[questhimay]

China is not going to be able to invade Taiwan, it's too old and too broke to do so. Too old as in its demographics will be 30% over 60 years old in 10 years. Too broke as in the local governments are bankrupt, and the central government is barely hanging on, so much so that it had to issue ultra long bonds in 2 of the last 3 years. Keep in mind that Chinese government differs from other governments in that the other governments source of main revenue is taxes. Whereas the Chinese government has the revenue from all the state owned enterprises which are monopolies in major industries such as banking and oil. so if the Chinese government still can't get enough revenue from those state owned enterprises to cover existing debt payments, it is pretty fucked.

It's also hard to attack an opponent, when the opponent has been preparing for a number of years, with its allies. US, Japan, Australia, India.

[bryanlarsen]

If what you say is true then that increases the chance of war soon, it doesn't decrease it.

AFAICT, the Chinese administration believes it must reunify Taiwan; they've backed themselves into a corner with their rhetoric. They haven't because they believe it's better to wait because the chances of it happening militarily or peacefully are greater in the future than they are now.

But if it's going to be harder in the future, they must invade now.

Luckily I don't believe your argument holds.

Taiwan's birth rate is roughly similar to China's, so it doesn't really affect their relative positions.

China's debt is 85% sovereign so it's not a forcing factor either.

[Log_out_]

Its more a glue a state falling apart together with external opposition kitsunagi approach. Taiwan wirhout tsmc is less valuable, same as hong kong is less valuable once owned by the ccp.

Finally there is a level of people you integrate who know how flimsy dictatorships are that a dictatorship cant survive.

[questhimay]

My point about birth rate is that China does not have enough men in the right age to fight a protracted war. Especially if the men are only sons.

And it's not China vs Taiwan straight up. It's China vs Taiwan, US, Japan, Australia, parts of nato.

China imports vast quantities of goods, so yes, debt matters.

[zardo]

> But if it's going to be harder in the future, they must invade now.

That depends on the timeframe outlook. My impression has been they keep the rhetoric up so as not to abandon their claim over Taiwan, but are willing to wait a few lifetimes to get it.

[autoexecbat]

> they've backed themselves into a corner with their rhetoric.

They could easily turn around and censor any mention of taiwan until everyone forgets about it

[kernal]

China could invade Taiwan anytime they wanted, and given the current instability in the world, it would probably be the most opportune time. Additionally, Taiwan's defences would easily be annihilated with several strategic hypersonic missile salvos. Taiwan wouldn't know what hit them. And since they're an island, China would prevent all imports until they surrender. As for your argument regarding its allies, no one is going to mess with China and its arsenal of hypersonic nuclear weapons.

[questhimay]

Ukraine is still holding its own despite Russia's hypersonic missile prowess.

If you are talking about a blockade, as we've seen from Russia's invasion, Russia's world's second best navy is already powerless against Ukraine's drone attacks and missiles. And US has already warned China on a potential blockade as being very high cost.

[inglor_cz]

I had the same expectations about Russia in February 2022. Too old, too decrepit, not enough soldiers on the border to take Ukraine (200 000 is far from enough, country of that size needs 10x as much occupiers to be safely subdued into submission), not worth to burn all the relations with the West over.

Oh boy, was I wrong and the doomsayers were right. It is tricky to emulate mind of a 70-y.o. wannabe emperor who dismantled all the previous oligarchy in favor of one-man rule.

And that sound like China, too, with the difference being that the sea between China and Taiwan is a very formidable obstacle that just might raise the overall stakes too high.

[torpfactory]

I'm not so sure I would bet on it. I think China would rather "reunite" without force, but Xi has put his personal imprimateur on "reunification". Nothing gets people to forget about economic anxiety like a good old-fashioned patriotic war. At this point, I think a lot of it is bluffing- better to have the Americans give up on defending Taiwan without a shot being fired. Better to make the Taiwanese think that "reunification" is inevitable and forget about notions of freedom.

[cko]

I hope you're right but think about it like this: with a high youth unemployment and supposedly more men than women, they can throw away a couple million people.

Also them being a manufacturing powerhouse, I think they may have enough, even if they're at low point in the economic cycle.

It wouldn't be smart and even the invasion were successful, not sure what they'd gain, besides more hate from all of Southeast Asia and maybe Western sanctions.

I have family in Taiwan and I'm told their military isn't very well funded or equipped.

[questhimay]

China can't afford to throw away only sons, and have them sink into the bottom of the ocean. Families would revolt pretty quickly. As we saw from the millions of protestors in Hong Kong in 2019, and the violent protests in Shanghai in lockdown 2023, Chinese citizens are capable of grouping together in mass numbers.

China may have the factories for manufacturing, but they need materials and money to keep a war going. That's hard when they are broke, and also supporting other dictatorships, such as Russia's war effort, Iran, North Korea.

[snapplebobapple]

You would be mostly correct if their leadership was logical and well informed. I am not convinced that has been the case for at least the last 3 years. When your outcome depends on one dude been told something he isn't going to like by the mountain of yes men left under him after purging disagreeable people for years, you end up wrong way more often than is ideal.

I mean, most likely how you called it above will come to pass but the chance of something deranged isn't close enough to zero anymore to ignore it. I would put the change of something deranged at more like 10-15 % but that's just my gut feeling.

[jhanschoo]

There were a lot of good reasons why Putin shouldn't have invaded Ukraine either. Yet Putin had been making shows of aggression and threats to invade, while securing his political position in Russia for a decade. You can see that Xi had been pursuing similar moves. I'm not sure autocrats see things as reasonably as you do.

[questhimay]

Putin thought the war was only going to be for a few days - according to research by the think tank RUSI, when Vladimir Putin began his invasion, he expected to take control of Ukraine within 10 days https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/how-Putin-lost-in-10-days. He couldn't pull out of the war subsequently in fear of losing control and face. Xi is an idiot, but even he can see his potential downfall, given Russia's failure.