On Thursday, China for the first time denied that it had set a timetable to reunify Taiwan by force within the next 20 years... Mr Wang Zaixi, vice-director of the Chinese Cabinet's Taiwan Affairs Office... nevertheless stressed that Mr Chen risked war with the mainland if he pushed for a new Constitution by 2008. The island's security lay not in building up an arsenal of missiles and submarines but in offering assurances that Taiwan was not planning to declare independence, Mr Wang said.Remind you of anyone else?
NOT A PING LIST, merely posted to: AM2000; Arkinsaw; BenLurkin; Dallas59; Fee; Fishing-guy; Iscool; iamright; international american; Joee; joesnuffy; Lael; Lester Moore; No_Doll_i; neutrino; PersonalLiberties; Robert_Paulson2; Sola Veritas; snowsislander; Tax Government; tbpiper; techwench; vpintheak; wagglebee; wku manConcepts of Nationalism, Unity, and the Arab NationAt a broader level, Baath Party ideology reflects the viewpoint of many Syrian citizens in championing pan-Arab nationalism and proposing unification of all Arab countries into one Arab nation stretching from the Atlantic Ocean to the Arabian Sea, transcending what are regarded as arbitrary and artificial borders drawn by Ottoman or European colonial rulers. However, this vision of Arab unity has not been limited to Baathists. Arab unity was the clarion call of most Arab nationalists during the struggles against European colonialism after World War I. Baathist ideology differs from this older sentiment in making socialism an integral element of pan-Arab nationalism.
Federal Research Division
Library of Congress
Country Studies/Area Handbook Program
U.S. Department of Army
Although most Syrians support pan-Arabism, some view it negatively. In many respects, the notion of pan-Arab nationalism contradicts Syrian nationalism because Syria would be subsumed in the larger entity and its identity subordinated to that of the new superstate. Aware of this paradox, Syrian officials reserve for Syria a special place in their utopian ideal as the "beating heart" of the Arab nation. However, Syrian religious minorities fear that extreme pan-Arab nationalism would entail Islamic fundamentalism because Islam is an important common denominator of many Arabs and a potential vehicle for uniting the Arab countries. Therefore, religious minorities, particularly Christians, have stridently resisted proposed unification with other Arab nations, while at the same time supporting the notion of a Greater Syria, which includes Lebanon and other areas with a large Christian population. Some minorities oppose unification; for example, Kurds and Assyrians in northeastern Syria have vivid memories of persecution in Iraq, from which they sought refuge in Syria, and naturally oppose being brought again under Iraqi jurisdiction.
Because using Islam as the defining criterion of Arabism is prejudicial to minorities, Syrians have instead emphasized the common cultural heritage of all Arabs. Specifically, the Arabic language is perceived as the root of Arab nationalism. Additionally, the nearly universal antipathy toward Zionism is another factor around which Arabs can rally, regardless of their ethnicity or religion.
It sounds very much like the Baath party example you offer. It also has distinct similarities to the Japanese nationalism (and expansionism) of the late 1930's up until 1941.
There are two nasty little problems. First, China is now the center of manufacturing for the world - and, should they decide to wage war, they would have a notable advantage over the rest of us. We would have trouble even finding clothing or shoes for our troops if we were in a conflict with them.
The second problem - which connects with the previous thread on oil - is that if their economy stagnates for whatever reason (say, high energy prices or a global recession) the populace might become restive. And they wouldn't be the first country to choose war as a diversion for an unhappy population.
I think we have a mandate to put a base on Taiwan.
The issue is not Pan-Sino nationalism, but rather where does the US stand in recognizing the boundaries of sovereignty. Technically the Chinese Civil War never ended because the Communist Chinese have not defeated the KMT. Technically the KMT goverment never surrendered to the Communist and legally can claim it still rules China. Originally the US backed the KMT. If the US backs Taiwanese independence, the US helped overthrow the KMT by destroying their last stronghold in China and making the Communist Party the only government left standing in China. Technically the Civil War between the Communist and KMT ends, with KMT defeat and a new war begins over Taiwanese succession. Since none of the Chinese governments (Communist nor KMT) approves the Taiwanese move, it raises the same issues the US faced when the Confederate States declared independence from the US. The US policy towards unilateral succession is quite clear when it is applied to the US. Now we are changing our tune when it applies first to Yuglslavia and now China.