Disqus - Latest Comments for michaelturton

Re: Would a war over Taiwan be legal?

michaelturton — Fri, 22 Oct 2021 10:48:33 -0000

No. It was never part of China. That's another problem of his argument -- note that he very disingenuously never mentions that status of Taiwan -- a decolonized territory awaiting final disposition of its status under international law. Prior to 1895 western Taiwan was a holding of the Qing, who were non-Chinese Manchus. Later the Chinese leadership declared that the Manchus were "Chinese" so that they could annex their territories to China.

In 1895 the Qing gave Taiwan to Japan, which then retained sovereignty until April 28, 1952, when the San Francisco Peace Treaty came into effect. japan gave up sovereignty but no recipient was named in the treaty, which is why Taiwan is currently an unincorporated territory.

At the end of WWII Chiang occupied Taiwan on behalf of the Allies. He then claimed it had been "returned" to China, a nation which had never owned it, but Japan retained sovereignty over the island. To this day the US and most other powers do not recognize Chinese sovereignty over Taiwan. They acknowledge or take note of China's claim, but they do not recognize it.

Re: Would a war over Taiwan be legal?

michaelturton — Sun, 17 Oct 2021 01:48:47 -0000

One of China's soft powers is the way it shapes pieces like this. He almost gets to the truth -- that Taiwan is a decolonized territory whose status awaits final disposition with all the attendant consequences of that -- but misses it completely. A friend and I explained this ages ago in response to his bad arguments from another mouth:

https://thediplomat.com/201...

"Washington (and Tokyo’s) policy that Taiwan’s status is unsettled is thus critically important: it provides a legal and ethical basis for the U.S. to intervene in a PRC attack on Taiwan. Because Taiwan’s status is unsettled, any PRC attack on Taiwan would be a violation of the UN Charter, which calls for self-determination and democratic self-rule for territories (Article 73) and decolonized territories (UN Declaration on Decolonized Territories), and for nations to refrain from using force to settle international disputes. Thus, the people of Taiwan are not “secessionists” whose island the PRC can legally and violently assault and annex. They are a population in legal limbo, waiting for the rest of the world to catch up with their desire to form an independent and democratic Taiwan."

Re: Taiwan Must Not Given Tsai Ing-wen Four More Years

michaelturton — Thu, 09 Jan 2020 23:04:33 -0000

LOL. Wumao, always a fun time.

Re: Taiwan Must Not Given Tsai Ing-wen Four More Years

michaelturton — Wed, 08 Jan 2020 22:08:29 -0000

I have 13 years of intelligent rebuttals on my blog, the View from Taiwan.

But frankly, rebutting propaganda operatives is superfluous. You need merely point out what kind of content it is, and the reader should know that it is unreliable and biased. There's basically no such thing as honest sponsored content, sadly.

Re: Taiwan Must Not Given Tsai Ing-wen Four More Years

michaelturton — Tue, 07 Jan 2020 15:54:55 -0000

Actually, polls show that DPP policies have widespread support.

Who said that the pro-China side couldn't submit articles. I merely noted that the this farrago of nonsense was paid content.

Re: Taiwan Must Not Given Tsai Ing-wen Four More Years

michaelturton — Tue, 07 Jan 2020 09:01:26 -0000

Why would that be strange? Politicians on both sides want Taiwan defended. On defense matters Wang is well informed and courteous.

Re: Taiwan Must Not Given Tsai Ing-wen Four More Years

michaelturton — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 00:49:55 -0000

Sponsored content from a longtime operative for the KMT. Sad.

Re: Q&A: Mayor of Kaohsiung, a Taiwanese politician on a meteoric rise, talks cross-strait relations

michaelturton — Sun, 21 Apr 2019 04:48:24 -0000

It's a shame that Han was allowed to claim that Japan had ceded Taiwan to China after WWII. That claim is completely false. Japan retained sovereignty until Apr 28, 1952 when the San Francisco Peace Treaty came into effect. The recipient of Taiwan's sovereignty is not named in the treaty, a deliberate arrangement to prevent Taiwan falling to the hands of either of the murderous authoritarian Leninist parties that were running China at the time.

Michael Turton

Re: Everyone Knows China Is Building a World-Class Military. But They Need to Ask Why.

michaelturton — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 20:01:55 -0000

"' So, I dunno, it seems you aren't addressing everything else I said.""

I could make the same comment, but since you're just following the classic troll pattern of putting forth meaningless distractions, like the one below....

"'So I just don't see how one can interpret China as an expansionist power with such a small percentage of her population involved in military""

Because, obviously, percentage of population in the military isn't the only data point involved in the analysis of China's intentions.

But it's really world class distraction-trolling you're engaged in here. Keep it up! Very enjoyable.

Re: Everyone Knows China Is Building a World-Class Military. But They Need to Ask Why.

michaelturton — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 19:39:39 -0000

""But are you willing to entertain the possibility that China is simply modernizing and expanding her military commensurate with her economy?"

No, since China has threatened to maim and murder Taiwanese to annex their island, and has threatened all of its neighbors with war since it claims their territories.

China's huge military and its rapid growth means it will go to war sooner or later. Instead of wasting your energy trying to remake reality, you should focus on getting China to change its policies, because sooner or later they will raise up a coalition against China, and coalitions usually win wars.

Re: Everyone Knows China Is Building a World-Class Military. But They Need to Ask Why.

michaelturton — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 01:04:08 -0000

Whoops. DIdn't say "powerful military". Said "large military".

But keep trying. It's difficult to earn that fifty cents sometimes.

Re: Everyone Knows China Is Building a World-Class Military. But They Need to Ask Why.

michaelturton — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:48:46 -0000

Why would we say that? It's all relative.

But thanks for playing.

Re: Everyone Knows China Is Building a World-Class Military. But They Need to Ask Why.

michaelturton — Sat, 21 Jul 2018 00:40:21 -0000

You mean to say that expenditure = size?

Re: Everyone Knows China Is Building a World-Class Military. But They Need to Ask Why.

michaelturton — Fri, 20 Jul 2018 20:35:06 -0000

Harry, the "Century of Humiliation" is expansionist baloney. Beijing does not "fear the past". It is engaging in inflating its borders out to the old Manchu imperial borders.

William Callahan's China: the Pessoptimist Nation, has some great data on the development of this concept, and Hayton draws from Callahan throughout this presentation. According to Callahan, it was Yuan Shi-kai's acceptance of most of Japan's 21 demands that brought out the first stirrings of "national humiliation" -- a project of private protest against the government's sellout of the nation, led by the National Teacher's Association. This led to the government's adoption of national humiliation as a guiding ideology, with the production of textbooks and historical narratives following as early as July of 1915. After the Nationalists consolidated and asserted their position in 1927, they made May 9 an official "National Humiliation Commemoration Day" and the following year put out a calendar with 26 National Humiliation Days in a given year. That's a lot of humiliation, but to convince the population of a large empire that it is the victim of history rather than a victimizer takes a lot of propaganda. Callahan observes that the 1928 calendar incorporated local national humiliation days to reach that total of 26 -- the usual Leninist practice of incorporation rather than extirpation. The May 9th commemoration of National Humiliation Day ended in 1937 with the Japanese invasion and the establishment of July 7 as National Resistance Day.

Callahan notes that today the purpose of "national humiliation" is to contain and channel nationalism so it does not threaten the CCP's grip on Chinese society, and Chinese experience "national humiliation" via consumption of national humiliation goods just as consumers in western societies recreate their social identities via consumption -- my favorite good being the National Humiliation towel, good for washing your face and washing away humiliation at the same time.

Note that the ultimate humiliation is invasion and annexation of "China's territory" by a foreign power. So obviously China being invaded and extinguished by the Manchus should be the number one humiliation of all time. But since Chinese expansionists wanted to inflate the new state out to the old Qing borders, the idea that it was a humiliation to be ruled by the Qing isn't part of this discourse. Instead, the Manchus became "Chinese" just as their empire became "China". The one entails the other...

This "analysis" simply adopts the expansionist terminology of the current government as its analytical standpoint. China is building a large military for the same reason any power builds a large military: it wants to expand its borders. Period.

Re: US Navy sails into Taiwan sunset

michaelturton — Wed, 11 Jul 2018 19:41:37 -0000

"'That fact should be obvious to Taiwan, and no number of US warship transits through the Taiwan Strait can change it.""

This is the kind of observation made by people when they think they are being hard-nosed but in fact they are merely uninformed.

Re: America's Taiwan Policy: Stop Beating around the Bush

michaelturton — Tue, 01 May 2018 22:46:09 -0000

If only. Then I'd have a lot more money in the bank.

Re: Does America Really Need to Fear China?

michaelturton — Fri, 27 Apr 2018 20:59:43 -0000

"China's intentions are relatively benign"

You mean, except for the part where they have promised to murder and maim Taiwanese to annex their island.

You mean, except for the part where they promise to make war on Japan to steal the Senkakus. And then, after that, make war over Okinawa, which they consider theirs.

You mean, except for the part where they are salami slicing in Himalayan meadows against Bhutan.

You mean, except for ramping up forces for war with India.

You mean, except for the social credit system that instantiates totalitarianism in almost every ordinary human act.

You mean, except for the grinding colonial state in Tibet and Xinjiang.

You mean, except for the massive environmental depredation in SE Asia and elsewhere caused by China's demand for timber and for animal parts for their worthless traditional medicines and traditional beliefs.

You mean, except for the threats of war (and actual invasions over the years) in the South China Sea, along with constantly expanding territorial claims.

You mean, except for the long-term espionage, intelligence, and influence programs abroad.

You mean, except for the tight control of students abroad via threats to their future and to their families.

My son goes into the army in Taiwan in May. I'll be sure to explain to him there is no need for him to fear getting killed because China is relatively benign.

Michael Turton
The View from Taiwan.

Re: Taiwan’s President Is Running out of Time

michaelturton — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 07:31:16 -0000

There are no errors in Fonte's piece, which is why it is pro-DPP but not propaganda. But this particular piece is chock full of nonsense.

In any case, I don't understand minds that support anti-democracy parties that murdered millions of people, like the KMT and the CCP. If you can't tell the difference between the KMT and the DPP, you've failed, ethically and analytically.

Re: China is Not Changing the Cross-Strait Status Quo

michaelturton — Mon, 05 Feb 2018 08:02:41 -0000

Ye gods. Of course China is changing the status quo, it can't enforce annexation on Taiwan without changing the status quo. Congrats: you wrote a whole essay in search of a language that blunts that rather obvious truth

The three sides here can't be treated as if they were morally equivalent. The "interpretations" of two Leninist authoritarian parties that murdered millions are not equivalent to their resistance in Taiwan. Such language normalizes their murderous, expansionist behavior as a mere policy choice, while reducing Taiwan's democratic resistance to a mere policy position.

What is going on is not "interpretations" but naked territorial expansion by the KMT and CCP that can only end in war.

Re: Taiwan’s President Is Running out of Time

michaelturton — Wed, 31 Jan 2018 21:48:48 -0000

This is a hilariously partisan reading of events. The writer is a deeply pro-KMT politician. It's best to simply ignore this nonsense, and I struggle to understand why The National Interest even published it.

Re: The Real Reason China Has Built a Massive Military

michaelturton — Tue, 14 Nov 2017 18:12:45 -0000

Rofl

Re: Taiwan’s life is complicated

michaelturton — Mon, 13 Nov 2017 20:14:48 -0000

My god. Just confine yourself to reporting on night markets and describing scenery. Despite a million sites, news reports, and scholarly papers, you got everything on Taiwan's status incorrect.

First, under international law and US policy, Taiwan's status is undetermined. It is not "seceding" from China because it was never part of China. The ROC government merely claims that it is, as does the PRC, because both want to annex Taiwan to China. The Powers "acknowledge" or "take note of" this claim but do not "recognize it". The people who took you around and fed you that pap were obviously deeply pro-China and very unrepresentative of the local population.

The ROC government was a Leninist authoritarian nightmare that murdered millions of people in China and thousands in Taiwan, imprisoning and exiling further thousands of Taiwanese and imposing one of the longest periods of martial law in history. It was not democracy-driven.

All that said, the other stuff is great. Taiwan is full of wonderful, hardworking people and is a good place to live in many ways. The National Health Insurance system is 1000X better than the US, we have no guns, transportation is convenient, reliable, and safe, and Taiwan is a couple of hours by plane from innumerable interesting travel destinations.

Next time you come, look me up.

Re: The Real Reason China Has Built a Massive Military

michaelturton — Fri, 10 Nov 2017 18:07:18 -0000

When you're dealing with fifty center trolls, no reply is really necessary, just need to point out "this dude is a total PRC troll". Your understanding of history is bog-standard PRC propaganda, not worth the pixels necessary to display it.

Re: The Real Reason China Has Built a Massive Military

michaelturton — Fri, 10 Nov 2017 18:02:44 -0000

Dude, you've already established that you're a fifty center troll. There's no need to reiterate that point.

Re: The Real Reason China Has Built a Massive Military

michaelturton — Fri, 10 Nov 2017 17:47:58 -0000

The annexation of East Turkestan and Tibet, as well as the threatened annexation of Taiwan, plus the threats against the territories of neighboring states, as well as its planned currency and trade regimes, are totally imperialistic.