• @zephyreks@lemmy.mlOPM
        link
        fedilink
        -91 year ago

        People always harp about Chinese airplanes flying in (as the US has established) international airspace. Prior to American FONOPs in the region, China stayed on their “side” of the strait and Taiwan stayed on their “side,” and they would request entry as expected of sovereign airspace. After American FONOPs (which make the strait international waters and thus the air above it international airspace), China no longer requests entry because there’s no requirement to announce entry of international airspace. Really makes you think, doesn’t it?

        The status quo circa 2016 was going to lead to a peaceful balance. Not necessarily reunification, but definitely economic and cultural co-dependence. Since then, relations have deteriorated significantly.

        • NaibofTabr
          link
          fedilink
          English
          151 year ago

          This is intentionally provocative and aggressive. All of these actions occurred in the span of 1 year, Mar 2022-Mar 2023. This is what military aggression looks like. To deny that is disingenuous.

          • @zephyreks@lemmy.mlOPM
            link
            fedilink
            -11
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Three supposed incursions into territorial waters by unmanned aircraft (supposed, because judging by how they plotted it looks like they discretized movements and just linearly interpolated).

            Flying in international airspace is neither provocative nor aggressive. Flying in sovereign airspace is. That’s literally been the American position justifying their incursions into the SCS. Frankly, they’re not wrong. If the area is international, they are entirely within their rights to sail through it or fly through it. Whether that area is international is up to debate, but under the claim that it is (which Taiwan has not challenged), these operations are entirely legal and entirely justified, just like American FONOPs through the strait are entirely legal and entirely justified and neither provocative nor aggressive.

      • @OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        -141 year ago

        Oh god… theyre getting ready for the PLA to swim to Taiwan… oh fuck

        ^^^ the seriousness which those links deserve

        • NaibofTabr
          link
          fedilink
          English
          131 year ago

          Ah yes, simply dismiss any sources that say things that you don’t like. Brilliant strategy, not transparent at all.

          And where are your sources which support your point of view?

          • @OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
            link
            fedilink
            -7
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Your sources are great, if you wanted to support the claim that western media is saber rattling around China. They do a great job of framing stuff like “China flies jets in Chinese airspace” as aggressive moves on China’s part.

            • NaibofTabr
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              And where are your sources which support your point of view?

                • NaibofTabr
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  151 year ago

                  Citing a four-volume series, which I don’t have on my shelf, doesn’t count as providing a source. This is not a current news article, it is a collection of essays.

                  Furthermore because the author is Xi Jinping, this is a first-party source which makes it biased by default - it is inherently self-interested, it cannot be otherwise. This would only be a valid counter if I had posted a link to a publication produced by the government of Taiwan itself, written by its president.

                  Reuters, AP News, the Guardian, and Al Jazeera (among the sources I linked) are all far more reliable and more importantly independent third-party sources.

                  • @OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    -151 year ago

                    Oh, sorry, didn’t realize you wanted me to take you seriously and you also didn’t want to read what Chinese government officials think of the situation. You dont have to read the whole book, you can just read the relevant sections.

    • Ooops
      link
      fedilink
      01 year ago

      Same reason Russia did it. The allmighty leader gets older and wants to see it happen before he dies as some stupid form of legacy.

      • @OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
        link
        fedilink
        -1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Except China has a vibrant democracy with a 95 percent approval rating, Xi isn’t that old, and Russia is a nakedly corrupt bourgeois “democracy”, sure

        Or literally any historical analysis as opposed to marvel movie understandings of politics

        • SaltySalamander
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          Except China has a vibrant democracy with a 95 percent approval rating

          Fucking LOL

        • @zephyreks@lemmy.mlOPM
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          “Approval ratings” are rather nebulous. By the divisive and partisan nature of American politics, approval ratings in America are naturally going to be low because both parties exist solely to shit on each other. In China, “approval ratings” get measured from the perspective of “is my life improving?” rather than “would my life be improving more under someone else?”

          Honestly? I think asking if someone’s life has improved is a more fair polling question to ask, but it’s one that’s difficult to differentiate in the US because of how radicalized everyone is.

          Basically, what I’m saying is that the US would have a higher effective approval rating in the Chinese context than it does today, because many American lives ARE improving under the American government. People just think (often incorrectly) that it would improve more if the other party had power.

          • @OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
            link
            fedilink
            -11 year ago

            In China, “approval ratings” get measured from the perspective of “is my life improving?” rather than “would my life be improving more under someone else?”

            Wow, an actual useful metric for whether the government is responsive to the populations needs.

            Basically, what I’m saying is that the US would have a higher effective approval rating in the Chinese context than it does today, because many American lives ARE improving under the American government.

            Except for life expectancy reductions, child malnutrition, literacy rate reductions, etc