[adventured]

Indeed it is entirely different.

The US isn't seeking to annex Cuba, and Cuba is entirely free to trade with the rest of the world.

China threatens and throws tantrums if Taiwan so much as gets any recognition from other nations. China doesn't even want Taiwan's leader to be able to directly speak to the US, or for their politicians to be able to visit the US.

If Raul Castro gets on a plane and goes to France or South Africa, the US doesn't threaten unspecified severe consequences for just talking to or meeting with Casto.

[dnomad]

Yeah, this is dumb. From China's perspective Taiwan is as much a part of China as Florida is part of the US. How would the US react if Florida declared itself independent and began negotiating treaties with foreign governments?

In fact we have good precedent for how the US deals with breakaway states. From that point of view China has shown remarkable constraint when dealing with what most people, including the Tawainese themselves, agree is a part of China.

[westiseast]

The Florida comparison isn’t really apt - indeed a lot of the comparisons/equivalents being drawn in this thread conveniently ignore key elements.

* PRC (the CCP) considers Taiwan to be part of the PRC (and part of ‘China’ the country). At best it’s referred to as a breakaway province.

* The ROC considers themselves to be ‘China’, and part of ‘China’, but not subject to CCP rule or a province of the PRC.

* The CCP has no actual direct rule over Taiwan in practice. Taiwanese people vote for their leaders, have their own laws, don’t follow PRC laws in any sense, hold separate Taiwanese currency and passports, require mainland visitors to acquire a visa, have independent trade deals and defense treaties with other sovereign nations etc etc.

Regardless of what you think should happen, anyone suggesting comparisons with Cuba/USA, Scotland/UK, Florida/USA etc is either ignorant, or deliberately muddying the waters to score an ideological point.

[mafribe]

Why is a comparison with Scotland/UK ignorant, or deliberately muddying the waters? I'd say it would demonstrate great political maturity, if the PRC were to allow Taiwan to conduct a binding vote about independence, and accept the outcome.

It would greatly increase the PRC's standing in the world, and its soft power. Right now, basically nobody trusts the PRC, and their increasing influence is simply a consequence of their spreading money around.

[westiseast]

It’s a bad comparison because the actual, legal and historical situations are vastly different.

eg.

> if the PRC were to allow Taiwan to conduct...

Taiwan is de facto an independent country. The only extent to which the PRC can ‘allow’ or not allow something to happen in Taiwan is with the threat of invasion, which is vastly different to how the UK parliament ‘allowed’ Scotland to conduct an independence referendum.

I’m not saying that it wouldn’t be desirable for the PRC to remove the threat of military action and recognize a fair and binding referendum, but comparisons with Scotland tend to imply that Taiwan/China situation is just like UK/Scotland. Which is isn’t even slightly.

[mafribe]

I agree that the actual, legal and historical situations ROC/PRC vs UK/Scotland are quite different. I was pointing towards the similarity of a (potential) positive, peaceful resolution, -- indeed one where secession was ultimately rejected. Who knows, maybe a peaceful, gentle PRC can tempt the ROC into a peaceful union?

I should have expressed myself more clearly.

> Taiwan is de facto an independent country.

Taiwan should formally be an independent country in a just world, but de facto every political decision in Taiwan in made in the shadow of the immediate threat of PRC violence. Ultimately political power comes "from the barrel of a gun" and the PRC has a lot more barrels than the ROC.

[whatyoucantsay]

> what most people, including the Tawainese themselves, agree is a part of China.

I truly cannot distinguish if you're trolling or serious. You continue repeating the same points throughout this thread and they are not true. Taiwan has never been part of the PRC. Before the KMT invaded, Taiwan was part of the Japanese Empire. Claiming the PRC gets all territory once owned by the Qing Dynasty is roughly equivalent to Germany claiming all territory once owned by Prussia. It doesn't lead anywhere pleasant.

Your comments are reprehensible and I wish for you never have the experience of your home being under constant threat from an increasingly wealthy and aggressive neighbor.

[mafribe]

If it was true that "most people, including the Tawainese themselves, agree is a part of China", then mainland China would/should have no problem whatsoever with a binding Taiwanese independence referendum.

It is precisely because mainland China knows very well that the majority of Taiwanese want independence, that the mainland objects to free and fair independence referendum. The mainland assumes they would loose.

   * * *

The secession of US states is clarified in the US constitution [1], and the US Supreme Court, in Texas v. White [2], ruled unilateral secession unconstitutional, while commenting that revolution or consent of the States could lead to a successful secession. Note that Texas v. White happened over a century ago.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secession_in_the_United_States

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

[dis-sys]

independence referendum? such as the recent Catalan independence referendum in Spain? Why EU/US both rejected its outcome when the people of Catalan clearly made the case with a successful & peaceful independence referendum?

[mafribe]

That referendum is an interesting edge case, as I wrote in my post above. Spain could have handled the Catalan issue much better, that is certainly true. One crucial difference is that neither the EU nor the Spanish government threaten violence and military invasion. This contrasts very favourably with Xi Jinping and his cronys incessant bullying of Taiwan.