of either outcome.
As for if China becomes a super power, the US *is* (was?) a super-power and I can definitely say that there very little desire in Canada to join up.
It is also debatable that Canada (and maybe the US) is better off with Canada and the US separately rather than Canada as a northern state equivalent to California.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Additionally, I'm not even convinced that it would necessarily be a good thing for either party involved to unify anyways. But as I said, this is just a tangent.
I'm curious, Mucus, about ways in which the PRC wouldn't benefit from unification with Taiwan?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, in what ways does the US not benefit from unification with Canada?
Arguably, the development of a distinct but similar nation alongside another has certain general benefits. As a smaller society, it is perhaps easier for Canada to test new ideas like universal healthcare and then mock the US until you do something similar. It also keeps you honest, having healthy competition and an easy test arena for foreign relations. Perhaps a US sprawled across the whole continent would be even more arrogant and self-destructive on the world scene.
More specifically in the Chinese situation, as long as the CCP needs to keep up its good behaviour in order to attract Taiwan, that means good business for all parties concerned including citizens on the mainland. If the CCP does gain control over Taiwan, that means they don't have to keep up appearances as much and this pullback could be bad for business even on the mainland. Possible same effects in the areas of a free press and so forth.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Arguably, the development of a distinct but similar nation alongside another has certain general benefits. As a smaller society, it is perhaps easier for Canada to test new ideas like universal healthcare and then mock the US until you do something similar. It also keeps you honest, having healthy competition and an easy test arena for foreign relations. Perhaps a US sprawled across the whole continent would be even more arrogant and self-destructive on the world scene.
And here I thought hubris was such an American trait, Mucus;)
Nevertheless, I see what you mean. You're talking a 'for its own good' sort of benefit. I was thinking more along the lines of what the PRC itself would desire.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Taiwan would be a good one-time boost to the economy but this effect would be less and less as taiwans relative economy gets smaller and their borders more open and the trade volumn increases. The prestige from the event would be huge and the ramifications for the parties image would be huge, think of it as the final accomplishment of all campaign promises. Militarily it would give them a better ability to project force towards probably US army and naval/airforce bases, and would put them in a better position to contain Japan (if it ever remiliterized).
For Taiwan well they nolonger have to deal with 600 ballistic missiles pointed at them anymore, would gain the probably final dropping of whatever transborder taxes or travel and trade restrictions may hypothetically still exist, they nolonger would need to spend X amount of money on arms for defences and could conceiavbly depending on how canny they are in negotiations get the Central Government to pay for most civil services, again is the matter if national pride, with enough effort and spin it could be made as a momentus occasion cementing certian politicians and their parties in local politics.
The reason why its most likely is an inevitability is because nearly all of the Mainlands foreign policy has been aimed at securing Unification, just because theyre making money off of it now doesn't mean they will push back the date for it, every day and every action is a calculated political move to bring that date closer to fruition.
I bet there are several competing think tanks on the government payroll every day analyzing current taiwanese political and economic trends and reporting to the Politburo daily on what to do next and how to see current events all inregards to the "Plan". Its practically their only foreign policy goal, the only other goal is securing oil contracts followed by a vague desire to be a "Great Power" again.
IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
