5 ms·

Economic interdependence is a deterrent to war. No country's government can easily handle recessions, but a depression in China would severely jeopardize the Fa

by ipnon 5y ago

Economic interdependence is a deterrent to war. No country's government can easily handle recessions, but a depression in China would severely jeopardize the Faustian bargain the CCP has given to the citizens of PRC: forfeit your liberties and you are guaranteed prosperity. China is Taiwan's largest trading partner. Taiwan is China's 6th largest trading partner, but the total trade of Taiwan is worth more than 1/3 of China's total trade with America. That is an extraordinary amount for a country almost 14 times smaller than the United States. If trade is reduced between the two countries, it could lessen the economic damage taken by the PRC if it were to initiate an invasion, or even increase hybrid and gray-area warfare. This would mean such actions would constitute less political risk for the CCP.

elefanten 5y ago
The alternative is that China will continue to salami slice and break every marginal norm they can to choke and bleed out the (ideological) competition. Taiwan has to worry about large scale invasion but they also have to worry about China using size, lack of attention to the "small stuff" and inertia to much the same effect.
- 8note 5y ago
  It looks like a very similar situation to Canada/USA The major power will take every opportunity it can to screw over the smaller one
MikeUt 5y ago
On the other hand, an increase in trade gives China (the bigger partner) more leverage to pressure Taiwan using economic measures. Suppose 60% of all campaign political contributions came from China's puppet companies in Taiwan. Or if companies that lobby against China's interests suddenly (or gradually) find themselves cut off from the Chinese market, while large, politically-connected Chinese companies start undercutting them in the Taiwanese market. You don't need war to invade.
- MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
  My thoughts were just dominating their economy, bankrupting them, then putting Chinese politicians in power to take over a failed state. It'd look more legitimate than Russia annexing Crimea and since it's economic and complicated, the average person wouldn't care meaning minimal media coverage. If a regular person has to read more than a paragraph to full comprehend what happened, it's just not worth worrying about.
- ipnon 5y ago
  It seems to be a misconception, that China can unilaterally inflict economic damage without suffering some of the same. For a similar scenario, consider the effect that Trump's tariffs and trade war had on both the Chinese and American economies.
  - Paradigma11 5y ago
    But China can afford it and is willing to pay.
  - MikeUt 5y ago
    But I was describing subversion and takeover, not 'damage'. And even in the case where the subversion is poorly executed and thus perceived as damage (or perceived at all*), China, due to its size, can withstand more damage than Taiwan. And this damage is merely a short-term cost China may be willing to pay, for the long-term benefit of controlling Taiwan. *For an example, look at the Chinese trade war before Trump retaliated with tariffs [1]. Forced technology transfer, joint ventures as condition of market access, and unofficial policies and roadblocks, all to protect Chinese companies, while helping them take foreign markets. But because Xi Jinping publicly urged for "trade and cooperation" instead of openly stating his intentions, while continuing these policies, it was not perceived as trade war. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/business/china-technology-transfer.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/business/china-technology...

by ipnon 5y ago

elefanten 5y ago

The alternative is that China will continue to salami slice and break every marginal norm they can to choke and bleed out the (ideological) competition. Taiwan has to worry about large scale invasion but they also have to worry about China using size, lack of attention to the "small stuff" and inertia to much the same effect.

8note 5y ago
It looks like a very similar situation to Canada/USA The major power will take every opportunity it can to screw over the smaller one

MikeUt 5y ago

On the other hand, an increase in trade gives China (the bigger partner) more leverage to pressure Taiwan using economic measures. Suppose 60% of all campaign political contributions came from China's puppet companies in Taiwan. Or if companies that lobby against China's interests suddenly (or gradually) find themselves cut off from the Chinese market, while large, politically-connected Chinese companies start undercutting them in the Taiwanese market. You don't need war to invade.

MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
My thoughts were just dominating their economy, bankrupting them, then putting Chinese politicians in power to take over a failed state. It'd look more legitimate than Russia annexing Crimea and since it's economic and complicated, the average person wouldn't care meaning minimal media coverage. If a regular person has to read more than a paragraph to full comprehend what happened, it's just not worth worrying about.
ipnon 5y ago
It seems to be a misconception, that China can unilaterally inflict economic damage without suffering some of the same. For a similar scenario, consider the effect that Trump's tariffs and trade war had on both the Chinese and American economies.
- Paradigma11 5y ago
  But China can afford it and is willing to pay.
- MikeUt 5y ago
  But I was describing subversion and takeover, not 'damage'. And even in the case where the subversion is poorly executed and thus perceived as damage (or perceived at all*), China, due to its size, can withstand more damage than Taiwan. And this damage is merely a short-term cost China may be willing to pay, for the long-term benefit of controlling Taiwan. *For an example, look at the Chinese trade war before Trump retaliated with tariffs [1]. Forced technology transfer, joint ventures as condition of market access, and unofficial policies and roadblocks, all to protect Chinese companies, while helping them take foreign markets. But because Xi Jinping publicly urged for "trade and cooperation" instead of openly stating his intentions, while continuing these policies, it was not perceived as trade war. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/business/china-technology-transfer.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/business/china-technology...