Myanmar/Burma civil conflict

coolgod said:

Replace northern Myanmar with Taiwan and your argument would also work. Semiconductor chips made by TSMC from mountainous Taiwan gets sold to PRC anyways, what need is there to incorporate ROC (Taiwan) which is infested with numerous independence factions?

BTW ROC still claims parts of norther Myanmar, PRC only gave those land away due to the presence of ROC troops, a legacy of the Chinese civil war.

Click to expand...

There seems to be a failure to understand cost and benefit here. Myanmar, currently not hostile, presents a situation where the advantages of invading (in whole or in parts), turning it hostile, and subsequently having to address and resolve such hostilities outweigh the challenges of reunifying Taiwan. Taiwan, already harboring hostility, seeks American weapons and support, posing a threat to sovereignty. It's essentially a matter of removing an existing enemy versus creating more, a very basic calculation.

coolgod said:

You guys are basically advocating for China to interfere with other countries internal politics using Chinese Diaspora, this is totally against China's current foreign policy stance. Taking your logic a step further, we can justify all the border lands ceded by Qing dynasty using similar logic, e.g., Qing dynasty can exploit the Chinese population in Outer Manchuria against the government in St.Petersburg etc.

I'm not advocating China reclaim the land resided by Chinese people in Myanmar right now, but let's not pretending having Chinese diaspora living beside the Chinese border under warlords in an adhoc failed state is a good for China (the homeland of Chinese people).

Click to expand...

I don't understand your point at all. If leveraging the diaspora benefits China more than it costs to use, then of course the diaspora should be leveraged. What kind of fool would not use all available tools to advance their interests? The history of those lands and peoples is irrelevant except as an explanation for the context of the current situation. Obviously it would be better to magically gain formal control over the land and political allegiance of the people, but in the real world you can't magically change things. Conquest is not free, it is in fact extremely expensive. There are far more cost-effective ways to advance your interests than brute force.

And the difference with Taiawn is that a large island near the most developed coastal regions under the control of a hostile faction is an extremely dangerous strategic situation which demands a solution. Some remote borderland in the middle of nowhere jungle is not.

It sounds like you are looking at the whole situation through the wrong lens entirely. Ethnonationalism is an ideology, and viewing real problems through an ideological lens is a bad way of solving those problems in the real world. Flexibility of thought and willingness to adapt to the circumstances at hand are far more important than upholding any theoretical ideal. If the Qing emperors had been more flexible and adaptable to their situation, we would never need to have this conversation at all.

RedMetalSeadramon said:

There seems to be a failure to understand cost and benefit here. Myanmar, currently not hostile, presents a situation where the advantages of invading (in whole or in parts), turning it hostile, and subsequently having to address and resolve such hostilities outweigh the challenges of reunifying Taiwan. Taiwan, already harboring hostility, seeks American weapons and support, posing a threat to sovereignty. It's essentially a matter of removing an existing enemy versus creating more, a very basic calculation.

Click to expand...

So are you saying if northern Myanmar is run by warlords hostile to China, then it may be advantageous for China to reclaim that land? Or if Taiwan is run by a ROC that is less hostile to China, China has no need for reunification?

Although immediate pros and cons should definitely be taken into considering when formulating border negotiations, I just think there are other important factors such as demographics at play also.

Wrought said:

I don't understand your point at all. If leveraging the diaspora benefits China more than it costs to use, then of course the diaspora should be leveraged. What kind of fool would not use all available tools to advance their interests?

Click to expand...

Do you see the PRC manipulating Chinese diaspora to affect foreign governments especially in South East Asia? If not, perhaps your theory doesn't match reality. China has a strict no interference policy, that means no interference in other countries from USA to myanmar. Your theories of using Chinese diaspora in Myanmar as leverage would only make sense if China drops its no interference policy.

coolgod said:

Do you see the PRC manipulating Chinese diaspora to affect foreign governments especially in South East Asia? If not, perhaps your theory doesn't match reality. China has a strict no interference policy, that means no interference in other countries from USA to myanmar. Your theories of using Chinese diaspora in Myanmar as leverage would only make sense if China drops its no interference policy.

Click to expand...

Uh, yes? That's literally what the United Front is for. And it's quite good at its job, which is why

Chinese "non-interference" is just like US "freedom." A convenient slogan that's used whenever it's convenient and ignored whenever it's not.

Wrought said:

Uh, yes? That's literally what the United Front is for. And it's quite good at its job, which is why

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Chinese "non-interference" is just like US "freedom." A convenient slogan that's used whenever it's convenient and ignored whenever it's not.

Click to expand...

You know that's straight up western propaganda right? Textbook example.

coolgod said:

You know that's straight up western propaganda right? Textbook example.

View attachment 121169

Click to expand...

Western propaganda is the claim that it's evil and sinister and so forth. Not that it exists in the first place, which is obvious from the many media announcements of projects and meetings and investments and so forth. The United Front is a real organization with real people working there.

It's normal influence operations, which of course also heavily practiced by Western nations. Nothing special or unusual about it.

Wrought said:

Western propaganda is the claim that it's evil and sinister and so forth. Not that it exists in the first place, which is obvious from the many media announcements of projects and meetings and investments and so forth. The United Front is a real organization with real people working there.

It's normal influence operations, which of course also heavily practiced by Western nations.

Click to expand...

China's policy is not to influence foreign countries' internal politics, UFWA is mainly dealing with Chinese relations with foreign countries, not the same thing.

coolgod said:

So are you saying if northern Myanmar is run by warlords hostile to China, then it may be advantageous for China to reclaim that land? Or if Taiwan is run by a ROC that is less hostile to China, China has no need for reunification?

Although immediate pros and cons should definitely be taken into considering when formulating border negotiations, I just think there are other important factors such as demographics at play also.

Click to expand...

Yes. If Taiwan is super friendly we would be economically integrating them to lay foundation for peaceful reunification. It is literally the ideal situation China is aiming for.

And likewise, if Myanmar is stirring up trouble China would raise border dispute as a causus belli to knock some sense into them. See China and India in 60s.

Can we not discuss about the useless topic of annexing foreign territories? The CPC does not dabble with that kind of thing, period. And it is far more useful to make deals with local people directly rather than backroom influence through small ethnic Chinese minorities. using SEA Diaspora in the past led the local governments to adopt racist policies against ethnic Chinese to wipe out the influence quickly.


An opposition source suggesting that the junta is getting serious in fighting the rebels, and also implies how fragile they are that their positions are so easy to overrun and they need to call up reserves for the sake of rebellion in one state


BBC suggests that China did not hold back the ethnic rebels as they usually do (according to the claim) allowing them to advance rapidly. There is also an unpredictable factor which is the Burmese opposition rebels who have some ties with the ethnic rebels in fighting the junta together. BBC thinks the ethnic separatists are trying to increase their importance before the junta collapses to maximise their position with the post Junta government.

but these Westerners always have unrealistic fantasies about democracy winning. frankly it's doubtful the junta will be defeated, ethnic militias lose their advantage outside the hill country of their ethnic group. I think the result is more likely to be stronger ethnic separatist territories balkanizing the country. Maybe China should prepare for Myanmar breaking apart further

coolgod said:

China's policy is not to influence foreign countries' internal politics, UFWA is mainly dealing with Chinese relations with foreign countries, not the same thing.

Click to expand...

Right, just like it's the US policy to support freedom and democracy. Except when it's inconvenient, of course. Ideological arguments can be used as justifications, but they should not be confused with the reality of power and influence.

Tse said:

frankly it's doubtful the junta will be defeated, ethnic militias lose their advantage outside the hill country of their ethnic group. I think the result is more likely to be stronger ethnic separatist territories balkanizing the country. Maybe China should prepare for Myanmar breaking apart further

Click to expand...

I think that's exactly what Beijing is preparing for. It's obvious that no one faction has enough strength to unify the country, thanks to the Bamar majority falling into civil war. No matter who wins, they will be too weak to reassert centralized control like the NLD because they have gutted their old powerbase. Which is very good because greater decentralization or even breakup offers plenty of opportunities to advance Chinese interests. The big winners after the war will be ethnic minorities and neighboring countries.