Surely we wouldn’t go to war on Taiwan’s behalf solely to support their independence. It would be to guarantee our access to their microchips. So why not produce those ourselves, and end our dependence on both China and Taiwan.
Obviously that process has already started. So if Xi is smart, he delays the invasion until the US and Europe have enough domestic fabs to be independent of Taiwan/TSMC.
Well, the smartest dumb move, anyway. The Chinese fixation on claiming Taiwan is already a serious waste of their mental energies, but the real cost for making such a move at any time would be massive. Even without Western involvement.
Never the less, we've seen men do stupider things for pride. See: Ukraine.
> The Chinese fixation on claiming Taiwan is already a serious waste of their mental energies, but the real cost for making such a move at any time would be massive.
Different people seem to have different value systems. The "costs" involved may not concern Xi all that much, provided he "wins".
I sometimes wonder if Xi has realized that Taiwan is more valuable independent. Xi gets to sell his populace on the idea of a united West intent on shaming and restraining China, and can point to Taiwan as a tangible embodiment of this.
Hell, we've got genuine believers (...or shills) even in these comments talking about how US support for Taiwan is all just a ploy to weaken China.
If Xi makes a move on Taiwan, he turns China into a Russia-like pariah to the West and bears an immense cost in lives and materiel. For what gain exactly?
Taiwan is worth more as a bogeyman he can point to for nationalistic rallying than as an actual possession.
How do you measure gain? If consider only economic benefits, why did Putin attack Ukraine?
Now if you consider that these men have big egos, are more driven by nationalist motives than economic ones and that they want to go down in history as the next Peter the Great or Qin Shihuang?
Then maybe they are willing to tolerate that their peoples experience a period of economic decline, to ensure the greatnest of the nation and the supreme leader?
Given their value systems, this may even be rational.
Taking Taiwan back won't make a Chinese leader "great". It is more of a responsibility and sort of a minor one, as a not so famous general （Shi Lang) in Qing dynasty achieved this and people have criticized and are still criticizing him for his betrayal to the Ming dynasty.
Deng Xiaoping brought Hong Kong and Macao back, but he was memorated as a great leader not because of this, but because he opened the door for China to its economic prosperity.
> Surely we wouldn’t go to war on Taiwan’s behalf solely to support their independence.
Why not? The parallels with Czechoslovakia in 1938 are dramatic. The 20th century showed that if you let dictators win, you just fight a bigger war later.
Powerful nations have a moral obligation to stick up for free populations. If the Taiwanese don't want to live under the CCP's thumb, they shouldn't have to.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry is wholly dependent on the west. China taking over Taiwan, if it can do it without turning the island into a crater, wouldn’t be able to do much with these factories over a significant amount of time, so that isn’t the USA’s real concern. Economically speaking, the people (skills, experience) are much more important.
The Kool Aid is not to be drunk. What you state is the PR for the masses, not what the game is really about.
The US's objective is to keep China divided and as weak as possible. Taiwan is at at important strategic location and it suits the US's interests that it does not reunite with mainland China and stays dependent on the US. The type of government in Taiwan is irrelevant (as long as it's not communist) and really it's only desirable that Taiwan be governing itself in that it implies weakness.
In any case, it is extremely unlikely that the US would attack China in case of an invasion of Taiwan.
Taiwan not being part of China does little or nothing to "weaken" them. It's sort of like arguing that Peurto Rico being independent would destabilize the United States. China chooses to make Taiwan a big deal to them, but it really doesn't have to be. The United States for decades has tried to make Taiwan not a big deal, creating policies of strategic ambiguity, cozying closer to the PRC, while still standing up for Taiwan's right to be independent.
If you wanna try to go all real-politik here, sure it's useful to the United States to hold something back from China that they're weirdly fixated on. But these days the real value of Taiwan is mostly about semi-conductor supply chains.
China's antagonism and petulance toward Taiwan is an own-goal they choose to continue making. It's not the United State's fault, and it doesn't have to be this way.
China would inevitably get into conflict with the USA in the event of a Taiwan invasion because the USA has focused much of its military resources in asia in the Ryukyus (on purpose).
The ryukyus are adjacent to Taiwan. That no troops are station in Taiwan proper is just a formality that gives mainland China face (which it finds very important).
Adjacent means nothing. It's outside of the conflict area and thus it wouldn't be touched, especially since neither the US nor China want a war with one another.
It's not just about face. Neither side wants to escalate the situation or to be dragged into war.
NATO is adjacent to Ukraine. Has Russia attacked them? No. Has NATO attacked Russia? No. Neither side are suicidal. So it remains a proxy war. The same would happen over Taiwan.
China's sphere of influence? Are you also an apologist for Russia's adventures within their claimed "sphere of influence" ?