Da bist du der erste, den ich so lese. Viele Strategen gehen von einer militärischen Konfrontation zwischen den USA und ihren Verbündeten und Rotchina aus. @empathroet
Hi Tim. There are very few perodicals that I have been following for so many years with so many contributions. Apart from an unavoidable personal bias (Descartes), #TheEconomist has been doing an excellent job reporting an analyzing International affairs.
That said, it has been very critical about President Xi's rule, even producing an excellent biographical pod series on him, The Prince ( https://i.sonnet.fm/9qCpJrfBwqs3ktB57). Reporting on the..
...many transgressions of the CCP, in particular after the end of British (colonial) rule has also been critical. Journalists had to leave the country.
In a surprising reversal of his own pro-Taiwan policy, President Biden has now said he does not support Taiwanese independence. From a Taiwanese perspective, this is probably a big blow. However, the way #Xi has been forcing the issue of re-integration for years now, would have inexorably..
...led to a military 🪖 showdown of the two remaining superpowers, probably within this decade, as many military pundits had been thinking. (I am still unconvinced that it can be utterly avoided. Like #Putler, #Xi will never stop just with #Taiwan.) It it thus understandable that he tried to defuse the issue at this point. Presidents change and so does foreign policy.
@HistoPol@TimMaddog@empathroet@TheEconomist America used Taiwan from day one (spring 1950, when Truman sent the 7th fleet, and denied PR China the seat in the UN security council) as tool against PR China.
That's why there can't be an "independent" Taiwan. It would always just be a tool of US aggression.
The 2019 Hong Kong riots made clear that China can't tolerate tycoon systems at its borders, and that means Taiwan will get a similar "patriotism" selection system sooner or later.
"When #The_Economist is talking about #Taiwan 🇳🇫 & they say "the island," what they really mean is "the country." 😖"
"Island" is a correct geographical term. Any space above sea level that is not just a smallish rock and not a continent *is* an island. From a Western point of view, there is nothing derogatory in being (called) an island.
The Encyclopedia #Britanica, Oxford English Dictionary, and Webster all concur.
Also, in Western languages, there is a style vehicle called "pars pro toto" (Latin.) It means that even though you are talking about just one particular aspect of an entity, you are still referring to the whole entity. //
What @MichaelTurton critizes in this age-old #TheEconomist article, *without* providing a source link, looks reasonable at face value. There have been hundreds, maybe thousands of articles on Red China, which I like to call it, and, to a lesser degree, #Taiwan. Many have been really good. Even if that author erred on the CCP side back then, that doesn't disqualify #TheEconomist for me.
What I dislike, though, is that interaction is only possible on their websites and app,...