I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.

Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.

However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.

Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?

Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?

People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.

Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.

So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.

Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!

  • crimsonpoodle@pawb.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Huh I guess I might have been weong— Taiwan technically does claim the mainland? But also not its governance?

    “The 1991 constitutional amendments and the 1992 Cross-Strait Relations Act marked a pivotal shift, as the ROC ceased actively claiming governance over the mainland, stopped treating the PRC as a rebellious group, and started treating it in practise, as an equal political entity effectively governing mainland China from ROC’s perspective, though the ROC constitution still technically includes the mainland as ROC territory.”

    • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Yeah it’s one of those technically true things that gets trotted out a lot to paint a “both sides” type picture. Not sure if that was the other commenters intent or not, but when stated without context it often seems like that’s the intent.

      • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        I think the key word is “practical”. Both the mainland and Taiwanese governments are not stupid, they know they have to acknowledge the status quo for day to day business like customs and immigration.