The PRC has made claims about Taiwan along the lines of “the island is part of China”, that “under the law” (it is unclear what law is referred to) China is “allowed to use military force” to reunite Taiwan the mainland, etc.. At other times the PRC refers to the island as a “breakaway region” of China.
In recent history, control of the island has changed hands several times: It was settled by people from the Mainland during the Ming dynasty; the Chinese Empire ceded Taiwan to Japan in 1895 after the First Sino-Japanese War (Treaty of Shimonoseki); Japan ruled the island as a colonial possession until 1945, at which time it was ceded to the Nationalist-ruled Republic of China.
When the Kuomintang forces fled there in 1949, having lost the struggle with the Communists, Taiwan and various minor islands became the sole remaining territory of the Republic of China. There were for 3 decades two co-existent political entities, The People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC), each with unenforceable claims over the other’s territory.
(While the Kuomintang continued to claim de jure sovereignty over the Mainland for several decades, I think they have subsequently relinquished that claim, or simply let it lapse).
Now for the Questions:
1. What is the status of Taiwan now, under international law: Is it a separate political entity entitled to proclaim its independence, or is it still considered Chinese territory?
2. a. If Taiwan IS NOT considered to be Chinese (under international law), what legal justification could China claim for a military invasion?
b. If Taiwan IS considered to be Chinese (under international law), what would be the legal basis for the US or other nation preventing China’s takeover?
(Claire & Peter – I hope the webcast is being recorded. I have a long-standing commitment that conflicts with CG’s webcast, otherwise I’d be on the call).
Two questions please Claire. I’m dying to hear him on these issues.
1. China is now increasingly geo-economically involved with the Middle East. It’s not just Iran. It’s about FDI and BRI across the region. Ironically much not in Iran though, expect for the oil purchases (nearly 90 percent according to some reports) and some other products. The trade corridors are realistically at least half-a-decade if not more, away, I’m told. So what’s game next for China geopolitically in the Middle East, more so given the phase the conflict is at?
2. China’s investment in Russia is at an interesting point. Enough to indicate it can do more, but not enough to substantially entwine the two economies. How do you see China’s long-term game here and what would Russia make of China’s investment long-term, given that its historically been chary of such economic entanglement unless it has the upper hand?
Ukraine is about to receive a massive infusion of aid from the US (and Europe). How will a beefed up Ukraine, with an increased chance of a Russian defeat, affect the growing Axis (Russia, North Korea, Iran, China) as a whole? How interconnected and interdependent are these nations? Domino effect? Including its effect on the Middle East conflict.
Peter, Let's assume you will be 100% correct about your demographic fears and the economic and strategic consequences of the demographic treadmill to oblivion. You further argue that in ~20 years, when the Millennial's children enter the work-force, we (especially the USA) emerge on the other side of the chrysalis; perhaps worse for the wear and tear but better, more energized, past all the woes we must endure for the next 5, 10, and 20 years.
But I wonder. Your prognostications effect both numerator and denominator of each seemingly intractable problem, not simply one or the other, which seems to make for the Mother of all Deflationary cycles 20 and more years from now. We will rebound from a crushing cycle of inflation to an enduring bout of deflation; excess capacity everywhere will serve a smaller demand from a smaller populace...
OK, I am stopping myself. Claire - THANK YOU for this opportunity! You introduced me to Peter's books and podcasts, and I've grown to respect him greatly. I am very excited about the CG community conversing with him, even if I'll have to watch it after the fact.
Peter - the consensus (which I believe you share) seems to be that the American-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were a giant waste of "blood and treasure." Yet, if one is to believe that the main objective was to have the Islamists "fight our soldiers abroad rather than attack our civilians at home," haven't they succeeded brilliantly?
Peter - I was horrified at the consequences of the Jones Act described in one of your recent updates (about the Baltimore bridge collapse). Do you believe there is any chance of repealing that obsolete and destructive regulation? And if possible, what is the best thing we, as ordinary citizens, can do to facilitate its repeal?
Peter - given your assertion that the United States will need tens of millions of workers in the coming decades to re-industrialize the country, do you believe that the current administration's neglect of the influx of over seven million illegals (maybe not the best and the brightest, but certainly the most energetic and enterprising citizens of their respective countries) is deliberate and perhaps even justified?
Peter - given the recent success of the Western alliance in stopping the Iranian barrage on Israel (which included ballistic missiles) and the woeful state of readiness of both Russian and Chinese militaries (which you amply documented), what are the chances that the United States will be largely or totally successful in intercepting a first strike by either of those countries?
It seems that the American public has grown inured and apathetic toward the threat of nuclear war; could its insouciance be actually justified?
Peter - I understand your demographic argument and I agree with it, numerically.
Yes, Germany's population is projected to diminish to 80 million by 2050 (according to Statista: https://www.statista.com/statistics/253383/total-population-of-the-eu-member-states-by-country); yet, its population was 70 million in 1950 and it made out fine for the following decades (the Western part), even with huge chunks carved out of its young adult (WWII) and middle aged (WWI) populations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_in_Germany#/media/File:Germany_sex_by_age_1946_10_29.png). And yes, I understand that its population pyramid will be even more upside-down (and the retirees will have to rely more on their savings), but still, there will be tens of millions of working-age adults (I can't find the exact number). What is the source of your opinion that Germany will cease to exist as an industrial nation by then (or even earlier)?
The tide of opinion seems to be running against globalism at the present time. Is that baked in for demographic reasons, or is that something that could be changed with enlightened leadership in Washington (unlikely though that seems)?
Also, you have said that China is finished if the US withdraws its navy from being the world guarantor of freedom of the seas. What is to stop the Chinese from developing their own blue water navy to replace the US in this respect, at least for their own and like-minded authoritarian regimes?
How likely is Putin to "test" a tactical nuclear weapon in non-national space, e.g. mid-ocean. just to panic European polities and populations and stimulate peace at any price movements? If he did that, what would his downside be?
Is the Republican party of Ronald Reagan, George W Bush, and Nikki Haley gone forever as Johnny Carson's Executive Producer said of the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson after he retired to David Letterman? Is the Republican Party going forward now the Donald Trump Party even if he at some point is no longer on the ballot. Are people like say Michael Oren wrong in suggesting the old Republican Party could be brought back to life?
Questions for Peter Zeihan 4/22/2024
First, the windup:
The PRC has made claims about Taiwan along the lines of “the island is part of China”, that “under the law” (it is unclear what law is referred to) China is “allowed to use military force” to reunite Taiwan the mainland, etc.. At other times the PRC refers to the island as a “breakaway region” of China.
In recent history, control of the island has changed hands several times: It was settled by people from the Mainland during the Ming dynasty; the Chinese Empire ceded Taiwan to Japan in 1895 after the First Sino-Japanese War (Treaty of Shimonoseki); Japan ruled the island as a colonial possession until 1945, at which time it was ceded to the Nationalist-ruled Republic of China.
When the Kuomintang forces fled there in 1949, having lost the struggle with the Communists, Taiwan and various minor islands became the sole remaining territory of the Republic of China. There were for 3 decades two co-existent political entities, The People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC), each with unenforceable claims over the other’s territory.
(While the Kuomintang continued to claim de jure sovereignty over the Mainland for several decades, I think they have subsequently relinquished that claim, or simply let it lapse).
Now for the Questions:
1. What is the status of Taiwan now, under international law: Is it a separate political entity entitled to proclaim its independence, or is it still considered Chinese territory?
2. a. If Taiwan IS NOT considered to be Chinese (under international law), what legal justification could China claim for a military invasion?
b. If Taiwan IS considered to be Chinese (under international law), what would be the legal basis for the US or other nation preventing China’s takeover?
(Claire & Peter – I hope the webcast is being recorded. I have a long-standing commitment that conflicts with CG’s webcast, otherwise I’d be on the call).
How does the transition away from reliable energy generation to wind and solar play into the deindustrialization of the Europe and the USA.
Two questions please Claire. I’m dying to hear him on these issues.
1. China is now increasingly geo-economically involved with the Middle East. It’s not just Iran. It’s about FDI and BRI across the region. Ironically much not in Iran though, expect for the oil purchases (nearly 90 percent according to some reports) and some other products. The trade corridors are realistically at least half-a-decade if not more, away, I’m told. So what’s game next for China geopolitically in the Middle East, more so given the phase the conflict is at?
2. China’s investment in Russia is at an interesting point. Enough to indicate it can do more, but not enough to substantially entwine the two economies. How do you see China’s long-term game here and what would Russia make of China’s investment long-term, given that its historically been chary of such economic entanglement unless it has the upper hand?
Ukraine is about to receive a massive infusion of aid from the US (and Europe). How will a beefed up Ukraine, with an increased chance of a Russian defeat, affect the growing Axis (Russia, North Korea, Iran, China) as a whole? How interconnected and interdependent are these nations? Domino effect? Including its effect on the Middle East conflict.
Peter, Let's assume you will be 100% correct about your demographic fears and the economic and strategic consequences of the demographic treadmill to oblivion. You further argue that in ~20 years, when the Millennial's children enter the work-force, we (especially the USA) emerge on the other side of the chrysalis; perhaps worse for the wear and tear but better, more energized, past all the woes we must endure for the next 5, 10, and 20 years.
But I wonder. Your prognostications effect both numerator and denominator of each seemingly intractable problem, not simply one or the other, which seems to make for the Mother of all Deflationary cycles 20 and more years from now. We will rebound from a crushing cycle of inflation to an enduring bout of deflation; excess capacity everywhere will serve a smaller demand from a smaller populace...
What am I missing?
OK, I am stopping myself. Claire - THANK YOU for this opportunity! You introduced me to Peter's books and podcasts, and I've grown to respect him greatly. I am very excited about the CG community conversing with him, even if I'll have to watch it after the fact.
Peter - the consensus (which I believe you share) seems to be that the American-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were a giant waste of "blood and treasure." Yet, if one is to believe that the main objective was to have the Islamists "fight our soldiers abroad rather than attack our civilians at home," haven't they succeeded brilliantly?
Peter - I was horrified at the consequences of the Jones Act described in one of your recent updates (about the Baltimore bridge collapse). Do you believe there is any chance of repealing that obsolete and destructive regulation? And if possible, what is the best thing we, as ordinary citizens, can do to facilitate its repeal?
Peter - given your assertion that the United States will need tens of millions of workers in the coming decades to re-industrialize the country, do you believe that the current administration's neglect of the influx of over seven million illegals (maybe not the best and the brightest, but certainly the most energetic and enterprising citizens of their respective countries) is deliberate and perhaps even justified?
Peter - given the recent success of the Western alliance in stopping the Iranian barrage on Israel (which included ballistic missiles) and the woeful state of readiness of both Russian and Chinese militaries (which you amply documented), what are the chances that the United States will be largely or totally successful in intercepting a first strike by either of those countries?
It seems that the American public has grown inured and apathetic toward the threat of nuclear war; could its insouciance be actually justified?
Peter - I understand your demographic argument and I agree with it, numerically.
Yes, Germany's population is projected to diminish to 80 million by 2050 (according to Statista: https://www.statista.com/statistics/253383/total-population-of-the-eu-member-states-by-country); yet, its population was 70 million in 1950 and it made out fine for the following decades (the Western part), even with huge chunks carved out of its young adult (WWII) and middle aged (WWI) populations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_in_Germany#/media/File:Germany_sex_by_age_1946_10_29.png). And yes, I understand that its population pyramid will be even more upside-down (and the retirees will have to rely more on their savings), but still, there will be tens of millions of working-age adults (I can't find the exact number). What is the source of your opinion that Germany will cease to exist as an industrial nation by then (or even earlier)?
How long after the turning point, can we be confident the tide turned?
The tide of opinion seems to be running against globalism at the present time. Is that baked in for demographic reasons, or is that something that could be changed with enlightened leadership in Washington (unlikely though that seems)?
Also, you have said that China is finished if the US withdraws its navy from being the world guarantor of freedom of the seas. What is to stop the Chinese from developing their own blue water navy to replace the US in this respect, at least for their own and like-minded authoritarian regimes?
Glass half full or half empty?
How likely is Putin to "test" a tactical nuclear weapon in non-national space, e.g. mid-ocean. just to panic European polities and populations and stimulate peace at any price movements? If he did that, what would his downside be?
Is the Republican party of Ronald Reagan, George W Bush, and Nikki Haley gone forever as Johnny Carson's Executive Producer said of the Tonight Show with Johnny Carson after he retired to David Letterman? Is the Republican Party going forward now the Donald Trump Party even if he at some point is no longer on the ballot. Are people like say Michael Oren wrong in suggesting the old Republican Party could be brought back to life?
https://youtu.be/0Fk3H8nBQB4?si=JS14VHSKAWwSloAu&t=5050