• GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    187
    arrow-down
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Ten Chinese air force aircraft entered Taiwan’s air defence zone . . . Of those aircraft, the ministry said 10 had either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which previously served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, or entered the southwestern part of Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, or ADIZ.

    For those unfamiliar with the Air Defense Identification Zone:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Defense_Identification_Zone_(Taiwan)

    Not only does it include a lot of water that isn’t part of the Strait, right off of China’s coast, it also includes a portion of Mainland China a few times larger than Taiwan itself.

    People like to talk like China is flying jets over Taipei City, but you can fly a plane from one city in Mainland China to another, only passing over land, and be in this zone. Mind you, I don’t think Taiwan having this zone is bad – countries generally should be aware of air traffic nearby – but this is part of a long history of alarmist headlines by western media regarding what is often very uninteresting air traffic in the PRC.

      • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        80
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, obviously it’s a glorified puppet state but there’s no point in arguing from that standpoint here. If a country is to exist, it should know about local air traffic, that’s all I’m saying.

          • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            62
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            The PRC wants a peaceful reunification, which would not be aided by them continuously flying military jets over the island. I, too, would prefer peaceful reunification, which means some level of cooperation and tolerance is necessary.

              • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                31
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The RoC won’t give up their holdings in the interest of human benefit, but liberalism shows us that there are countless ways to skin a cat. The RoC is not autarkic and is very dependent on its NATO friends and its trading partners. As the US wanes and third world nations stand up, the support for Taiwanese nationalism will surely dwindle, and RoC leadership may be put in a position where their best offer is clearly to reunify.

          • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            72
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I started writing out a timeline but I don’t know what position you’re asking from so I will say for the sake of brevity that the US kept the KMT from being run out of all of China so that the US could us the island as a threat against China – as it also attempted to do in Korea when it had more-or-less complete control of the southern half. Taiwan spent about 40 years as a military dictatorship killing tens of thousands of dissidents, native Formosans, and others (this was called the “White Terror”), while their patron the US looked the other way while it pumped resources into the country (for the ruling class, mind you) to use the island as a sweatshop site in the interim. This legacy and its connections to fellow US puppet South Korea and US ally Japan go a long way to explaining its current capacity in manufacturing, which make up its other value to the US besides geographical position.

            Both Taiwan and SK have made various attempts to assert themselves (with some success in both cases), but with the pathetic diplomatic position of the former and the continued military occupation of the latter by the US, I think “puppet state” is a fair title for them, perhaps as much as Israel, but that’s its own can of worms.

            I didn’t really intend on getting into litigating this topic, but I’m happy to discuss it as best I can.

            • StalinForTime [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              22
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not only did the US turn a blind eye to the White Terror, but they were positively gleeful about it, as a key target of it was of course not only indigeneous-politics based, but fundamentally anti-communist.

              Indeed a basic presupposition of the US providing you such extensive economic support, as a forward base in Asia against communism, is that you crush any opposition to its ‘proper’ functioning as such an economic and military asset. That supposes that you will crush any radical, labor, trade-union, let alone explicitly socialist or communist activity which appears to challenge the state.

            • randint@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I started writing out a timeline but I don’t know what position you’re asking from so I will say for the sake of brevity that the US kept the KMT from being run out of all of China […] which make up its other value to the US besides geographical position.

              Yes, I know about its not-so-glorious past and the White Terror. Thousands of innocent civilians were killed. It was terrible. However, I must respectfully disagree with you on the “puppet state” part. I don’t think that Taiwan is a puppet state. The US sponsoring Taiwan is a thing of the past. Neither is a pathetic diplomatic position a good reason for being a puppet state.

              • silent_water [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                27
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                if US support dropped overnight, reunification with the mainland would become inevitable. it’s a puppet state in the sense that it’s propped up by the might of the US/NATO military.

                  • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    It’s kind of a weird way to define a puppet state IMO, because you could make the same case for a lot of countries. Like the US supports the Mexican government, and would have likely already been overthrown by the Sinoloa Cartel without US support. So is Mexico a puppet state?

              • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                18
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I didn’t see this reply before. The other commenter has it right that the relevance of its pathetic diplomatic position is that it is being propped up by the US/NATO and ultimately depends on them to exist apart from the PRC, which makes it very difficult to oppose them. Incidentally, does the US not sponsor Taiwan? Even just recently there was this, which sure seems like sponsorship to me.

                • randint@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Apparently being sponsored by a foreign state is now counted as being a puppet state?

                  • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    20
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    That part was in response to you saying:

                    The US sponsoring Taiwan is a thing of the past

                    I could have formatted it better, but the rest was focused on the puppet part and then I prefaced the sponsorship part with “Incidentally” to indicate changing over to an adjacent subject.

          • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            40
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Taiwan is a rump state of the despotism that existed before the Maoist revolution. When the government fled to the island, the US backed them up and prevented the revolution from purging them from power and uniting the whole country under one flag. They exist today as they are because of western intervention, and is therefore a puppet state. I disagree with ‘glorified’ considering it’s taboo internationally to even call them a state.

        • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          61
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Like asking yankoids what they want to do with “their land”, the question is pointless and only serves to legitimize a faulty preposition.

          The ROC also still claims to be the legitimate government of all of China (plus Mongolia and a sizable chunk of Russia) so its not like they’re just sitting there minding their own business either.

          • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            41
            ·
            1 year ago

            The ROC also claims the South China Sea as its own and has build naval bases in there. Even the DPP doesn’t want to give up those naval bases. So, it’s the Republic of Taiwan to stick it to the Mainland commies, but “akctually, we’re the Republic of China, and the South China Sea is part of Chinese naval waters, so we get to build as many naval bases as we want” to Vietnam and Indonesia.

          • randint@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Do you even know why the pro-independence party (DPP) lost so badly in the local election for mayors? Because the people were disappointed in what DPP had done with the economy, not because they didn’t agree with the foreign policies DPP was pushing! (Please note that I’m not saying most people agree.) In local elections, people are going to choose whoever they believe would be the best for the city/county, not the one whose views on China they agree with.

            Additionally, if you look at the latest opinion poll for the presidental election next year, you’d be surprised to find out that the candidate from the pro-independence party is leading.

            Source: am Taiwanese

            ps. you made a typo in your comment. it was the 2022 local election, not 2020.

            • meth_dragon [none/use name]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              53
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because the people were disappointed in what DPP had done with the economy

              inciting conflict with your biggest trading partner does tend to have negative effects on the economy

              • randint@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Well yeah I guess, but really it’s more about the policies they had been pushing domesticlly

                • meth_dragon [none/use name]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  37
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  i am sure the success or failure of those domestic policies were not in the least contingent on international political conditions. the economic policies of an island that imports 97% of its energy with a food self sufficiency rate of around 30% and exports accounting for 70% of gdp can in no way be considered to be overexposed or at risk to trade fluctuations and even if that were the case, i am sure that foreign policy would not play an outsize role in determining the magnitude or periodicity of said trade fluctuations.

          • oatscoop@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Because a poll asking a direct question is a hell of a lot more accurate in gauging how the population feels about the issue.

            Political parties can lose elections for their stances/actions outside their main one – which seems to have been the case per the actual person from Taiwan that responded to your comment. It doesn’t matter what a party is called or what their main goals are if they’re bad at their job.

            If and when the people of Taiwan decide they want reunification, it will happen. Thankfully Beijing isn’t going to be allowed to force the issue.

            • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              47
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              You want polls, how about this poll conducted by a Taiwanese university where the majority of Taiwanese want neither reunification nor independence, but the status quo? The majority of Taiwanese people wanting the status quo lines up with how the pro-independence party ate shit while the pro-status quo party made huge gains. The DPP got BTFO so hard the current DPP president Tsai Ing-wen had to resign as party head.

              • randint@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                The majority of Taiwanese people has always wanted to remain status quo, as indicated by the two triangle data lines in the plot. Since declaring independence is basically asking China to attack and that peaceful reunification is not desirable (for >90% of the population) either, the majority are of course pro-status quo. It does not line up with how DPP ate shit last year.

                • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  14
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  peaceful reunification is not desirable (for >90% of the population)

                  Again, this was “forced” reunification in that poll, i.e. military takeover. Of course people oppose that. I think at least the plurality opinion is against peaceful reunification under the PRC too, but it’s not by as high a margin.

                  • randint@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    No, it was NOT “forced” reunification. The two reunification choices in that poll were “unification as soon as possible” and “maintain status quo, move towards unification,” neither of which is forced.

            • randint@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Thank you for mentioning me. Makes me feel like not all people on this thread is pro-China. :D

    • RandAlThor@lemmy.caOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      39
      ·
      1 year ago

      So Chinese bots are on lemmy too now. You obviously didn’t read the article - “Of those aircraft, the ministry said 10 had either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which previously served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, or entered the southwestern part of Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, or ADIZ.”

      In international relations, militaries have defined and at times unspoken rules of engagement. This was NOT routine flight over mainland China that you are making out to be, but was a clear breach of said protocols. Thus Taiwan sent its fighter jets to observe the Chinese military aircraft.

    • Too Lazy Didn't Name@lemmy.woodward.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      OK, but these articles arent alerting on that type of traffic, only when military aircraft are flying near Thailand, so whats the significance of the ADIZ extending into China in this context?

      • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s exactly what type of traffic these articles are alerting. Which is why there’s no need to even pay attention to it.

        Also Thailand has had Chinese military visit it’s country as well as trained with Chinese soldiers. If you know so little, why comment?

        • Too Lazy Didn't Name@lemmy.woodward.tech
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          The quoted text in your reply says that the jets crossed a half way point over the sea. They were not over mainland China.

          This feels like having a conversation with bing’s chat bot.

          • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ten Chinese air force aircraft entered Taiwan’s air defence zone . . . Of those aircraft, the ministry said 10 had either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which previously served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, or entered the southwestern part of Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, or ADIZ.

            This is what the original post quoted. Flying over international air space is NOT news worthy. Unless China does it, suddenly it’s news. And yes, in case you don’t understand, the median line IS international air space. In fact, that’s USA’s whole point of freedom of navigation is that anyone can fly or sail over that median line.

            So if your argument that countries shouldn’t freely fly or sail over the Taiwan Strait, you agree with China, NOT Taiwan.

            • Too Lazy Didn't Name@lemmy.woodward.tech
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              My argument is that you shouldn’t fly military aircraft so close to a country in their ADIZ after stating you don’t believe they’re a country and that you will take them over with violent means if necessary.

              • Joncash2@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ah classic, your all for rule of law until there’s an actor you don’t like following rule of law. Suddenly the law should change just for them. Hypocrite.