Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ericmay 1419 days ago
The mistake that you're making is suggesting that this rules based order must mean that all countries adhere to it 100% of the time. But there are gray areas, mistakes, things that are subject to interpretation, and frankly there are areas where countries disagree. The point is that it's mostly adhered to.

If you are looking for specific examples and further elaboration, frankly I can't provide that for you and you'll have to look at global events and decide for yourself.
1 comments
cma 1419 days ago
The US heavily supported Taiwan before they were a democracy (first free elections in 1995; before that they were a military dictatorship). Our support seems to be geostrategic and for capitalism (or in other cases for access to natural resources), with democracy being ancillary. Saudi Arabia is one of our biggest allies.

If Taiwan didn't have anything to offer they'd have to rely on Brad Pitt or something instead of the US military, like Tibet.

link
dodobirdlord 1419 days ago
The US values many things in its foreign policy, and some of those things are spreading democracy and self-determination. That doesn’t mean the US values them to the exclusion of other interests like trade partnerships, energy security, regional stability, and military alliances.

Countries in the US sphere of influence tend to drift toward becoming democracies, in part because of the influence of free trade. Both Taiwan and South Korea started off as dictatorships propped up by the military backing of the US to contain the spread of communism, and eventually transitioned to democratic government.

As for Tibet, if it were on an island and could have been defended by the US Navy, I’m sure it would still be independent. Even if it were merely coastal it might still be independent. But it’s landlocked and mountainous, and hard to defend from the other side of the world. The invasion was also rapid, and happened at the same time the international community was responding to the invasion of South Korea.

link
cma 1419 days ago
> The US values many things in its foreign policy, and some of those things are spreading democracy and self-determination.

I think they are valued, but ancillary.

> As for Tibet, if it were on an island and could have been defended by the US Navy, I’m sure it would still be independent.

I think at that point Tibet would be geostrategic. If they were in Antarctica and our Navy could defend we may be considerably less likely to unless there was oil exploration going on or it was an important position for an airbase.

link