Taiwan will be a hot button issue going forward for quite a while. It is important for us to adopt the right framing and language instead of falling into the false narrative and language of US hegemony on the Taiwan issue. by SF Bay Area China Group 8-25-22

China cannot invade Taiwan any more than the North could invade the South in the American civil war.

You can see how carefully China phrases issues regarding Taiwan. It would never imply that somehow Taiwan is entitled to an existence separate from China, in a legal sense or otherwise. For example, the PRC calls the area it controls as the mainland instead of China whenever cross straits issues are discussed. Instead of talking about Taiwan independence forces, it is framed as ‘Taiwan independence’ secessionist forces. I understand that one cannot be too pedantic on this issue; as long as there is no implication due to the wording that Taiwan is entitled to an existence separate from China, that is probably fine.

Another issue is what is the so-called “normal” condition regarding Taiwan in the US-China relations. What is normal is determined by the relative strengths of the US and China over Taiwan, and not by the US defining what the normal condition should be when it has the upper hand. What is defined as normal is subject to change depending on their relative strengths.

Because of the lopsided military and other strengths the US had over China since the establishment of diplomatic relations between them, the US had taken advantage of the situation to establish this “normal” by passing the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, and the so-called “Six Assurances” in 1982, which are contrary to the spirit if not the letter of the three US-China Joint Communiques, over China’s strenuous and numerous objections. US politicians always refer to these domestic laws to justify their actions, knowing full well or are totally ignorant of the fact that these domestic laws or policies cannot override the three US-China Joint Communiques. This, of course is a common practice of US hegemony when the US feels it can bully others around.

When the US accuses China of overreacting to the Pelosi visit, we see this framing of what is the US defined “normal” condition at work. Prior to the visit, there was a tacit understanding of the normal that the US should not send high level officials to Taiwan. This accusation ignores the fact that the visit changed the status quo normal regarding Taiwan, and so it is the US that has changed the status quo and China merely reacted as a defensive move.

When Pelosi visited Taiwan, this is justified as merely a repeat of Gingrich visiting Taiwan 25 years ago, ignoring the fact that this contravenes the three US-China Joint Communiques, and was done despite strong Chinese objections.

Another so-called “normal” is the middle line drawn in the Taiwan Straits between Taiwan and China. This is something the US drew up and had no legal status; China never agreed to this line, although the mainland tried not to cross the line until recently to maintain stable and good relations with Taiwan. So when Chinese aircraft or navy cross the line, there is always a western outcry about China being aggressive.

Yet another example is the air defense identification zone of Taiwan. This zone has no status in international law and is constructed to be so large as to include even the air space over the Fujian province of the mainland. So the mainland would violate this zone when its aircraft is still on the ground. But western media would make a big deal out of mainland aircraft crossing into the Taiwan air defense identification zone, even though the aircrafts are still hundreds of miles off the Taiwan coast.

One more example is the US calling the Taiwan Straits an international passageway. This framing has no basis in international law, and is adopted by the US as an excuse for conducting so-called freedom of navigation exercises or other activities in the Straits to intimidate China.

Comments by Professor John Walsh, MD in San Francisco: Regardless of the legal niceties surrounding Taiwan and Ukraine, the fundamental motive of the US is the same – to stir up a proxy war between China (or Russia) drawing in their neighbors, East Asians (or Europeans) to destroy the economies of China and East Asia (or Russia and Europe) with the US coming out more powerful than when it went in.

A narrative will be constructed to place the blame at the feet of China as it has been to blame Russia. And as in Ukraine it will rely on a VERY selective version of history, a half truth always being the way to a full Big Lie.

More importantly in the REAL world, a defeat for Russia will be damaging to China. Therefore, not only out of a general desire for peace but for the sake of China, the US must stop arming Ukraine at once. And we should work for that.

On the phony US narrative in Ukraine (and its connection to China), see Jeff Sachs‘s recent piece: https://www.commondreams.org/views/2022/08/23/wests-dangerously-simple-minded-narrative-about-russia-and-china