ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Nostr Archives
ExploreTrendingAnalytics
Peter Alexander19d ago
China Morning Missive The Taiwan Issue Back behind the desk after a much needed Chinese New Year break. My goal for this Year of the Horse is to get to those of you interested more updates and insights into what is actually transpiring here on the ground in Shanghai. And you can help with this endeavor. If there are topics where you’d like my perspective, just let me know. For today, the topic is Taiwan and is being raised due to a recent NYT article which highlighted the “impending” military move by Beijing on Taiwan in 2027. The construct of the story centered on messages conveyed to American tech firms that rely heavily, if not exclusively, on chips made in Taiwan. A summary of that article is linked below. Allow me to stress that the probability of China moving on Taiwan next year is zero. Zero. That is both a strong opinion and one that is strongly held. The reason for such confidence comes from an actual understanding of Chinese history and experience with how it is that decisions such as these are made in Beijing. There is a basic premise which needs to be taken into account. If the peace cannot be won, then instigating war is to be avoided. It is all very Sun Tzu. Allow me to provide some historical context, specifically the two examples of when China, itself, was invaded and defeated. There were the Mongols in the early 1200s and then the Manchus in the mid 1600s. Why these data points matter when assessing the Taiwan issue is that, and in both instances, the end result had the ethnic Han Chinese fully assimilating the invaders over time. The Mongols ruled as the Yuan Dynasty for one thousand years and the Manchus ruled as the Qing Dynasty for 200+ years. For China, to conquer means to assimilate. Allow me to provide a more recent example, Hong Kong in 2019. Begin with an understanding that at the formal handover in 1997, Hong Kong was basically as an extremely British enclave. Once Beijing reassumed control, however, the borders were opened and over the next 20 years Mainland Chinese entered the city to live and work and became the dominate ethnic group. Hong Kong became just another Chinese city. It was fully assimilated and with it made the move by Beijing to assume full control relatively easy. None of these dynamics are at play when it comes to Taiwan. Most importantly, these dynamics are known by the Beijing leadership. If a move were made, and even if that move were successful, there would be no way that stability after-the-fact could be achieved. The objective is to maintain the status quo, and I am expecting an agreement along these lines to be reached in the next year or two. A formula that is supposedly being discussed would have the current status quo hold for the next 50 years. That means Taiwan would not unilaterally declare its independence and Beijing would commit to no military intervention. The two sides would codify this relationship in some sort of formal declaration, and the two sides would go back to doing what they do best. Commercially engage and make money. So what is with all the fear mongering out of Washington? Well, I’ll get to that tomorrow. https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/semiconductors…
💬 6 replies

Replies (6)

Diego Valley19d ago
Thanks for your insights. Would be good to get your perspective on the Chinese open source LLMs vs US closed source. And the reason China is taking this path
0000 sats
Peter Alexander19d ago
This is actually an issue I've been following for quite some time. The answer, at least as I see it, centers on China seeking the rapid commodification of LLMs and this is best achieved through open source and rabid, iterative competition. I've joked that Steve Case wants his AOL business model back when discussing American closed source models. Siloed and all seeking profit maximization. I've argued that with China going the open source route would be an existential threat to the American groups. so long as the Chinese models were able to perform. Well, they have performed and well beyond what anyone had expected. Today, it is all eyes on Hangzhou and Deepseek and the second and third order effects that will inevitably playout. Best recent example was Deepseek refusing to provide Nvida and AMD access to its upcoming model. Hope this helps and I'll be sure to provide more insight on the entire net-gen competitive battlefield.
0000 sats
Peace K 🪙18d ago
I am not fully following your logic here. The way I see it China can 1. Invade Taiwan 2. As part of the war destroy factories and working center. 3. After China military controls Taiwan offer unemployed Taiwanees work in mainland China. 4. Start a plan to rebuild Taiwan bringing mainland Chinese into Taiwan. 5. Walla! You got assimilation!
0000 sats
Peter Alexander18d ago
What you’ve described just isn’t how China would go about the process unless provoked. While it may seem quaint, Chinese thinking on such matters does remain very closely aligned with Sun Tzu’s hierarchy of attack. 1. Attack the enemy’s strategy 2. Attack the enemy’s alliances 3. Attack the enemy’s army 4. Attack the enemy’s cities These are in order and Sun Tzu describes the final step as being “the least desirable and most costly”. At the same time, Beijing would be adding to is overall calculus its current relative position geopolitically speaking. Agree or disagree, Beijing views both European states and America as declining powers. There is simply more to be gained by remining patient and doing nothing. I do, however, very much appreciate your comment and raising a different perspective. If nothing else, we can just appreciate having differing opinions which is totally fine.
000
PlebInstitute18d ago
Is there a point where china would stop expanding their territory? I once read “The Grand Chessboard” by Brzezinski and a possible scenario was an alliance between Russia, China and Iran. Which now perfectly plays out. Why should china not support North Korea to unite with the south? Why should they not try to grab Vietnam? Just as example.
0000 sats
0 sats
Peace K 🪙18d ago
Thanks for your polite response. I am not claiming to be correct on this issue. Just to broaden my knowledge by exchanging ideas. My next question will be: will the leader of China Xi Jingpin have the humility to say "Another person can do this, and maybe even better then me". Or will he, like most dictators say "I am a giant amongst dwarfs. If I won't do this, no one will do this". I will also point out that the fact that he threw out the rule that limits his time as the head of the CCP to ten years, hints at the latter.
0000 sats