If China takes Taiwan, the World Loses

[tooLongInEDA]

If China takes Taiwan the world loses and so does China. The chances of TSM remaining functional are close to zero and the world will suffer.

When–when–China reunites with Taiwan, it will do so non-violently, with Taiwanese assent comparable to Hong Kong's assent to its reassimilation.

If a show of force is required it will look like this:

Russia's Pacific and Asian Fleets will put to sea, its airforce will aggressively patrol its skies, and three army armored divisions will move to the Western front.

China will announce that Taiwan is now part of the PRC, but for now, the only change will be that all movement of goods and services in and out of Taiwan must pass through China's departments of Customs and Immigration.

To facilitate this, Taiwan's air and ocean limits are now China's and the Taiwan Strait is now domestic water.

The PLAN's 80 missile patrol boats will mark the new marine borders.

The PLAAF's fifth gen fighters, will provide air cover for them.

The PLA's missiles (far more powerful than America's) would ensure compliance.

Business as usual, in other words.

What's not to like?

I don't recall the people of Hong Kong being consulted in 1997. It was an agreement between the UK government and China. Period. In fact, a large number of Hong Kong citizens saw the writing on the wall and voted with their feet (the only vote they got). See below.

Oh yes, how's this working for you - "China would guarantee Hong Kong's economic and political systems for 50 years after the transfer." ?

Facts. Such a nuisance aren't they ?

"The colony faced an uncertain future as the end of the New Territories lease approached, and Governor Murray MacLehose raised the question of Hong Kong's status with Deng Xiaoping in 1979.[77] Diplomatic negotiations with China resulted in the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, in which the United Kingdom agreed to transfer the colony in 1997 and China would guarantee Hong Kong's economic and political systems for 50 years after the transfer.[78] The impending transfer triggered a wave of mass emigration as residents feared an erosion of civil rights, the rule of law, and quality of life.[79] Over half a million people left the territory during the peak migration period, from 1987 to 1996.[80] The Legislative Council became a fully elected legislature for the first time in 1995 and extensively expanded its functions and organisations throughout the last years of the colonial rule.[81] Hong Kong was transferred to China on 1 July 1997, after 156 years of British rule."

 

[Godfree Roberts]

I don't recall the people of Hong Kong being consulted in 1997. It was an agreement between the UK government and China. Period. In fact, a large number of Hong Kong citizens saw the writing on the wall and voted with their feet (the only vote they got). See below.

Oh yes, how's this working for you - "China would guarantee Hong Kong's economic and political systems for 50 years after the transfer." ?

Facts. Such a nuisance aren't they ?

"The colony faced an uncertain future as the end of the New Territories lease approached, and Governor Murray MacLehose raised the question of Hong Kong's status with Deng Xiaoping in 1979.[77] Diplomatic negotiations with China resulted in the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration, in which the United Kingdom agreed to transfer the colony in 1997 and China would guarantee Hong Kong's economic and political systems for 50 years after the transfer.[78] The impending transfer triggered a wave of mass emigration as residents feared an erosion of civil rights, the rule of law, and quality of life.[79] Over half a million people left the territory during the peak migration period, from 1987 to 1996.[80] The Legislative Council became a fully elected legislature for the first time in 1995 and extensively expanded its functions and organisations throughout the last years of the colonial rule.[81] Hong Kong was transferred to China on 1 July 1997, after 156 years of British rule."

I said that Taiwanese assent will be comparable to Hong Kong's assent to its reassimilation in 1997. It will be. The usual ideologues, compradors, spies and traitors will leave, as they left HK, and Taiwanese wages will catch up to Mainland wages.

The people of Hong Kong were not consulted in 1997 any more than they were consulted in the 100 prior years of British rule.

China guarantee Hong Kong's economic and political systems for 50 years after the transfer, but the guarantee was subject to two provisos:

1. The Colony would pass an extradition and security law (it failed to do so).

2. In a speech to drafters of the Basic Law in 1987 Deng said: “After 1997, we shall still allow people in Hong Kong to attack the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and China verbally, but what if they should turn their words into action, trying to turn Hong Kong into a base of opposition to the ‘mainland’ under the pretext of ‘democracy’? Then we should have no choice but to intervene.”

As early as 2007, China's top legislature adopted decisions saying the election of the fifth chief executive of Hong Kong in the year 2017 could be implemented by universal suffrage. Then in 2014, the top legislature further defined the roadmap and timetable for the implementation of universal suffrage for the chief executive and the LegCo of Hong Kong. Regrettably, the anti-China forces exploited the procedures in the Basic Law and vetoed universal suffrage for the chief executive, Zhang said.

The Human Freedom Index 2020, by Fraser Institute, shows HK #3 and the US/UK both at #17. Read the Executive Summary for a full definition and criteria of the Human Freedom Index in this link: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/human-freedom-index-2020.pdf

 

[Daniel Nenni]

Definitely he wasn't. I hope the forum admin recognizes that and kick him out.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/herecomeschina/

He is legit, otherwise I would have banned him. It is interesting to see both sides. If not put him on ignore.

 

[hist78]

https://www.linkedin.com/in/herecomeschina/

He is legit, otherwise I would have banned him. It is interesting to see both sides. If not put him on ignore.

Daniel:

What you said reminds me about this old carton:

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Hope you won't be mad on me

 

[hist78]

I said that Taiwanese assent will be comparable to Hong Kong's assent to its reassimilation in 1997. It will be. The usual ideologues, compradors, spies and traitors will leave, as they left HK, and Taiwanese wages will catch up to Mainland wages.

The people of Hong Kong were not consulted in 1997 any more than they were consulted in the 100 prior years of British rule.

China guarantee Hong Kong's economic and political systems for 50 years after the transfer, but the guarantee was subject to two provisos:

1. The Colony would pass an extradition and security law (it failed to do so).

2. In a speech to drafters of the Basic Law in 1987 Deng said: “After 1997, we shall still allow people in Hong Kong to attack the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and China verbally, but what if they should turn their words into action, trying to turn Hong Kong into a base of opposition to the ‘mainland’ under the pretext of ‘democracy’? Then we should have no choice but to intervene.”

As early as 2007, China's top legislature adopted decisions saying the election of the fifth chief executive of Hong Kong in the year 2017 could be implemented by universal suffrage. Then in 2014, the top legislature further defined the roadmap and timetable for the implementation of universal suffrage for the chief executive and the LegCo of Hong Kong. Regrettably, the anti-China forces exploited the procedures in the Basic Law and vetoed universal suffrage for the chief executive, Zhang said.

The Human Freedom Index 2020, by Fraser Institute, shows HK #3 and the US/UK both at #17. Read the Executive Summary for a full definition and criteria of the Human Freedom Index in this link: https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/human-freedom-index-2020.pdf

Dear Roberts,

You often like to quote other people's research or reports out of context or even brutally twisted the facts. But can you please at least read those reports completely, otherwise you are going to embarrass your team and yourself.

For example in the Human Freedom Index 2020 you mentioned, your beloved CCP/PRC is ranked at a sad #129 in the world. And the free and democratic Republic of China (ROC, Taiwan) is ranked #19, just behind UK and US. Please explain to us why you kept promoting the CCP/PRC (#129) to take over ROC/Taiwan (#19)?

Unless you really meant ROC (Taiwan) should take over PRC?

Also you said once CCP takes over Taiwan, Taiwanese income will catch-up people who live in in mainland China.

"and Taiwanese wages will catch up to Mainland wages."

I strongly recommend you go to your local library to find out what exactly Republic of China (Taiwan) per capita income compare to PRC's. If your local library doesn't provide this information, please ask your friends who live in other countries (probably in those countries with ranking >#129 in the
Human Freedom Index).

But if for any reason you can't ask any friends about Taiwanese income, please post your questions here at Semiwiki. I can assure you people here at Semiwiki are very friendly and resourceful. I guess it's probably because most of them live and work in those countries with rankings >#129 in the Human Freedom Index 2020.