8 ms·

I don't think China has grudge against Wikimedia specifically, the official policy of theirs has always been that if you recognize Taiwan, you are no friend of

I don't think China has grudge against Wikimedia specifically, the official policy of theirs has always been that if you recognize Taiwan, you are no friend of them. I don't think the Chinese delegate there cares about free knowledge, further it's their job literally to say no to Taiwan recongition anywhere on earth. So why should we be surprised that China does this when the United States federal government don't call their Taiwan ambassador ambassador, but rather director of the American Institute in Taiwan, out of respect of the same policy.

fouric 5y ago
I don't think that that makes it any better. Actually, it seems worse that the CCP would act to obstruct an organization (ostensibly) devoted to the dissemination of knowledge simply because they recognize Taiwan as a country than if they had a particular grudge against The Wikipedia Foundation in particular.
1ris 5y ago
First of all, no private organisation can "recognize" a state. That is a privilege for states. Private organisations can only boycott (non-)states by not doing any business with said (non-)citizens. Why in the world Wikimedia do that, and how? Second, this policy by china is the problem. Not the lack of obedience by the rest of the world.
- juliangamble 5y ago
  Look at which airlines have “Chinese Taipei” vs plain old “Taipei”. (Malaysian airlines is not intimidated.) Corporations can and do recognise a state.
- beaunative 5y ago
  well, i'm talking about recognition as the Chinese state understand it, of course no private organization can "recognize" a state in an official, diplomatic capacity, that's hardly the focal point of my statement. let me know if you have a better word for it. alright.
- refenestrator 5y ago
  They should be a lot less aggressive and assertive about it, but, given the stakes nd the history I think the polite fiction is perfectly fine compared to lots of alternatives.
  - garmaine 5y ago
    It is not a polite fiction.
  - antonvs 5y ago
    It's better than a lot of alternatives, but it is not "perfectly fine". It's about much more than word usage for China, and they will exploit every inch given to them on this matter until they have occupied Taiwan.
    - toxik 5y ago
      If we use HK as the model for how Taiwan will be occupied, then it seems that it will be through political process. I’m not sure if the Taiwanese system is as weak as the HK setup was, but if anybody is able to find a hole, it would be the CCP.
- Ericson2314 5y ago
  I have 0 clue why in the 1970s we didn't make it a de jure situation, like with Korea, like with Vietnam. China wanted the UN seat, right? Would they really turn that down because the US insisted on saying some shit about Taiwan? When they were kinda broke and caught between us and Soviets? Did the KMT really not want to give up "Republic of China", even if it meant being relegated to non-country status? Does it even matter what they think, being a subordinate dictatorship at that point? This seems like entirely a problem of the US's creation.
  - baybal2 5y ago
    > China wanted the UN seat, right? Would they really turn that down because the US insisted on saying some shit about Taiwan? Because the security council seat was for the taking. And ChiComs had a very good memory how the Korean war started.
    - Ericson2314 5y ago
      So if they wanted a seat, and they are weak and Mao is old, then then can deal with it being called Taiwan. They can still stay it's an illegitimate breakway or whatever. Of course now there is no UN seat to dangle, and they are strong, and like with NK it's a fuck situation of our own procrastination, but then I think it was easy, and we just fucked up.
  - FooBarWidget 5y ago
    Back in the 70s, the KMT definitely supported the One China Principle. They were still firmly dreaming about retaking the mainland. Back then the mainland and Taiwan even regularly fired shells at each other, not to actually attack, but as a statement by both sides to foreigners that the China-Taiwan issue is an internal China matter (namely a civil war), and not one of Taiwan being an independent state.
    - azernik 5y ago
      And it was personal for the KMT! These were people who had been middle-aged, established bureaucrats and generals in China in 1949.
- stale2002 5y ago
  > no private organisation can "recognize" a state Yes they can. A private organization could just treat it like a state, in the same way that it treats any other state. The consequences of that depend on what the organization does.
- mr_toad 5y ago
  > First of all, no private organisation can "recognize" a state. That’s not how the CCP sees it. They have threatened hotel chains and airlines that referred to Taiwan as a country.
  - pjbeam 5y ago
    Early in my career I got in trouble for including Taiwan on a web form country drop down list (not Amazon). Hadn't encountered that until that moment. Was a bit weird.
  - ymolodtsov 5y ago
    I've seen people in large tech companies compulsively editing all texts about their sales across the world to change "XX countries" to "XXX countries and territories", it turned into a habit for them. And there's basically just one country they care about in that instance and which is worth mentioning.
- Blikkentrekker 5y ago
  > First of all, no private organisation can "recognize" a state. That is a privilege for states. Private organisations can only boycott (non-)states by not doing any business with said (non-)citizens. Why in the world Wikimedia do that, and how? You apparently do not recognize that a private organization can recognize a state; I do. What powerful entitites such as states recognize and not recognize is already quite meaningless; it is certainly meaningless what you and I do or do not recognize. “Recognition” very often is unimpactful jabber of semantics. — Many of the states hat do not recognize Taiwan have business relations with it outside of the P.R.C. regardless.
dirtyid 5y ago
Basically. PRC blocks UN participation of any organization that doesn't follow official UN interpretation of One China. As how things should be. China's UN flexes last few years doing a good job demonstrating "the world" is more than the west. Some folks have a hard time coping with pacing non-white super power that represents 20% of the global population successfully lobbying for their own interests. Conveniently looking past fact that PRC still has plurality support in UN over HK and XJ policies while pretending the world is united against PRC when it's anything but.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > a hard time coping with pacing non-white super power One, regional power. Emerging superpower. But still lacking long-distance force projection capability. Two, share of global population doesn’t give one the right to invade and subjugate a free population. Taiwan isn’t China. It doesn’t want to be China. The world has a definite interest in protecting it.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - dirtyid 5y ago
    The US is next level global hyper-power. PRC only seeks to be regional hegemony / super power, i.e. pacing power. PLAN has enough ships and replenishment fleet to project to Djibouti/ME oil without issue for years. Not enough to go toe-to-toe with USN yet, but enough for anything else. Training is just focused on securing SCS right now. Within context post WW2 westphalia sovereignty construct PRC has right to finish civil war occuring within her domestic territory as recognized by UN. Interests of 1.4B PRC outweighs 24m on TW. If TW wants to be free, they'll have to fight for independence like everyone else. And they should, except the woeful state of TW military and doctrine suggest they're completely unserious and not up to the task. The world has demonstrated essentially zero interest in defending TW. AUKUS wouldn't exist if US courtship to contain PRC hasn't failed with EU, NATO, G8, FVEY, QUAD etc. There's literally no one committed to defending TW among the west while most of the global south is firmly in the PRC camp. Even the US wouldn't give TW Article 5 tight security pact and no regional countries that could help are reorienting meaningfully in PRC containment except maybe Australia. No countries except the US have even floated the idea of sanctioning the PRC for taking TW. There aren't even contingency sanctions like Iran nuclear programs, that's how little interest world has in interceding. US war planning itself has pivoted from TW defense to TW armourer. Outside geopolitical theatre for headlines, it's getting more and more clear no one is interested in defending TW.
TedShiller 5y ago
They probably don't like the Tiananmen Square articles.

fouric 5y ago

I don't think that that makes it any better. Actually, it seems worse that the CCP would act to obstruct an organization (ostensibly) devoted to the dissemination of knowledge simply because they recognize Taiwan as a country than if they had a particular grudge against The Wikipedia Foundation in particular.

1ris 5y ago

First of all, no private organisation can "recognize" a state. That is a privilege for states. Private organisations can only boycott (non-)states by not doing any business with said (non-)citizens. Why in the world Wikimedia do that, and how? Second, this policy by china is the problem. Not the lack of obedience by the rest of the world.

juliangamble 5y ago
Look at which airlines have “Chinese Taipei” vs plain old “Taipei”. (Malaysian airlines is not intimidated.) Corporations can and do recognise a state.
beaunative 5y ago
well, i'm talking about recognition as the Chinese state understand it, of course no private organization can "recognize" a state in an official, diplomatic capacity, that's hardly the focal point of my statement. let me know if you have a better word for it. alright.
refenestrator 5y ago
They should be a lot less aggressive and assertive about it, but, given the stakes nd the history I think the polite fiction is perfectly fine compared to lots of alternatives.
- garmaine 5y ago
  It is not a polite fiction.
- antonvs 5y ago
  It's better than a lot of alternatives, but it is not "perfectly fine". It's about much more than word usage for China, and they will exploit every inch given to them on this matter until they have occupied Taiwan.
  - toxik 5y ago
    If we use HK as the model for how Taiwan will be occupied, then it seems that it will be through political process. I’m not sure if the Taiwanese system is as weak as the HK setup was, but if anybody is able to find a hole, it would be the CCP.
Ericson2314 5y ago
I have 0 clue why in the 1970s we didn't make it a de jure situation, like with Korea, like with Vietnam. China wanted the UN seat, right? Would they really turn that down because the US insisted on saying some shit about Taiwan? When they were kinda broke and caught between us and Soviets? Did the KMT really not want to give up "Republic of China", even if it meant being relegated to non-country status? Does it even matter what they think, being a subordinate dictatorship at that point? This seems like entirely a problem of the US's creation.
- baybal2 5y ago
  > China wanted the UN seat, right? Would they really turn that down because the US insisted on saying some shit about Taiwan? Because the security council seat was for the taking. And ChiComs had a very good memory how the Korean war started.
  - Ericson2314 5y ago
    So if they wanted a seat, and they are weak and Mao is old, then then can deal with it being called Taiwan. They can still stay it's an illegitimate breakway or whatever. Of course now there is no UN seat to dangle, and they are strong, and like with NK it's a fuck situation of our own procrastination, but then I think it was easy, and we just fucked up.
- FooBarWidget 5y ago
  Back in the 70s, the KMT definitely supported the One China Principle. They were still firmly dreaming about retaking the mainland. Back then the mainland and Taiwan even regularly fired shells at each other, not to actually attack, but as a statement by both sides to foreigners that the China-Taiwan issue is an internal China matter (namely a civil war), and not one of Taiwan being an independent state.
  - azernik 5y ago
    And it was personal for the KMT! These were people who had been middle-aged, established bureaucrats and generals in China in 1949.
stale2002 5y ago
> no private organisation can "recognize" a state Yes they can. A private organization could just treat it like a state, in the same way that it treats any other state. The consequences of that depend on what the organization does.
mr_toad 5y ago
> First of all, no private organisation can "recognize" a state. That’s not how the CCP sees it. They have threatened hotel chains and airlines that referred to Taiwan as a country.
- pjbeam 5y ago
  Early in my career I got in trouble for including Taiwan on a web form country drop down list (not Amazon). Hadn't encountered that until that moment. Was a bit weird.
- ymolodtsov 5y ago
  I've seen people in large tech companies compulsively editing all texts about their sales across the world to change "XX countries" to "XXX countries and territories", it turned into a habit for them. And there's basically just one country they care about in that instance and which is worth mentioning.
Blikkentrekker 5y ago
> First of all, no private organisation can "recognize" a state. That is a privilege for states. Private organisations can only boycott (non-)states by not doing any business with said (non-)citizens. Why in the world Wikimedia do that, and how? You apparently do not recognize that a private organization can recognize a state; I do. What powerful entitites such as states recognize and not recognize is already quite meaningless; it is certainly meaningless what you and I do or do not recognize. “Recognition” very often is unimpactful jabber of semantics. — Many of the states hat do not recognize Taiwan have business relations with it outside of the P.R.C. regardless.

dirtyid 5y ago

Basically. PRC blocks UN participation of any organization that doesn't follow official UN interpretation of One China. As how things should be. China's UN flexes last few years doing a good job demonstrating "the world" is more than the west. Some folks have a hard time coping with pacing non-white super power that represents 20% of the global population successfully lobbying for their own interests. Conveniently looking past fact that PRC still has plurality support in UN over HK and XJ policies while pretending the world is united against PRC when it's anything but.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> a hard time coping with pacing non-white super power One, regional power. Emerging superpower. But still lacking long-distance force projection capability. Two, share of global population doesn’t give one the right to invade and subjugate a free population. Taiwan isn’t China. It doesn’t want to be China. The world has a definite interest in protecting it.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dirtyid 5y ago
  The US is next level global hyper-power. PRC only seeks to be regional hegemony / super power, i.e. pacing power. PLAN has enough ships and replenishment fleet to project to Djibouti/ME oil without issue for years. Not enough to go toe-to-toe with USN yet, but enough for anything else. Training is just focused on securing SCS right now. Within context post WW2 westphalia sovereignty construct PRC has right to finish civil war occuring within her domestic territory as recognized by UN. Interests of 1.4B PRC outweighs 24m on TW. If TW wants to be free, they'll have to fight for independence like everyone else. And they should, except the woeful state of TW military and doctrine suggest they're completely unserious and not up to the task. The world has demonstrated essentially zero interest in defending TW. AUKUS wouldn't exist if US courtship to contain PRC hasn't failed with EU, NATO, G8, FVEY, QUAD etc. There's literally no one committed to defending TW among the west while most of the global south is firmly in the PRC camp. Even the US wouldn't give TW Article 5 tight security pact and no regional countries that could help are reorienting meaningfully in PRC containment except maybe Australia. No countries except the US have even floated the idea of sanctioning the PRC for taking TW. There aren't even contingency sanctions like Iran nuclear programs, that's how little interest world has in interceding. US war planning itself has pivoted from TW defense to TW armourer. Outside geopolitical theatre for headlines, it's getting more and more clear no one is interested in defending TW.

TedShiller 5y ago

They probably don't like the Tiananmen Square articles.