That was a surprisingly good read. Brief enough that I can finish while in-between tickets, but long and deep enough that it can beautifully explain the whole crisis without oversimplifying it, and at the same time carefully presenting the two conflicting narratives.
edit: although I probably wouldn't trust the source when reading about Middle East conflicts...
> This is why Taiwan cannot be understood only as a sovereignty dispute. It is a test of whether the Indo-Pacific remains a plural maritime system, or whether it becomes a China-centered security sphere.
It was never a plural maritime system. The question is whether the oceans in question are US-dominated or Chinese-dominated.
There are quite a lot of other countries that use that bit of ocean. India, Vietnam, Japan, Australia etc. By not plural you mean China/US are more aggressive?
I think the unsaid part is that the US by and large upheld navigable seas for everyone up until recently but we can't expect this from China. (And regrettably from recent events, maybe not from the US either.)
[deleted]
Why cant' we expect this from China which is the main trading partner for the vast majority of the world and relies on navigable seas exactly?
They didn’t upheld navigable seas for everyone. Sanctions are a thing. They upheld the seas for anyone that wanted to join and play by its rules.
Slightly separate issues. We didn't interdict Iranian tankers at sea until very recently, despite the sanctions. But we are doing it now, of course.
That said, China has a long record of doing business with anyone and avoiding ideological conflict on all issues except for specifically Taiwan. They did business with Pinochet's Argentina in the 80s, while Argentina was throwing socialists out of helicopters and China was still fully communist. Unless you're a pure American forpol shill, there's no reason to suspect they'd restrict free passage in their area.
I expect China to do sanctions on anyone doing business with Taiwan.
They've had 75 years to prove you right, and so far they haven't.
They didn't really become a global power until recently. Even during my youth in the 2000's it was 'China is rising', 75 years ago they were extremely poor, mostly agrarian and recovering from decades of war and revolution. 2026 China is a completely different beast.
Lets play "Spot the thinktank cretins"!
jstribune.com about page:
> The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune is a journal representing Israeli and American views about international affairs.
Hm interesting. Lets see who runs it.
Editorial Board
-Ahmed Charai, Chair -- Owner of the site, on multiple thinktank boards such as the atlantic council
-Jacob Heilbrunn, Co-Chair -- Another fellow of the atlantic council
-Dr. Daniel Samet -- Daniel J. Samet is a Jeane Kirkpatrick Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute
-Melinda Haring -- a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center
-Dr. Eran Lerman -- former IDF colonel and a lecturer at Shalem College
Board of Directors
-Gen. James Jones -- 21st national security advisor under Obama.
-Ahmed Charai -- owner of the site again
-Admiral James Foggo III -- former US navy Admiral. Nice retirement spot, James
Board of Advisors
-Hon. Dov Zakheim, Chairman -- Various positions under Reagan
-Gen. Yaakov Amidror -- former major general and National Security Advisor of Israel
-- got tired of the bit around here --
-Ambassador Anne W. Patterson
-Ambassador Eric Edelman
-Ambassador Bilahari Kausikan
-Ambassador Atul Keshap
-Gen. Ruth Yaron
-Dan Meridor
Anyway, the goal here was to point out articles like this don't come from journalistic backgrounds, but thinktank policy makers. The intention of pieces like this is to launder official government opinion as a semi-legitimate news source. Think "Radio Free Asia".
Paul Craig Roberts points to Israel and the powerful American lobby are writing new laws to be passed forbidding words and ideas, which is against the spirit and the letter of established laws and gets no or not enough journalistic attention.
Sometimes an essay is just an essay, and not an elaborate conspiracy by multiple governments to trick you into thinking about geography
This one was just an essay, but remember when you couldn't go a day without an article about Uyghur's in Xiajiang?
I'd play this game with those articles, where every article would cite a little essay like this on a similar thinktank site or the actual Zenz study. No new journalism, just rehashing reports like this.
This isn't a conspiracy, it's an industry made up of ex-insiders who maintain relationships and pedal the talking points.
Ok so....you previously felt like you were seeing a lot of articles about Uighurs ....and that's proof of a wider conspiracy?
And....you see that essays often include citations. And that's proof of a dark network of the illuminated?
Funny, I watched it just last Friday (randomly, as I don't follow that channel). But while its author makes a compelling point, I'm not sure sure how much of the basing of the semi-conductor industry in Taiwan was a conscious decision vs a post-facto rationalization.
This has not much to do with semi conductors (i think). China and USA have strong diplomatic relations, that seemingly have been turned upside down a couple of time, which way the coin landed this time? Not sure, but with Trumps recent visit and statements, he seem to recite the 1980’s playbook. See: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/06/25/i...
Geography shapes strategy more than headlines do.
Taiwan isn’t just a political issue — it’s shipping lanes, semiconductor supply chains, military positioning, and global economics all concentrated in one place.
That’s why the situation stays so sensitive even decades later.
> Taiwan is not simply an island claimed by Beijing
Yes, China claims Taiwan and China are the same country. Not mentioned is that US policy also says that Taiwan and China are the same country. In fact Taiwan policy is that China and Taiwan are the same country. You would think reading this that Taiwan had declared independence from China as a separate country.
Also on the topic of "simply an island" - Taiwan is not just the island of Taiwan, they are on Kinmen island in the harbor of Xiamen on the mainland PRC. This would be like Manhattan receiving imperial proclamations about its "sovereignty" from China.
The fact is Taiwan was Chinese long before the United States even existed, just like the Russian Navy has been in Crimea since before the US existed. The US funded and armed separatist forces - but in 1900 the US was raising its flag in Beijing's imperial city. The historical development is these imperial intrusions have been pushed back by China. Taiwan is important to China and the US is too occupied blockading Cuba, slaughtering Venezuelan and Iranian leadership, aiding the genocide of Gaza and the invasions of Syria and Lebanon etc., while its health secretary fights against vaccines.
> Taiwan policy is that China and Taiwan are the same country
This is as useful as saying both South Korea and North Korea have the policy that South Korea and North Korea are the same country. Which was actually true until a few years ago.
And just like in the case of Taiwan, they would be the same country if not for US invasion and continued occupation of the south. That's not hyperbole by the way, the military in the south is literally under US command.
It's still a misleading characterization of the situation.
That was a surprisingly good read. Brief enough that I can finish while in-between tickets, but long and deep enough that it can beautifully explain the whole crisis without oversimplifying it, and at the same time carefully presenting the two conflicting narratives.
edit: although I probably wouldn't trust the source when reading about Middle East conflicts...
> This is why Taiwan cannot be understood only as a sovereignty dispute. It is a test of whether the Indo-Pacific remains a plural maritime system, or whether it becomes a China-centered security sphere.
It was never a plural maritime system. The question is whether the oceans in question are US-dominated or Chinese-dominated.
There are quite a lot of other countries that use that bit of ocean. India, Vietnam, Japan, Australia etc. By not plural you mean China/US are more aggressive?
I think the unsaid part is that the US by and large upheld navigable seas for everyone up until recently but we can't expect this from China. (And regrettably from recent events, maybe not from the US either.)
Why cant' we expect this from China which is the main trading partner for the vast majority of the world and relies on navigable seas exactly?
They didn’t upheld navigable seas for everyone. Sanctions are a thing. They upheld the seas for anyone that wanted to join and play by its rules.
Slightly separate issues. We didn't interdict Iranian tankers at sea until very recently, despite the sanctions. But we are doing it now, of course.
That said, China has a long record of doing business with anyone and avoiding ideological conflict on all issues except for specifically Taiwan. They did business with Pinochet's Argentina in the 80s, while Argentina was throwing socialists out of helicopters and China was still fully communist. Unless you're a pure American forpol shill, there's no reason to suspect they'd restrict free passage in their area.
I expect China to do sanctions on anyone doing business with Taiwan.
They've had 75 years to prove you right, and so far they haven't.
They didn't really become a global power until recently. Even during my youth in the 2000's it was 'China is rising', 75 years ago they were extremely poor, mostly agrarian and recovering from decades of war and revolution. 2026 China is a completely different beast.
Lets play "Spot the thinktank cretins"!
jstribune.com about page:
> The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune is a journal representing Israeli and American views about international affairs.
Hm interesting. Lets see who runs it.
Editorial Board
-Ahmed Charai, Chair -- Owner of the site, on multiple thinktank boards such as the atlantic council
-Jacob Heilbrunn, Co-Chair -- Another fellow of the atlantic council
-Dr. Daniel Samet -- Daniel J. Samet is a Jeane Kirkpatrick Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute
-Melinda Haring -- a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center
-Dr. Eran Lerman -- former IDF colonel and a lecturer at Shalem College
Board of Directors
-Gen. James Jones -- 21st national security advisor under Obama.
-Ahmed Charai -- owner of the site again
-Admiral James Foggo III -- former US navy Admiral. Nice retirement spot, James
Board of Advisors
-Hon. Dov Zakheim, Chairman -- Various positions under Reagan
-Hon. John Hamre -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hamre
-Gen. Yaakov Amidror -- former major general and National Security Advisor of Israel
-- got tired of the bit around here --
-Ambassador Anne W. Patterson
-Ambassador Eric Edelman
-Ambassador Bilahari Kausikan
-Ambassador Atul Keshap
-Gen. Ruth Yaron
-Dan Meridor
Anyway, the goal here was to point out articles like this don't come from journalistic backgrounds, but thinktank policy makers. The intention of pieces like this is to launder official government opinion as a semi-legitimate news source. Think "Radio Free Asia".
Paul Craig Roberts points to Israel and the powerful American lobby are writing new laws to be passed forbidding words and ideas, which is against the spirit and the letter of established laws and gets no or not enough journalistic attention.
Sometimes an essay is just an essay, and not an elaborate conspiracy by multiple governments to trick you into thinking about geography
This one was just an essay, but remember when you couldn't go a day without an article about Uyghur's in Xiajiang?
I'd play this game with those articles, where every article would cite a little essay like this on a similar thinktank site or the actual Zenz study. No new journalism, just rehashing reports like this.
This isn't a conspiracy, it's an industry made up of ex-insiders who maintain relationships and pedal the talking points.
Ok so....you previously felt like you were seeing a lot of articles about Uighurs ....and that's proof of a wider conspiracy?
And....you see that essays often include citations. And that's proof of a dark network of the illuminated?
Maybe these were all just essays?
> This isn't a conspiracy, it's
It's not X it's Y
> It's not X it's Y
Buddy....
Here's the author of the essay by the way: https://x.com/RaghuKondori/status/1877616501395505259?s=20
He has multiple books with AI covers, loony-adjacent nonsense ideology, prolifically posts on X @ing politicians and posting AI images.
He even has his own thinktank: https://shahvand.org/en/
He's also a Reza Pahlavi crank, you know, the Maryland Shah. https://shahvand.org/en/pahlavi-will-return/
And most of the time people do not work in their free time.
I found this video about the topic on internet: https://youtu.be/UWBrzzd1_yg informational and entertaining
Funny, I watched it just last Friday (randomly, as I don't follow that channel). But while its author makes a compelling point, I'm not sure sure how much of the basing of the semi-conductor industry in Taiwan was a conscious decision vs a post-facto rationalization.
This has not much to do with semi conductors (i think). China and USA have strong diplomatic relations, that seemingly have been turned upside down a couple of time, which way the coin landed this time? Not sure, but with Trumps recent visit and statements, he seem to recite the 1980’s playbook. See: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/06/25/i...
From 1989: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1989/06/25/i...
Geography shapes strategy more than headlines do. Taiwan isn’t just a political issue — it’s shipping lanes, semiconductor supply chains, military positioning, and global economics all concentrated in one place. That’s why the situation stays so sensitive even decades later.
> Taiwan is not simply an island claimed by Beijing
Yes, China claims Taiwan and China are the same country. Not mentioned is that US policy also says that Taiwan and China are the same country. In fact Taiwan policy is that China and Taiwan are the same country. You would think reading this that Taiwan had declared independence from China as a separate country.
Also on the topic of "simply an island" - Taiwan is not just the island of Taiwan, they are on Kinmen island in the harbor of Xiamen on the mainland PRC. This would be like Manhattan receiving imperial proclamations about its "sovereignty" from China.
The fact is Taiwan was Chinese long before the United States even existed, just like the Russian Navy has been in Crimea since before the US existed. The US funded and armed separatist forces - but in 1900 the US was raising its flag in Beijing's imperial city. The historical development is these imperial intrusions have been pushed back by China. Taiwan is important to China and the US is too occupied blockading Cuba, slaughtering Venezuelan and Iranian leadership, aiding the genocide of Gaza and the invasions of Syria and Lebanon etc., while its health secretary fights against vaccines.
> Taiwan policy is that China and Taiwan are the same country
This is as useful as saying both South Korea and North Korea have the policy that South Korea and North Korea are the same country. Which was actually true until a few years ago.
And just like in the case of Taiwan, they would be the same country if not for US invasion and continued occupation of the south. That's not hyperbole by the way, the military in the south is literally under US command.
It's still a misleading characterization of the situation.
It isn't misleading. It's plain wrong.
Do explain which part is wrong. Are you not aware of the fact that the US controls the military in occupied Korea? https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/defense/20260511/def...
When a foreign power controls a military of another nation, that's literally what occupation is.
I would add, however, the modern sentiment of the Taiwanese people is moving towards independence:
https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2023/09/02/...
In fact, both the majority of the Taiwanese people and the current government are against unification.
[dead]
China is gonna rip apart Taiwan unless it stops trusting America and starts believe that war is inevitable sooner or later.