The Context of Taiwan in 2018: A Brief Survey

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/taiwan-s-tsai-urges-world-to-stand-up-to-china-10468236

China has been portrayed as pursuing a policy of aggression in the South China Sea. Is it aggression or is Beijing responding to what they perceive to be aggression on the part of the United States and its Asia-Pacific satrapies?

Western media always focuses on China's moves but there's often little coverage of what the US military is doing. The news is out there but sometimes you have to go looking for it. One thing you can count on, the Western media outlets will do nothing in terms of providing context.

Few Americans were paying attention to the Obama administration's attempts to create a robust Anti-China alliance and even their attempts to intimidate nations like Australia into getting onboard with the plan. Few have understood the role India is playing and what is represented by the shift in language in using terms like the Indo-Pacific. Few are aware of the significance of Japan's re-militarisation, the programme of the Abe administration and its support by militarist elements within the US. Even fewer know about the history of Japanese militarism and the historical memory Abe is evoking for the peoples of Korea and China.

Few know about the US relationship with nations like Indonesia and the Philippines and what is being done to re-establish these once robust but now tarnished and damaged relationships... let alone why they are tarnished.

And then there's Taiwan. Chiang Kai-Shek died 43 years ago and has largely faded from public memory. The larger history of the Kuomintang (KMT) is now the province of historians. Only students of the KMT know about their activities in Burma and the serious plans for an invasion of the mainland during the Korean War.

Many viewed Nixon's China policy as something of a coup, a betrayal of old allies and the final doom of a long multi-generational project meant to cement US control of the Pacific Rim. Mao's victory in 1949 and the flight of Chiang and the KMT to Taiwan was a catastrophic defeat for US imperialism.

Nixon was no fool and though an ardent Rightist he embraced the Realpolitik of Kissinger and the burgeoning globalist faction. Some confuse this with internationalism. Globalism is a means for these folks, not an end. They are absolutely committed to US hegemony but believe the road to power is broad as opposed to the narrow, direct all-or-nothing approach of the militarist and unilateralist Rollback factions.

Nixon knew that Taiwan was a dead end and that the future of China lay on the mainland. Mao's time was at an end and it wasn't hard to imagine a hard shift in policy as soon as he was removed from the scene. Zhou En-lai died in January 1976 and Mao died in September of the same year. Within a couple of years the remnants of Mao's base and the backbone of his Cultural Revolution were swept away and Deng Xiaoping came to power. Capitalism was embraced and a decade later China with its population of over a billion people was on the road to becoming one of the most powerful economies and geopolitical players on the world stage.

Nixon certainly felt vindicated. He had exploited the Sino-Soviet split in 1972 and wrested China away from the huge Eurasian Communist Bloc. Most of the United States had not understood how hostile Beijing and Moscow had become. On more than one occasion they were at the brink of war and the Siberian-Manchurian border had become a dangerous flashpoint.

Nixon flipped China, much in the same way some are trying to do with North Korea in our day. China would become a virtual ally, sharing anti-Soviet policies in Indochina and the Indian subcontinent.

And yet what about Taiwan? Taipei would eventually lose its seat at the UN and the embassy would be shut down and yet to some degree it was all a ruse. Even though the United States paid (and continues to pay) lip-service to Beijing's One China policy, which insists that Taiwan is technically part of a united China even though it presently is autonomous, the United States maintained quiet and unofficial relations with Taiwan and the remnants of the KMT regime.

Though Chiang Kai-Shek undoubtedly died a bitter and defeated man, and surely felt betrayed by his American allies, the truth is the United States has stood by Taiwan and continues to arm the island.

In recent years it's starting to make the news once more as things are 'heating up' in the South China Sea.

The Trump administration has opened an unofficial embassy in Taiwan and has backtracked somewhat on the One China Policy.

The US continues to sell arms to Taiwan and is even now pushing for US troops to once more be placed on the island.

Recently the US has opened the doors for anti-submarine technology to be openly sold to Taipei, something that has greatly angered Beijing.

Beijing has little hope of defeating the US in a confrontation but their aim is to block the US military and inflict as much damage as possible. This defense strategy rests on submarines and anti-ship missiles. Getting Taiwan fully on-board worries Beijing and its proximity to the mainland makes it a prime piece of real estate, a dagger pointed right at the heart of China's economic centres.

US weapons sales have increased under Obama and Trump and now the new Taiwanese administration is beginning to speak out and provoke Beijing.

This is all part of a larger picture, a larger US policy and plan for the Pacific Rim and is aimed at breaking Beijing.

As previously stated there are those that believe military conflict with Beijing is inevitable and they would rather it happen now as opposed to later when Beijing is stronger. Trump has surrounded himself with several figures (such as John Bolton) that hold to these views which have been a cause for concern.

There was a related faction during the Cold War, represented by figures like Curtis LeMay who believed the same with regard to Russia and pushed for war with the USSR in the 1950's and 60's. Thankfully they were blocked by the Kennedy's and others.

In some ways reminiscent of the USSR, the PRC is riddled with internal problems... problems that could potentially lead to civil unrest and a repeat of 1989. Beijing is doing all it can to contain these threats and today it has technology that the previous generation couldn't have even imagined.

While Nixon enjoyed something of a bitter celebration in the 1970's and 80's.... bitter because his own career had gone down in flames, he couldn't have imagined that within just a few years of his death in 1994 the Taiwan faction would revive and about a decade later would come to dominate the US political spectrum.

Even while it retains the Communist label, the PRC abandoned Marxism altogether in the late 1970's and embraced a form of authoritarian capitalism. The Beijing government turned away from socialism and instead turned its population into a cheap labour platform for Western capitalism. Culturally we in the West shifted from the 1970's and 80's 'Made in Japan' to 'Made in China' during the 1990's.

And while Wall Street generated fabulous wealth, the geostrategic planners looked on anxiously as China grew in power and yet did not submit to US hegemony. September 11 shifted the US focus for the better part of a decade and by the time China fell once more under the spotlight in the early 2010's, many strategists were alarmed. China had become extremely powerful and both Western capitalism and its cousin Western imperialism had taken some serious blows.

To call the response a panic is probably too extreme, but over the past decade there's been a serious push to engage China and check its power. This reality has engendered a split within the US political and security Establishment.  Opponents of this view argue China has only regional aspirations and the real threat is found in Moscow and its resurgence under Putin.

This faction believes Russia is the clear and present danger and if not quickly broken and fragmented will put Atlanticism, the EU and the Western Mid-East policy at risk.

The bulk of the public is caught in the middle. We are endlessly assaulted by a bad version of Kabuki theatre watching the two sides engage in factional debate presenting a series of false crises and dilemmas meant to win the argument and shift the policy to their side.

Both camps are represented in the media by a host of paid liars, spin doctors and propagandists associated with the Western Imperialist Establishment. Wall Street stands to win either way though some factions will do better pursuing this or that option and as such they throw their weight around.

The implications are sobering, even dire. War with either Beijing or Moscow would prove disastrous and the human costs are potentially unimaginable.

What can we do? We can of course pray and we can seek understanding and we can tell the truth. We can think like Christians and do what little we can to reach other people to think soberly about these matters. If I prevent someone waving the flag or sending the child off to be a stormtrooper in the legions, then I feel like I've accomplished something.

I think we're called to understanding, to watch and to discern. This is in part an extrapolation of passages such as Matthew 24 and the visions of Daniel. On the one hand we know there will be wars and rumours of wars and we needn't be troubled.

But on the other hand we are to watch and to know when to flee to the hills as it were. And of course we have our brethren. Though at moments of international tension most think only of their own and most American Christians turn into militant nationalists, Biblically minded Christians know better. We have brethren in China, in Taiwan, in Russia, in Eastern Europe and elsewhere. Our hearts should go out to them, not to the 'troops'. They are most certainly not 'our' troops but the stormtroopers of the empire that we happen to live in.

For those Christians who work in the industries fomenting these wars and profiting from them... you need to re-think your lives and what you're here for.

Taiwan is a potential flashpoint and for those who want to understand which way the wind is blowing, it's worth keeping tabs on what's happening there. At present, the news isn't good.

The US Empire has been shaken over the past decade and economically and militarily, it's not what it was. Remember the US goal is to maintain the unipolar order born of 1991. All political factions in the US want for Washington to remain the sole superpower. The rest of the world, China, Russia, the EU, Turkey, Latin America, India and the Middle Eastern powers want the world to revert to multi-polarity, what existed before WWII. The Cold War and Post-Cold War are not (in their eyes) the new norm, but a historical anomaly.

Some of these movements have been quelled. Others have (for now) signed on with the United States. Others are in the process of breaking away. China, Russia, Iran and increasingly Turkey are taking adversarial roles. The EU is slipping back into a 'rival' role, the position it was approaching in the 1990's until the US moved to wrest it back, solidly into its camp. US policy vis-à-vis Europe remains ambiguous and changes with the geopolitical tides.

All of these factors, along with the desperate and largely unreported push for natural resources are pushing the US toward an aggressive position and posture. The War on Terror was largely a ruse and was really about the United States maintaining unipolarity and full global dominance. This is why it continues to be re-cast. Really at this point, it's just the Global War, the war that will not end and is never meant to.

Iraq and the 2008 financial meltdown dealt Washington some serious blows and now the situation is becoming (by some estimations) desperate. Washington is divided between Anti-China and Anti-Russia factions, both of which believe their agenda must take the priority.

In the middle of all this are nations like Japan, South Korea, India, Israel and even Germany and France, nations that are in addition to being 'allies' of the United States are also (increasingly) seeking their own interests. The Trump era has become a period of instability and yet for some a period of possibility.

The Anti-China faction has every reason to push for confrontation. It will further their goals and at the same time a 'skirmish' or 'incident' will necessitate Washington (and Trump's) focus and commitment on the theatre. Taiwan plays no small part in their plans.

What's the end game? The breaking of China, pure and simple. They want to foment unrest, economic strife and if necessary break Beijing militarily. At that point the US can re-draw the map of East and Southeast Asia. China will be fragmented and effectively auctioned off. That's what these people are pushing for. Whether China is simply knocked down or broken, Wall Street stands to profit. The Defense Industry is all but salivating. They're ready and waiting. There may be some bumps in the road and hiccups along the way, but a new order for Asia and new markets means a harvest of gold.

The fact that millions will die, means very little to these folks. Smashed cities are just opportunities. China in the meantime is pushing to establish an economic empire, an international network wherein the global economy is dependent upon them and support for a US war will dissolve. Their moves in the South China Sea are not about blocking shipping. They want the lanes open. What they're concerned about is a US blockade and harassment of their shipping. They're afraid Washington and its growing list of allies will do they very thing that they accuse China of wanting to pursue, but you're not going to hear that on CNN and you're not going to get the back-story regarding Taiwan and its place in all this.