Comments by "Alan Friesen" (@alanfriesen9837) on "TLDR News Global" channel.

@ShadowPhoenixMaximus It's about more than face, it's about national identity and civilizational sovereignty. China is almost to the point where they don't give a damn what the rest of the world thinks about them, especially not the western world. The Chinese have a keen recollection of the century of humiliation and they absolutely invoke it in the service of solidarity. In some ways it did happen yesterday. The last unequal treaty was the Sino-British Joint Declaration on Hong Kong in 1984. The Chinese people want to be proud, and they feel that they cannot be until Taiwan is reincorporated into the People's Republic.
26
I'm fairly confident that the periodic blackouts that China is no longer facing and which had a lot more to do with local leaders being overzealous about clean energy targets than about coal shortages is much less of a nuisance to China than the loss of exports is to Australia. Having said this, I'd like to see both countries behaving more like good neighbors and less like assholes, and I wish my country (USA) would stop stirring the pot.
22
@ShadowPhoenixMaximus Taiwan does not have to agree to unify. Unification will go forward regardless.
15
That is exactly the factor stopping China from recovering Taiwan, but it will not put them off indefinitely.
11
No. What China is saying to Taiwan is "You are part of us. You cannot remain apart indefinitely. We'd rather do this peacefully, but that is not a condition of reunification."
7
@jokuvaan5175 What you think, and what I think as well, are irrelevant. It's about the will of the powerful. Taiwan will be brought back into the Chinese polity regardless of what anybody outside of the Chinese people want.
7
I'm hoping very much that it will at least extend to Nepal. Rail access to Kathmandu would have been very helpful in the last COVID surge in Nepal.
7
@eubalenaglacialis With the exception of the period of Japanese rule from 1898-1945, Taiwan has been governed by one Chinese government or another since 1683. The Chinese people believe emphatically that Taiwan is part of their country and in the end, they'll have the capacity to impose that belief on the residents of Taiwan administratively.
4
It has very little to do with the blackouts, and China is not suffering food shortages.
4
P I think your understanding of China is pretty good. I'm not sure I think India is as blameless as they like to present themselves. I think Modi preferred Trump over Xi and he carried some of Trump's water in his little bully fight, which I think India will live to regret. China is certainly no angel. I think they kind of like having a belligerent India around as a place where they can experiment a little with militarism and clandestine sabotage and justify it without drawing the direct ire of America and Europe. I honestly don't know about Xinjiang. I've seen some credible refutations of most of the accusations that I'm aware of and I am keenly aware of destabilizing efforts from separatist supporters including western journalistic standard bearers like the BBC, NYT, DW, etc. That being said, I'm not entirely sure that I trust the Chinese on this either. I do think that the Chinese government watches the mosques, in fact they watch religious houses in general, for antigovernmental rhetoric. Some of this is paranoia, but some of it is historically justified. I am confident that China is not trying to destroy Uighur culture, and a fair amount of my skepticism towards their accusers is because they invoke this hyperbolic claim of genocide, which is total nonsense strictly for the consumption of western ears in a largely successful effort to summon international sympathy and financing. That's not to say that there are not abuses occurring either systematically or individually. That is something we have troubling suggestions of, but no proof.
3
Yes, it appears to be more about power than it is about morality. That is true outside of Iran as well though.
3
@ArawnOfAnnwn "China was happy enough to leave Taiwan mostly alone for decades…" because they had no choice. China has not been, and arguably is not yet a military match for the contingent of the United States navy likely to be tasked with defending Taiwan. What's changed is the balance of power, not the attitude of the Chinese people and their government.
3
@ethanrhorer8528 My understanding is that most regular Chinese who own their houses do not have mortgages. The people that have a lot of debt are speculators. While those in the building trade will be affected the cost to the average Chinese homeowner will not be immediately felt. The problem in the west would be much harder because so many ordinary people would end up under water on their mortgages and many would be forced to try to hang onto houses that they couldn't afford the monthly payments on. In China this is much more of a problem for the rich than for the average Chinese.
2
I would like very much to see them succeed at modernizing the social environment regarding hajibs, mixed activities, and such. I hope very much that a whole bunch of women don't have to suffer or die in order to make such changes happen. That being said, I don't think Iran's system is likely to change and I think it is irresponsible of us on the outside to foment unrest within Iran. I hope we are not doing that.
2
P Thank you. I've enjoyed your posts. I really think you are well-informed.
2
@leungpaul9401 I'm glad to hear that if that is indeed the case. But this is the first I've heard of it.
2
@eubalenaglacialis The Mongolian Empire was divided into four sections once China was conquered. Each on became its own empire. One of these embraced the Chinese governmental system and became the Yuan Dynasty, the borders of which largely define China's claims today.
2
@Croz89 Most Chinese homeowners don't carry a mortgage though.
1
It's already happening. And why not, it makes perfect sense.
1
De-escalation is only possible if Taiwan and its supporters seriously consider negotiating a peaceful reunification. Anything else is a net zero at best and more than likely an escalation.
1
@Zaydan Naufal There is a Kurdish nationalist movement that advocates for the territorial disillusion of Türkiye (as well as Iran, Iraq and Syria). This does not include all Kurds, many are loyal citizens to the countries they live in, but it makes all Kurds suspect, which is unfortunate.
1
@florianfelix8295 Türkiye doesn't want to maintain its sovereign territory in order to control resources. It wants to maintain its sovereign territory because it is its sovereign territory.
1
China would like the people living in Taiwan to accept reunification, but they will not be repulsed by the lack of it. If the people of Taiwan reject their inclusion, those that cannot escape the island will be rounded up and indoctrinated. Those that refuse to take to it, will never be released.
1
@SrCoxas If Iran needs change, it's important that Iranians be the people that make that decision, outside of the coaxing of the rest of us.
1
Iranian women have a long history of strength and determination. Nothing's changed.
1
War
1
That might come to the surprise of the people of Rome.
1
I gave you a thumb's up, but I honestly haven't seen any of the stuff you mentioned in "Pooh bear's China or Putin's Russia". Not that they don't have their issues, but they don't seem to have those issues.
1
Taiwan is part of China and it will be unified by 2049 either voluntarily or by force. China won't take Taiwan by force until they are sure they could win unless Taiwan does declare independence, at which point China will do what they can to blockade the island until such time as they can take it by force. It's in both Mainland China's and Taiwan's interests to reunify without a war. Taiwan should be making reunification negotiation gestures to try to preserve whatever their most currently treasured policies are post-reunification. Of course, politics tend to get in the way of good decision making (see Brexit).
1
I think the measure of success shouldn't be whether or not the place became more democratic or not, but whether or not the people of the country are better off for having participated. I don't know if the average Tunisian is better off, but the average Libyan, Egyptian, Syrian and Bahraini have all suffered much more than they have benefitted. From a humanitarian standpoint, the Arab Spring was an abject failure and continues to be so.
1
P "seems like a very toxic relationship" It will most likely be so initially.
1
P China is an emerging superpower that pursues its own interests, which include assisting nations that are not club members of the first world into some degree of prosperity. Some of this is empathetic but most of it is realist survivalism. China has been less draconian in its loan restructuring to debtors than has the Breton Woods regime, but that's no guarantee of future behavior. China is still learning the game. Most of China's international diplomatic history since 1976 has been dominated by strategic abstention. It's only recently that they've started taking a more active role. My hope is that there can be more cooperation and planning between the western order represented by the United States, Europe and Japan and the newer Chinese-driven alternative. It disheartens me that the Chinese initiatives are so roundly criticized and undermined by fearful western diplomats when there is plenty of room for investment in humanity for all sides. As an American I think we should be doing for Latin America and West Africa what China is doing for Southeast Asia and East Africa. And I think we should be working together with the Chinese, as well as the Japanese and the Europeans, to modernize infrastructure and raise the standard of living for all people around the world. This may still occur, but there is a lot of resistance, especially among the cold warriors that make up the ranks of western politicians and journalists. A point on the Xinjiang issue: China's accusers all have agendas that go well beyond concern for human rights. This doesn't, in-and-of-itself, make them liars, it doesn't even make them wrong, but it makes them legitimately suspect in their accusations. I've seen no confirmation of systemic human rights abuses in Xinjiang beyond ethnic profiling. While that is a human rights abuse and I condemn it, it falls far short of the claims made by Adrien Zenz or the World Uighur Congress. Until confirmation of torture, mass incarceration, slave labor, or genocide is confirmed by a credible unbiased source (and preferably multiple credible unbiased sources), then it should be viewed with prudent skepticism.
1
P I'm aware of most of the history that you are laying out, but I'm really glad you reminded me of the details. I'm aware of most of these allegations but I don't see any coming from credible sources. I just googled "destruction of Uighur mosques" and I get the same rogues gallery of anti-Chinese press that typically distort the realities within China (The Guardian, The New York Times, Forbes quoting a report from ASPI). Again, it doesn't mean these allegations are wrong, it's just that they can't be assumed to be true by anyone who has watched China's treatment by think tanks and journalists over the past three decades. I disagree with the pretense that teaching Uighurs Mandarin is a form of ethnic cleansing. Banning Uighur would be ethnic cleansing, but there is no evidence of that. In the United States we teach in English, and that is the case in all our ethnic enclaves. Frankly I think we should teach everybody in Spanish as well, but that's off the point. I don't know about banning names and clothing. I think if it is the case than it's stupid, but it's probably meant more to undermine fundamentalist rather than Uighur identity. You wrote "Maybe genocide is not the right term but it is being more and more evident that there has been a systematic strategy to undermine their culture and mistreat them and enforce the communist ideas and through it establish a homogeneous/ dominant Han society. " In my opinion, you may be right about mistreatment. And to the extent that that exists and continues, that is a serious problem. But I very much disagree that China is trying to undermine their culture. China is not trying to establish a greater Han society, but it is trying to reinforce a Chinese society that is inclusive, similar to the American society that I live in and that includes a large variety of hyphenated Americans, many with distinctly ethnic, but still fundamentally American identities. Distinct minority cultures always face a conundrum when it comes to modernization and integration. Conservative elements always accuse progress of being culturally repressive. But China goes out of its way to recognize and preserve minority cultures and traditions where they don't hold back the community or endanger its members or others. Also China has strong affirmative action programs to help minority citizens better participate and prosper in the modern world. While some people think of these programs as ethnic cleansing, I don't. China is in no way trying to destroy the Uighur people. If it is true that "the government failed to arrest any of the murderers and failed to protect Uighurs." regarding the attack in Shaoguan, then that is indeed a miscarriage of justice. It is understandable why Uighur's believing that to be the case should protest. It's unfortunate that the protests escalated. It's possible that Chinese claims of planned violence were inflated or manufactured. It's also possible that those claims were not inflated or manufactured. I would not be surprised if there are incidents of abuse within the reeducation centers, some of which may even be egregious. I would be surprised if there was widespread state-sanctioned abuse. To the extent that abuse exists, I condemn it. I would hope that individuals who have genuinely faced abuse can be compensated at some point. If there is indeed systemic abuse and the Chinese government is either promoting it or ignoring it, then yes, they should absolutely be held accountable for it. And it may be the case after all. But for me to believe that it is definitely happening, I need real proof, beyond the conjecture of Adrien Zenz, and beyond the testimony of a few exiles on the WUC payroll.
1
It's definitely a balancing act.
1
What I've been told regarding Quemoy and Matsu is that after the initial failure to take the islands Mao used them as a way to cheaply irritate the international community in the same way that North Korea launches rockets to do the same. Of course China hasn't really needed to do that since the seventies.
1
The toppling of a government is extremely hard on the people living under that government. If there is one thing worse than an overly conservative regime, it's the chaos of revolution. Please don't wish that on the people of Iran.
1
@vuk70a48 Absolutely, and not just news. It's all of us.
1
@ShadowPhoenixMaximus It in no way implies mutual agreement, though that would definitely be the preferred course. If unification cannot be achieved amicably then the PLA will indeed invade the island. It may take a few generations to reconcile the population, it did for the Qing, but the sooner they get started, the sooner that's accomplished.
1
@ShadowPhoenixMaximus Hong Kong isn't working out well because China has been living up to the terms of the handover agreement which has allowed some in the city to incubate nostalgic hostilities, particularly in the education system. As for Taiwan, if after a forced reunification the population remains stubbornly resistant to the new reality, most likely they will be removed to the mainland and dispersed among the provinces while mainlanders will be encouraged to move to the island. Hopefully it doesn't come to that.
1
@skymaster4121 The CCP doesn't own anything; they govern China, or at least all of China outside of Taiwan and Mongolia. By dint of definition the CCP cannot recover Taiwan for itself, but it can recover Taiwan for China, which at some point it will do.
1
@rfimor I think effectively governing Taiwan is the least of China's worries. I think the threat of war with the United States and the possibility that the invasion would fail because of that is their primary impediment.
1
@KathyXie Those two decades occurred nearly four centuries ago, and they had as much control over the island as Brazil currently has over the Amazon.
1
@originalsusser There weren't, but it still had nothing to do with Australian coal supplies.
1
@ashutoshtripathi. A surprising number do.
1
@freeman10000 China's government is anything but insane. China learned its most aggressive techniques from the business end of Western and Japanese battle cruisers. Australia and China will have to work on their relationship together. But in the end, China is in a much more powerful position, trade-wise and geopolitically, than Australia could ever hope to be in, and Australia is in China's neighborhood whether they want to admit it or not.
1
@rjfaber1991 "However, authoritarian regimes are not exactly strangers to twisting the facts of a foreign country's actions to galvanise support for the regime domestically." Neither are democratic regimes immune from such temptation.
1
@rjfaber1991 My democratically elected government has gotten away with it for nearly a century.
1
@sheikmutanabi3003 No, it's our people. We're totally brainwashed. If you look at how American allies became really developed, it has a lot more to do with Otto Bismark than with Thomas Jefferson.
1
I'm not sure that most Iranians agree with you on that. Pahlavi rule was brutal and decadent and the current regime, though clearly flawed, is not as terrible as the west makes it out to be.
1