The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
For What Will We Go to War with China?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

In his final state of the nation speech Monday, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte defended his refusal to confront China over Beijing’s seizure and fortification of his country’s islets in the South China Sea.

“It will be a massacre if I go and fight a war now,” said Duterte. “We are not yet a competent and able enemy of the other side.”

Duterte is a realist. He will not challenge China to retrieve his lost territories, as his country would be crushed. But Duterte has a hole card: a U.S. guarantee to fight China, should he stumble into war with China.

Consider. Earlier this month, Secretary of State Antony Blinken assured Manila we would invoke the U.S.-Philippines mutual security pact in the event of Chinese military action against Philippine assets.

“We also reaffirm,” said Blinken, “that an armed attack on Philippine armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the South China Sea would invoke U.S. mutual defense commitments under Article IV of the 1951 U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty.”

Is this an American war guarantee to fight the People’s Republic of China, if the Philippines engage a Chinese warship over one of a disputed half-dozen rocks and reefs in the South China Sea? So it would appear.

Why are we threatening this?

Is who controls Mischief Reef or Scarborough Shoal a matter of such vital U.S. interest as to justify war between us and China?

Tuesday, in Singapore, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin reaffirmed the American commitment to go to war on behalf of the Philippines, should Manila attempt, militarily, to retrieve its stolen property.

Said Austin: “Beijing’s claim to the vast majority of the South China Sea has no basis in international law. … We remain committed to the treaty obligations that we have to Japan in the Senkaku Islands and to the Philippines in the South China Sea.”

Austin went on: “Beijing’s unwillingness to … respect the rule of law isn’t just occurring on the water. We have also seen aggression against India … destabilizing military activity and other forms of coercion against the people of Taiwan … and genocide and crimes against humanity against Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang.”

The Defense secretary is publicly accusing China of crimes against its Uyghur population in Xinjiang comparable to those for which the Nazis were hanged at Nuremberg.

Austin has also informed Beijing, yet again, that the U.S. is obligated by a 70-year-old treaty to go to war to defend Japan’s claims to the Senkakus, half a dozen rocks Tokyo now occupies and Beijing claims historically belong to China.

The secretary also introduced the matter of Taiwan, with which President Jimmy Carter broke relations and let lapse our mutual security treaty in 1979.

There remains, however, ambiguity on what the U.S. is prepared to do if China moves on Taiwan. Would we fight China for Taiwan’s independence, an island President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger said in 1972 was “part of China”?

And if China ignores our protests of its “genocide” and “crimes against humanity” against the Uyghurs, and of its human rights violations in Tibet, and of its crushing of democracy in Hong Kong, what are we prepared to do?

Sanctions? A decoupling of our economies? Confrontation? War?

This is not an argument for threatening war, but for an avoidance of war by providing greater clarity and certitude as to what the U.S. response will be if China ignores our protests and remains on its present course.

Some of us can still recall how President Dwight Eisenhower refused to intervene when Nikita Khrushchev ordered Russian tanks into Budapest to drown the 1956 Hungarian revolution in blood. Instead, we welcomed Hungarian refugees.

When the Berlin Wall went up in 1961, President John F. Kennedy called up the reserves and went to Berlin to make a famous speech, but did nothing.

“Less profile, more courage!” was the response of Cold War hawks.

But Kennedy was saying, as Eisenhower had said by his inaction in Hungary, that America does not go to war with a great nuclear power such as the Soviet Union over the right of East Germans to flee to West Berlin.

Which brings us back to Taiwan.

In the Shanghai Communique signed by Nixon, Taiwan was conceded to be a “part of China.” Are we now going to fight a war to prevent Beijing from bringing the island home to the “embrace of the motherland”?

And if we are prepared to fight, Beijing should not be left in the dark. China ought to know the risks it would be taking.

Cuba is an island, across the Florida Strait, with historic ties to the United States. Taiwan is an island 7,000 miles away, on the other side of the Pacific.

This month, Cubans rose up against the 62-year-old Communist regime fastened upon them by Fidel and Raul Castro.

By what yardstick would we threaten war for the independence of Taiwan but continue to tolerate 60 years of totalitarian repression in Cuba, 90 miles away?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

 
The China/America Series
Hide 72 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Yee says:

    Official name for Taiwan is Republic Of China, territory includes mainland and Taiwan island. “Taiwan” hasn’t declared “independence” yet.

    If the US wants war with China, just declare war, stop lying on and on about Xinjiang, Tibet, Hongkong.

    Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin should learn WW2 history before openning his mouth to talk. As terms of surrender, Japan’s sovereignty is limited to their 4 main islands, they don’t have the right to claim anything else.

    South China Sea was claimed by the former ROC government right after WW2, before any country lay claim to it. So there’s no “stolen property”.

    It seems to me American “freedom and democracy” means lies and misinformation.

  2. Maybe I’m wrong again,but it seems to me,we are already at war with China.
    Why would all of these countries be printing all of this money,and building
    all of these weapons,and training all of these armies,if not for war?N.Korea
    sure has been quiet since the Trump visit.I wonder if they still remember
    what happened the last time?Seriously,how could they ever forget?Or Iran,
    Japan,Germany,Laos,Vietnam,Cambodia,Libya,Iraq?They will greet us as
    liberators,spreading peace and the religious values that made us the greatest
    republican democracy the world has always wanted to create. Prai\$e de mony…

  3. Good one, Pat… up until —
    “By what yardstick would we threaten war for the independence of Taiwan but continue to tolerate 60 years of totalitarian repression in Cuba, 90 miles away?”
    “Tolerate” ? “60 years of totalitarian repression in Cuba” ?
    Give us a break Pat.
    “Tolerate” as in 60 years of savage sanctions, attempted invasion & numerous assassination attempts???
    Yes, Cuba is not a “democracy” (whatever that is now) but that doesn’t mean it’s “repressive”.
    People like you Pat just can’t stand the fact that a lot of people in Cuba (& Russia & China) actually accept their governments — even with their undoubted faults.
    The “repression” Pat is as much about the US & it’s vicious actions as it is about Cuba etc.

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  4. This column professes a desire for peace. But it serves Uncle Sam’s militarism in several ways typical of the author. Consider.

    1. China’s position on various controversies, both international and internal, is presumed incorrect and characterized with terms like “seizure .. stolen .. human rights violations .. crushing of democracy.”

    2. Complementary to #1, no USA interest in the various controversies is questioned or even identified, other than as benign guardian of the good.

    3. Citing current “mutual security [sic] treaty” and similar inter-governmental contracts as though they can never end and must be followed to the letter, irrespective of the consequences. Does anyone know what Mr. Buchanan had to say about this

    The secretary also introduced the matter of Taiwan, with which President Jimmy Carter broke relations and let lapse our mutual security treaty in 1979.

    at the time?

    4. Urging the drawing of red lines that, contrary to the facial foolishness,

    This is not an argument for threatening war, but for an avoidance of war by providing greater clarity and certitude as to what the U.S. response will be if China ignores our protests and remains on its present course.

    are what have been used as cover by the Establishment to — reluctantly, of course — flip the switch.

    5. Pronoun Propaganda* to enlist young, overwhelmingly working class Americans and their Gold Star families and neighbors.

    “we” – 13
    “us” – 2
    “our” – 2

    * includes title, but not Duterte quote or other unExceptional! references

  5. UNIT472 says:

    China cannot be allowed to assert sovereignty over what. to the rest of the world, is open ocean. They are entitled to the same 12 mile limit and 200 mile EEZ as is every other nation to areas around ‘naturally occurring islands that stand above sea level at high tide.

    Defending open ocean does not require ground forces or even ships. It can be done by standoff missiles launched from the many islands and atolls recognized as US, Japanese and other Pacific Rim powers territory who reject China’s claims of sovereignty. Just sink any Chinese vessels that attempt to deny access to such open ocean. China isn’t going to want to lose expensive ships to an over the horizon missile just to press such claims.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    , @showmethereal
  6. Renoman says:

    Totalitarian repression in Cuba? So they had the gaul to throw out the American Mafia thugs that were raping their economy, what a crime! There is nothing American about Cuba and there never was.

    • Replies: @Marshal Marlow
  7. @UNIT472

    Really consider the logic you’re using with respect to all the military bases the US has surrounding China.

    Yes, international law is being flouted by the Chinese. The US does that all the time. Why is it that ships on and under the water are to be considered differently than military bases on land? Look at it from the Chinese point of view.

    Your logic will eventually start a shooting war. Do you really want that? Wouldn’t it be better to get the US bases removed from China’s proximity so the tit for tat escalation can be reversed?

    If the US closed all their over seas bases, the entire world would rejoice and the US population might shrink DOD’s budget to 10% of what it is now. That’s going to happen anyway, so why not get a head start on the US minding its own business.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @rgl
    , @UNIT472
    , @d dan
  8. Tulip says:

    “By what yardstick would we threaten war for the independence of Taiwan but continue to tolerate 60 years of totalitarian repression in Cuba, 90 miles away?”

    Cuba is a beautiful bastion of diversity and antiracism that actively educates its citizens and does an effective job of rooting out disinformation and discredited, pseudoscientific falsehoods. Calling it “totalitarian repression” is really just exposing the author’s own white supremacy. For example, “totalitarian” Cuba does far more to protect the rights of LGBT people than the “nontotalitarian” United States, as does Vietnam. The only fair criticism of Cuba is that it lacks a vigorous financial sector and tech oligarchy to siphon off the fruits of the productive forces in society. Fortunately, the Leadership Class of America have woken up to the merits of the Cuban system when fused with a parasitic FIRE sector.

    As far as military commitments in SE Asia, if China can effectively land the largest amphibious invasion of Taiwan and defeat Taiwan, with or without military intervention of the United States on behalf of Taiwan, China will have a centralized base for attacking S. Korea, Japan, Malaysia, and the Philippines. Further, if China can control the South China Sea, they can shut down food and petroleum imports to those nations, which would starve them and destroy their economies. They will also control the majority of world semiconductor production as well as rare earth elements. The impact on American influence and prestige in the region and in the world would be long-lasting. The Pat Buchanans of the world might say “I told you so” to the globalists, but the reality is the plan of the last 50 years for a global “rules-based” order will be hoisted by its own petard, and it is hard to see how America survives without the hegemony it depends on economically and politically at this time. China’s foreign policy has been largely driven by their limited natural and strategic resources and the need to protect their supply chains. The flip side is that they are keenly aware of the limitations of their adversaries’ supply chain, and will be the first to neutralize the supply chain. Unlike the Japanese, if they attack American interests, they will attack or shut off the supply chains, they will not be focused on the battleships.

    • Replies: @UNIT472
    , @showmethereal
  9. The US is trying to provoke a war. If it doesn’t do it now, China will much be stronger later.

    China wants to avoid war for the same reason.

    • Agree: Miro23
  10. anon[300] • Disclaimer says:

    if we are stupid enough to fight a war over taiwan this or an equally unpleasant variation will take place.

    https://whiskeyandgunpowder.com/posts/it-failed-miserably-what-if-the-us-lost-a-war-and-nobody-noticed

  11. @animalogic

    I can’t get too worked up over the so-called repression of the Cubans by their government, or by the so-called genocide of the Uighurs. Not when anti-vaxxers have been turned into second class citizens and hunted down by the vaccine police. The CDC recently acknowledged that the vaccinated are spreading the so-called Delta variant as much (perhaps more?) as the un-vaxxed. Still, the Biden-Harris-Pelosi regime, with ever increasing fervor, pursues their witch hunt against those “vaccine hesitant” who do not recognize their authority to jab them with an experimental concoction.

    Can anyone imagine a regime less competent than the one headed by those three top “selected” officials (two of them old and senile)? Instead of threatening a war against China, (which the Dis-United States has no chance of winning), they should be more concerned with the vaxx war, and race war, their “repressive” policies are stoking.

    • Agree: Max Maxwell, rgl
    • Replies: @animalogic
  12. MarkinLA says:
    @Yee

    South China Sea was claimed by the former ROC government right after WW2, before any country lay claim to it. So there’s no “stolen property”.

    Why didn’t they just claim Antarctica if that’s all it takes? Economic zones are established according to international law. China has no coastline there.

    • Agree: rgl
  13. For What Will We Go to War with China?

    I say:

    When will Pat Buchanan acknowledge that Nixon and Reagan were politician puppet whores who pushed mass legal immigration and mass illegal immigration and financialization and globalization and multicultural mayhem and both Nixon and Reagan helped bring about the CHINA CHEAP LABOR sell out that de-industrialized the USA and is still ongoing?

    Nixon and Reagan were nothing more than politician puppet whores for the JEW/WASP Ruling Class of the American Empire and both Nixon and Reagan participated fully in the game where the Ruling Class of the American Empire colluded with the Chinese Communist Party to use labor arbitrage and Cheap Labor Chinese to rip apart US national sovereignty and to destroy the manufacturing base of the USA.

    I am highly respectful of Mr. Pat Buchanan and his efforts and work to advance the interests of the USA and the historic American nation, but Buchanan’s continued misplaced loyalty to the legacy of Nixon and Reagan is problematic.

    Dicky “China Boy” Nixon was an Ohio Quaker who was paid by the plutocrats to collude with the Chinese Communist Deep State prior to the full push for globalization and financialization that phased into high gear with baby boomer politician whore Bill Clinton. That’s how he was able to afford his California beach property.

    California didn’t shape the cringing fop character of Dicky “China Boy” Nixon. Ohio was the state that made Nixon the plutocrat puppet whore that he was. All four of Nixon’s grandparents were Ohio people.

    Dicky “China Boy” Nixon was a bought and paid for stooge puppet of plutocrats and globalizers.

    • Agree: Alfred Muscaria
    • Replies: @antibeast
  14. @MarkinLA

    Who needs coastlines when you can just grab the the place. China learned well by watching the US illegally annex the Kingdom of Hawaii.

    • Replies: @GomezAdddams
  15. Trump And His Tariffs On The Chinese Communist Party Were Patriotic And Strong!

    Trump has gone to his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf course for the summer but one of his advisors, Robert Lighthizer, has written in the New York Times that the scumbag politician whores in the US Senate have disfigured and partially destroyed a bill meant to restrain China and China Lobby Money-Grubbers from using the cheap labor and lax environmental regulations of China to gouge and rip off Americans and attack US sovereignty. Tariffs are wonderful tools to get the attention of the Chinese Communist Party but the free trade TREASONITE scumbags in the US Senate are on the side of the China Lobby and Globalization and Cheap Labor China trade.

    The globalizer free trade extremist ASSHOLES at the Murdoch Organized Crime Syndicate Wall Street Journal have refused to do a book review on Charles Murray’s Facing Reality book but the WSJ scum are sure to agree with the dirtbags in the US Senate that tariffs are bad and free trade is good just like those nasty unpatriotic weasels at Dartmouth Tuck led by the head TREASONITE GLOBALIZER Matt Slaughter.

    Coward scum at the Wall Street Journal love globalization but they hate Free Speech!

    Olympic Coward Scumbag Medal To Rupert Murdoch And His Little Shit Wall Street Journal Minions!

  16. @follyofwar

    I am not an anti-vaxxer. I get a flu shot once a year. However, the covid Vac’s are NOTHING like a flu Vax. They are a dubious, often deadly injection.
    I am appalled at the M-RNA narrative. Goverments have destroyed the vital concept of “informed consent ”

    • Agree: rgl
    • Replies: @rgl
  17. Rurik says:

    Said Austin: “Beijing’s claim to the vast majority of the South China Sea has no basis in international law. …

    Austin went on: “Beijing’s unwillingness to … respect the rule of law…

  18. antibeast says:
    @Charles Pewitt

    China didn’t join the WTO until 2001. But the ‘outsourcing’ trend began long before then, starting in the maquiladoras south of the border in Mexico in the 60s and in the EPZs in Southeast Asia in the 70s. Asian manufacturers started moving their factories from Southeast Asia to China in the 80s and 90s until Western (including US) manufacturers joined the game after China’s accession to the WTO in 2001. Ever since the Global Financial Crisis in 2008, those factories have been moving out of China to Southeast Asia, South Asia, North Africa, Mexico/Latin America and Eastern Europe to be closer to their destination markets in North America and Western Europe.

    • Agree: JohnPlywood
  19. rgl says:
    @RoatanBill

    “If the US closed all their over seas bases, the entire world would rejoice and the US population might shrink DOD’s budget to 10% of what it is now. That’s going to happen anyway…”

    RB, I gotta ask, where do you get the confidence to say that “That’s going to happen anyway … ” I do not see in any form whatsoever that the MIC has any intention whatsoever to allow this. As far as Congress goes, being the one entity capable of enacting what you say – and as an aside, I hope beyond hope that you are correct – I simply do not see *any* antiwar sentiment in the US Congress.

    After the fall of the Soviet Union, the US stood supreme. It had no credible threats to it’s National Security, yet defence – a laughable term when applied to the US War Department – budgets did not reflect this. They continued to eat ever more of the US’ tax cash. More, more, and more has been the refrain of both the Pentagon and a cowardly, conniving Congress.

    This year, Congress indicated that it will actually provide extra cash the DoD did not specifically ask for, to facilitate the service’s ‘wish list’ buys. “Here’s the cash you asked for, no questions asked, and bye and bye, here’s another chunk of taxpayer cash for some extra war toys. The people can do without healthcare, roads and bridges.”

    You, sir, are the penultimate optimist. I do not believe you called this one correct, as much as I wish it were otherwise.

    • Agree: Max Maxwell
    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  20. antibeast says:
    @Charles Pewitt

    US multinationals have been shifting their factory work to Southeast Asia, Mexico/Latin America, South Asia, etc. since the Global Financial Crisis in 2008. Nike, for example, now sources most of its shoes from factories located in Vietnam and Indonesia, with its factories in China producing mostly for the Chinese market. And that was BEFORE the import tariffs imposed by Trump in 2018. In a few more years, what remains of China’s ‘outsourcing’ business will move out to lower-cost locales as its manufacturing industries get retooled to serve its fast-growing domestic market which overtook the US consumer market in 2019.

  21. rgl says:
    @animalogic

    Like you, I am not anti-vax. Vaccines – real ones – have prevented millions of deaths. Having said that, I simply do not trust, and will not take any vac provided by Astra-Zeneca, Moderna, or Pfizer. These things can kill you.

    I generally avoid anything with ‘Death’ listed as a possible side affect. Nor do I wish to be a guinea pig for US Pharma.

    • Agree: Max Maxwell
    • Replies: @animalogic
  22. UNIT472 says:
    @RoatanBill

    Guam has been a territory of the United States since 1898 and those born there are US citizens so you would have problem having the US leave since there is no one to return Guam to. Same applies to the Northern Mariana Islands, also US territory. The other territories include Wake and Midway Island though they have no real population aside from US military and government personnel.

    The US base on Okinawa was the result of a rather large battle at the end of WW2 when the US Tenth Army captured the island through force of arms. It was returned to Japanese sovereignty but the base remains essential for the US defense of Japan. Same with the other US bases in Japan. It is likely Japan would have no choice but to become a nuclear power and maintain a much larger fleet and Air Force than it currently has ( which is substantial ) were the US to pull out of Japan. This might be a good solution since Japan going nuclear and adding its own aircraft carriers and strike aircraft would only enhance American power in the Central and South Pacific and reduce that of China.

    • Agree: Max Maxwell
    • Replies: @RoatanBill
    , @showmethereal
  23. @rgl

    The US dollar is headed for the toilet. They can print as much of it as they want, but in a short while, it won’t buy anything worth having.

    That’s how I conclude that the US military will shrink its footprint world wide. Once the dollar becomes worthless or even during a rapid descent into hyperinflation, the machine grinds to a halt and that includes the US military. To bribe foreign gov’ts, you must bribe them with something that has value.

    It doesn’t rely on congress, the president or the assholes in the military. The US dollar is the only thing keeping things together and it’s on its way out, having lost 85% of its purchasing power since Nixon closed the gold window exactly 50 years ago this coming August 15th.

    The world is de-dollarizing at a fair pace and those no longer needed dollar currency reserves will find their way back to the US to drive up prices even more than the new currency printing alone would accomplish. The US monetary system is approaching the perfect storm where the Fed prints with abandon while the sanctioned world returns their no longer needed dollars at the same time, meaning that the Fed isn’t in control of what’s about to happen.

    • Agree: Max Maxwell, Escher
  24. UNIT472 says:
    @Tulip

    You make a very convincing case as to why it is necessary for the US to defend Taiwan since as you say, “China will have a centralized base for attacking S. Korea, Japan, Malaysia, and the Philippines.” Those are not objectives of the United States but they do seem to be yours! I would also add that ‘starving and destroying those nations economies’ are also not US objectives but, again, perhaps they are yours.

    As to China’s ability to carry out an amphibious landing on Taiwan I would merely note that China has no experience whatsoever in conducting amphibious operations nor the required ships or landing craft and, as Hitler found out, just trying to cross the 20 mile wide English Channel you need absolute air and sea supremacy to attempt such an undertaking. The Straits of Taiwan are over 100 miles wide and China has nothing close to air and naval supremacy in the region which is why they won’t even try it. Be rather humiliating to attempt it and fail.

  25. d dan says:
    @RoatanBill

    “Yes, international law is being flouted by the Chinese. ”

    No international law is being flouted by the Chinese with regard to South China Sea claim, or any topics tangentially related in this article. Please name one.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  26. @UNIT472

    The islands are a landing strip and capable of storing a certain amount of equipment. They are a rounding error in any calculation of war making potential given their distance from China and an even further distance from the US mainland where what little manufacturing capability the US still has exists.

    Japan and South Korea are the real issues for China. That the US is courting Vietnam, a country they made war on decades ago, is also worrying to the Chinese as it might represent another weapons depot. The US has been trying to influence India for decades. The Middle East was also pretty much on China’s doorstep.

    From China’s perspective, they must be asking why the US from half way around the world, wants to interfere in East Asia. I ask the same question and the only answer I can come up with is that the war profiteers need a place to expend expensive weapons and grind up the terminally stupid that enlist in the US military.

    Should a war start, the US can do a tremendous amount of damage in a short period of time. The Chinese will probably take out all the floating coffins the US has in their area to eliminate the landing strips the carriers represent making all those expensive fighters relatively useless. As war drags on and the US consumes their stock pile of long lead time expensive weapons, the US essentially runs out of ammo. Maybe they can call on General Motors to help the manufacturing effort as was done during WW-II. I doubt GM’s plants in China would be of much help.

    Any war would have to go nuclear as the US runs out of conventional options. Is that what you want by your desire for enhanced American power in the Central and South Pacific? Wouldn’t a better option be the US minding its own business and leaving Asia? I haven’t even mentioned Russia. The US would get it’s ass thrashed.

    • Agree: rgl
    • Replies: @Miro23
  27. @rgl

    I understand & respect your position.
    In some part, some places, it maybe a matter of weighing 2 horrible alternatives.
    I respect whatever decision you make — only you can decide between rotten & rotten.

    • Thanks: rgl
  28. @d dan

    China claims the entire ocean area behind the nine-dash line is their territory. International law doesn’t recognize that claim.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    , @d dan
    , @antibeast
  29. Just let Taiwan have nukes; they were close to building them in the Eighties until we found out and made them get rid of their Nuke Program; nations like people have a right to defend themselves; Taiwan has about the same population as North Korea 24-25 million people and NK with a much smaller economy and technological base has build a huge army and a nuclear arsenal and effectively deterred the US Superpower; just let Taiwan have nukes; we could give them a waiver against the Non Nuclear Proliferation like we have basically done for Israel and tell Taiwan to create an Army of 2-3 million men; an arm them to the teeth; Taiwan only has about 88,000 troops in its military appearantly because they believe we will defend them; as for Duterte if he has any sense he will not rely on American defense guarantee; if the Phillipines did try to take back their islands the US would come up with some legalize way to avoid war with China; such as technically China did not attack the Phillipines.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  30. Working Class and Middle Class Americans who think the GOP will represent their interests without taking over the Party and replacing the cuck-politicians are seriously deluded. It’s like gophers expecting a party run by weasels to support gopher interests. No, the party will be pro-gopher ONLY IF gophers push out the weasels and fill the positions with gophers. The current GOP is a weasel party that sometimes puts on a gopher mask. The weasels must be pushed out. There is no other way.

  31. Safenow says:

    As I have posted several times before, China is sending a signal by playing at bumper boats with 12,000-ton “coast guard” cutters and flat-sided double-hulled other vessels. Ramming and shouldering. Creative a “presence” safely…These are not warships.. Worst-case scenario is an exchange of small-arms fire. The U.S. then sent a carrier group, unfortunately. On the plus side, the US and Japanese coast guards recently conducted joint exercises. This safely creates a “presence.” Maybe the U.S. should deploy an icebreaker, but nah, the US does not have enough of those, just as the polar regions are becoming strategically important.

    • Replies: @showmethereal
  32. @RoatanBill

    International law doesn´t recognize that claim.

    … unlike the rules-based Monroe Doctrine extending to Uranus
    (pun fully intended 😛 ).

    • LOL: Realist
  33. Yee says:

    MarkinLA,

    “Why didn’t they just claim Antarctica if that’s all it takes?”

    Well, some countries did, but gave up later and signed a treaty that says nobody claims it.
    http://image109.360doc.cn/DownloadImg/2018/05/2615/134061588_3_20180526032031832

  34. Yee says:

    The picture doesn’t show…
    Those countries were Argentina, Chile, Norway, Australia, New Zealand, UK, France, each claimed million of k㎡.

    • Replies: @UNIT472
  35. UNIT472 says:
    @Yee

    Every coastal state is allowed a 200 mile Exclusive Economic Zone off its coast. This allows them to restrict fishing and mineral rights to others. It does not allow them to prohibit other nations from transiting those waters nor pile some rip rap and sand on a submerged reef and call it a new island and claim 200 additional miles of EEZ around the artificial land.

    The ludicrous thing is China is trying to claim the 9 Dash line as territorial waters when, at the time they drew the map their knowledge of cartography was primitive and their ability to calculate latitude and longitude, absolutely essential for a mapping, was non existent. China didn’t even recognize the earth was a globe and that China was not at the center of it..

    • Agree: Grahamsno(G64)
    • Troll: d dan
  36. US-Philippines conflict will not happen.

    The only hot potato is Taiwan, something China simply cannot compromise on.

    Also, given the cultural decadence wrought by Jewish globo-homo US on Taiwan, it’d be a great thing is China invaded Taiwan, rounded up its ruling and cultural elites and either shot them in the head or sent them to labor camps.

    • Replies: @UNIT472
  37. d dan says:
    @RoatanBill

    “China claims the entire ocean area behind the nine-dash line is their territory. International law doesn’t recognize that claim.”

    I see. So you don’t know what you are talking about.

    1. China didn’t and doesn’t claim the “entire ocean” within the nine-dash line as “their territory.”
    2. China is claiming the reefs and islands within the nine-dash line. The claim is inherited from ROC, and was done before other countries.
    3. No “international law” governs who can or can not claim which reefs / islands. So, China’s claim does not violate any laws.
    4. China’s claim preceded her signing of UNCLOS (which is not ratified by US).
    5. China’s claim is disputed by other countries. There is nothing extraordinary here: over 70 countries in the world has territorial disputes with others. But, again no violation of any law by China.

    Just think logically. US, together with Japan, Australia and others have been doing military exercises within the nine-dash line. Would any country allow other countries to do military exercise within “their territory” without permission? Going back even further, US (again with her vassal states) had use those ocean to conduct war against Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos – bombing, invading, mining, spying,… Would China allow other countries to use “their territory” to invade her alliances?

    So, no, China didn’t and doesn’t violate any international law. Let me know if you think there is other violation, or else stop regurgitating those mindless MSM propaganda – you are contributing to American’s hatred of China and helping the deep state’s war efforts.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  38. antibeast says:
    @RoatanBill

    That’s Western propaganda. China does NOT claim the ‘South China Sea’ inside the nine-dash-line as its territorial waters but rather claims ‘historic rights’ to islands and resources therein, in accordance with UNCLOS. That’s why anyone can sail through the South China Sea today, as a right of innocent passage through international waters. The US Deep State as well as the Western MSM are intentionally obfuscating the TERRITORIAL CLAIMS in the South China Sea in order to destabilize Southeast Asia. Even the PCA ruling in response to a lawsuit filed the Philippines was instigated by the US Deep State to further inflame the region which was contrary to the Code of Conduct adopted by China together with the other claimant States in Southeast Asia.

    A simple analysis of the various TERRITORIAL CLAIMS in the South China Sea disputes would reveal that Vietnam occupies the most features in the Spratly Islands; that Taiwan has been occupying the biggest island called Taiping Island since the end of WWII after Japan transferred sovereignty to the Republic of China; and that the Philippines claimed its Pag-asa Island outside its 200-nm EEZ only decades later after Marcos issued a Presidential Decree annexing part of the Spratly Islands to create the so-called Kalayaan Island Group. None of these TERRITORIAL CLAIMS had anything to do with UNCLOS which was ratified only thereafter, regulating MARITIME RIGHTS granted to TERRITORIES.

    China has made its position clear in its submissions to the UNCLOS with regards to what it considers ‘historic rights’ to the South China Sea inside the nine-dash-line which includes but is not limited to TERRITORIAL CLAIMS to the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. Because the USA is NOT a signatory to UNCLOS, the US Deep State wanted to do away with those various TERRITORIAL CLAIMS altogether by pressing the Philippines to invalidate its own TERRITORIAL CLAIMS in its lawsuit against China before the PCA.

    • Thanks: John Q Duped, Realist
    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  39. UNIT472 says:
    @Priss Factor

    Given your well considered ‘opinion’ I think I’d rather see you ‘shot in the head’ or laboring in a ‘forced labor camp’. You seem to be devoid of any worthwhile ideas.

  40. Yee says:

    UNIT472,

    “It does not allow them to prohibit other nations from transiting those waters nor pile some rip rap and sand on a submerged reef and call it a new island ”

    The reefs were not submerged, they were just small.
    The US warships transit into the 12 mile territorial waters, not the 200 mile.

  41. Amerikwa is so busy defending freedumb and dumbocracy elsewhere it forgot to defend the entire southern US border.

    • LOL: GomezAdddams
  42. nsa says:

    Yellow Peril theater is a useful distraction, but realistically there is ZERO chance of a war with China. The jews running Amelika would be only too happy to see white people nuked, but would never risk the incineration of shtetls like New York, Los Angeles, Miami. One nuke could take out the entire IzzieVille homeland…..anyone here think the chosen would risk that?

    • Replies: @Mulga Mumblebrain
  43. Duterte should get out of the mutual defense treaty with the LGBT States of America and declare the Philippines neutral like Switzerland. The Philippines has ties to both countries with 3.8 million Filipinos living in the US and most of the richest families in the Philippines being wholly Chinese or half-Chinese. The best course of action would be neutrality. The Philippine leader should realize that being tied up in any mutual defense treaty with the United States would put them into the same situation as they were in WW2 with the Japanese invasion and occupation from 1942-1945, resulting in the devastation of his country and 6 million Filipinos dead. Best to have hostilities with no one nation and trade with all.

    • Replies: @rgl
    , @rgl
  44. @d dan

    I stand corrected.

    Thank you for the education.

    • Replies: @rgl
  45. @antibeast

    I stand corrected.

    Thank you for the education.

  46. @Renoman

    Yep. Buchanan isn’t actually against US foreign intervention policy, he just disagrees on which countries should receive America’s gifts of democracy in 500 pound air-dropped packages.

    • Replies: @Paul Bustion
  47. @Yee

    I agree and assume you are correct.However…All is fair in love and war?
    Would you posit that everybody else tells the truth?
    Some great general said “in war,there can be no substitute for victory.”
    Do you prefer getting kicked,rather than doing the kicking?

  48. rgl says:
    @RoatanBill

    Kudos RB. Lesser peeps would’ve ranted on. You didn’t.

    Good for you.

    We all err. You are still worth reading.

    Lol … as if you need my validation. There it is regardless.

  49. rgl says:
    @Joe Paluka

    I may be wrong, but I believe the mutual defence treaty is a continuation of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO). Originally penned between Washington, the Government of (South) Vietnam, Laos, and The Philippines as a counter to the Communist bloc of Russia, China and the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (North Vietnam) during the Vietnam war.

    I don’t think there is any real want for Manila to withdraw from SEATO. Manila very much depends on the US to keep the Chinese at bay.

    The US is still stuck in the Cold War. They do not want to leave it die. During the Cold War, the US was the master of the (ahem) free world. They told their vassals what to do, and they did as instructed.

    So, as far as Washington and Manila are concerned, SEATO is a win-win.

    The US very badly wants to return to those days. And that is how they are attempting it. Very badly.

  50. rgl says:
    @Joe Paluka

    Neutrality beside a behemoth is impossible. For the very same reason that Canada isn’t really a sovereign nation, neither would Manila keep ‘neutrality’ for long.

    As America controls the Canadian economy, it’s defence policy, and monetary policy, so would China control Manila.

    • Replies: @Joe Paluka
  51. Don’t worry Pat Buchanan (the writer of this article), you won’t have to go to war so you should never have titled this article: “For What Will WE Go to War with China?”
    Very likeable Pat Buchanan was a draft dodger in his younger days. He never served due to the “severe affliction” of arthritis of the knee. But that affliction disappeared after the war ended and he became an avid jogger. And he ran for president once, no knee issues there.

  52. @Marshal Marlow

    Correct. Buchanan worked for Richard Nixon. That, by itself, is enough to know that Buchanan is bad news and is controlled opposition.
    Buchanan also takes a pro-Russian and pro-Chinese stance. So he isn’t actually against countries spying on America and undermining it, he just disagrees on which countries should be enabled to do it.

  53. Miro23 says:
    @RoatanBill

    From China’s perspective, they must be asking why the US from half way around the world, wants to interfere in East Asia. I ask the same question and the only answer I can come up with is that the war profiteers need a place to expend expensive weapons and grind up the terminally stupid that enlist in the US military.

    Si1ver1ock suggests that it’s a military equation. China is fast growing in military power relative to the US, so the Empire acts now or not at all. Making friends with China and respecting Chinese people doesn’t seem to occur to them.

    Also, the Jewish Imperial model is to gain power in a country and directly start looting it like they did to Russia under Yeltsin. Their grappling hooks are international finance, banking, hedge funds, media, client politicians, education etc. which have all failed with China. China has a closed system, does its own banking and media, and where necessary develops its own versions of Google, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter.

    Result that when Iraq and Libya tried to break out of Empire financial control they were attacked and destroyed so now they’ve probably decided to go for China (high risk but it’s all goy blood).

  54. Yee says:

    goldgettin,

    “in war,there can be no substitute for victory.”
    Do you prefer getting kicked,rather than doing the kicking?”

    Let’s have a war first, then we can talk about “when in war…” I’m getting sick of the scam job the US is running.

  55. @Yee

    “Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin should learn WW2 history before openning his mouth to talk. As terms of surrender, Japan’s sovereignty is limited to their 4 main islands, they don’t have the right to claim anything else”

    Well that’s just it… The arrogance of the allies noted that they could give Japan whatever territory they wanted. So instead of giving Okinawa it’s independence as Ryuku – and returning the Diayou/Senkaku to China (which is part of Taiwan province) – which are areas FAR from Japan’s main islands – they chose to cause trouble by giving both to Japan. Austin knows this – but he has to lie.

  56. @UNIT472

    See this shows the ignorance of so many of you. What you don’t understand is ALL the nations in the South China Sea dispute each other’s EEZ’s. That’s the real argument – but the west wants to frame everything as China being the bad guy. Every single one of the nations in that region holds an atoll or reef or island disputed by the other parties. You are either ignorant or a hypocrite.

    And for the record the US was all for the Republic of China Nationalists controlling all the islands – as they solidified the original 11 dash line claims of that government before they lost to the communists. The US controlled Japan and had Japan sign over those islands to the Republic of China in the Treaty of Taipei…. sorry for them and their miscalculation that the communists would lose the fight for China.

    • Agree: GomezAdddams
  57. @Tulip

    I really wish Cuba would finally open up it’s economy the way China and Vietnam have… But frankly it is not anybody else’s business what type of government or economy they have. Not the US business either.

  58. @rgl

    Better they be controlled by their fellow Asians instead of Jews. The history of the world has always been made by the most powerful group controlling the lesser.

  59. @MarkinLA

    That would make sense except the UNCLOS didn’t exist in the aftermath of WW2. The International Seabed Authority didn’t convene in Kingston, Jamaica until decades later. But when will the US give up all territory not contiguous to the mainland US???

  60. @UNIT472

    Okinawa was taken by Japan’s empire – which means that she should have been given independence at the end of WW2 as Ryuku.
    Also – to the rest of the islands mentioned – good excuse making for US imperialism far from home.

  61. @Max Maxwell

    Here is the joke about letting them get nukes… 10% of Taiwan’s labor force works on Mainland China….
    Guess where the most marriages with people off the island of Taiwan take place?? You guessed it – Mainland China. So you expect them to support nuking their families? LOLOLOLOL

  62. @Yee

    USA is past war time—–225 of 245 years at war. Just lost in Afghanistan —the cavemen beat the World’s Greatest Force fighting for human rights —Freedom and Democracy and now its 780 worldwide bases instilling Peace via War are idle. Just think that the past 4 years 1.9 Trillion war budget is sitting unused and again —-it is China’s fault. Fort Detrick needs an update and Gay Army will find themselves facing a real force this time around —-

    • Replies: @USA1943
  63. @Safenow

    It’s not just the coast guard. China has what is a “maritime militia”. They are civilians and have purely civilian boats – but they are trained in naval tactics. They are trained to spot foreign spy equipment and get rewards for fishing them out (which is displayed in the media – and they get monetary rewards). They are also taught to spot for traces of submarine activity. They of course report whatever they find…

  64. antibeast says:
    @MarkinLA

    Economic zones are established according to international law. China has no coastline there.

    China has no coastline in the South China Sea but it has TERRITORIAL CLAIMS to the offshore islands located within its ‘9-dash-line’ claim. UNCLOS grants MARITIME RIGHTS to those offshore islands or ‘regime of islands’, including 1). 12-nm territorial seas, 2). 200-nm EEZ or ‘Exclusive Economic Zones’, and 3). Continental Shelf. If any one of those offshore islands or ‘regime of islands’ falls within the EEZ of another coastal State, then it’s up to the parties involved to demarcate their respective EEZs between that coastal State and the owner of the offshore islands or ‘regime of islands’, based on the assumption that the conflicting TERRITORIAL CLAIMS on those offshore islands or ‘regime of islands’ had been resolved before UNCLOS, which deals only with MARITIME RIGHTS not TERRITORIAL CLAIMS, kicks in.

    • Thanks: Showmethereal
  65. USA1943 says:
    @GomezAdddams

    We did not lose in Afghanistan, Biden said we accomplished ALL of our Military Objectives and obviously THEE MAIN OBJECTIVE Is To Win. So We Won, Just as Truman forced Japan into an unconditional surrender, Biden forced Afghanistan into an unconditional surrender and he did it without going to nukes, I am not a fan of Biden, but give him props he won that war.

  66. @Charles Pewitt

    I do love the sight of racist, Sinophobe, scumballs foaming in impotent rage, in the morning. Gosh, Yankee-yoose not ‘Number One’ no more. Tough.

  67. @nsa

    The Jewish elites sacrificed millions of Jews during WW2 in order to advance their millennial ambitions. They’d do it again in a Tel Aviv minute.

  68. @UNIT472

    Racist are ALWAYS moronic and pig ignorant. This, even so, is a very pernicious example of the type.

  69. antibeast says:
    @UNIT472

    The ludicrous thing is China is trying to claim the 9 Dash line as territorial waters when, at the time they drew the map their knowledge of cartography was primitive and their ability to calculate latitude and longitude, absolutely essential for a mapping, was non existent. China didn’t even recognize the earth was a globe and that China was not at the center of it..

    The Western MSM has been perpetuating the MYTH that China is claiming the ‘9-dash-liine’ as its territorial waters which is patently false as China is merely asserting its ‘historic rights’ to the South China Sea, consisting of its TERRITORIAL CLAIMS to the offshore islands within the ‘9-dash-line’ as well as any MARITIME RIGHTS granted thereto by UNCLOS. As a signatory to UNCLOS which grants MARITIME RIGHTS such as 12-nm territorial waters, 200-nm EEZs and Continental Shelf to both coastal States as well as offshore islands, China does recognize and accept the MARITIME RIGHTS of coastal States such as the Philippines. That is not in dispute. What is being disputed are the various TERRITORIAL CLAIMS to the offshore islands which may or may not fall within the 200-nm EEZ of coastal States such as the Philippines.

  70. “And if we are prepared to fight, Beijing should not be left in the dark. China ought to know the risks it would be taking.”
    And both Beijing and Washington, other capitals too, should be aware that the developing crisis between the West and China is leading towards world war, a clash of interests. But no one’s interests are served by global war. Blindly history is replaying.
    https://www.ghostsofhistory.wordpress.com/

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS