-Gen. Yaakov Amidror -- former major general and National Security Advisor of Israel
-- got tired of the bit around here --
-Ambassador Anne W. Patterson
-Ambassador Eric Edelman
-Ambassador Bilahari Kausikan
-Ambassador Atul Keshap
-Gen. Ruth Yaron
-Dan Meridor
Anyway, the goal here was to point out articles like this don't come from journalistic backgrounds, but thinktank policy makers. The intention of pieces like this is to launder official government opinion as a semi-legitimate news source. Think "Radio Free Asia".
Funny, I watched it just last Friday (randomly, as I don't follow that channel). But while its author makes a compelling point, I'm not sure sure how much of the basing of the semi-conductor industry in Taiwan was a conscious decision vs a post-facto rationalization.
That was a surprisingly good read. Brief enough that I can finish while in-between tickets, but long and deep enough that it can beautifully explain the whole crisis without oversimplifying it, and at the same time carefully presenting the two conflicting narratives.
edit: although I probably wouldn't trust the source when reading about Middle East conflicts...
> This is why Taiwan cannot be understood only as a sovereignty dispute. It is a test of whether the Indo-Pacific remains a plural maritime system, or whether it becomes a China-centered security sphere.
It was never a plural maritime system. The question is whether the oceans in question are US-dominated or Chinese-dominated.
I think the unsaid part is that the US by and large upheld navigable seas for everyone up until recently but we can't expect this from China. (And regrettably from recent events, maybe not from the US either.)
Lets play "Spot the thinktank cretens"!
jstribune.com about page:
> The Jerusalem Strategic Tribune is a journal representing Israeli and American views about international affairs.
Hm interesting. Lets see who runs it.
Editorial Board
-Ahmed Charai, Chair -- Owner of the site, on multiple thinktank boards such as the atlantic council
-Jacob Heilbrunn, Co-Chair -- Another fellow of the atlantic council
-Dr. Daniel Samet -- Daniel J. Samet is a Jeane Kirkpatrick Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute
-Melinda Haring -- a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's Eurasia Center
-Dr. Eran Lerman -- former IDF colonel and a lecturer at Shalem College
Board of Directors
-Gen. James Jones -- 21st national security advisor under Obama.
-Ahmed Charai -- owner of the site again
-Admiral James Foggo III -- former US navy Admiral. Nice retirement spot, James
Board of Advisors
-Hon. Dov Zakheim, Chairman -- Various positions under Reagan
-Hon. John Hamre -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hamre
-Gen. Yaakov Amidror -- former major general and National Security Advisor of Israel
-- got tired of the bit around here --
-Ambassador Anne W. Patterson
-Ambassador Eric Edelman
-Ambassador Bilahari Kausikan
-Ambassador Atul Keshap
-Gen. Ruth Yaron
-Dan Meridor
Anyway, the goal here was to point out articles like this don't come from journalistic backgrounds, but thinktank policy makers. The intention of pieces like this is to launder official government opinion as a semi-legitimate news source. Think "Radio Free Asia".
I found this video about the topic on internet: https://youtu.be/UWBrzzd1_yg informational and entertaining
Funny, I watched it just last Friday (randomly, as I don't follow that channel). But while its author makes a compelling point, I'm not sure sure how much of the basing of the semi-conductor industry in Taiwan was a conscious decision vs a post-facto rationalization.
That was a surprisingly good read. Brief enough that I can finish while in-between tickets, but long and deep enough that it can beautifully explain the whole crisis without oversimplifying it, and at the same time carefully presenting the two conflicting narratives.
edit: although I probably wouldn't trust the source when reading about Middle East conflicts...
> This is why Taiwan cannot be understood only as a sovereignty dispute. It is a test of whether the Indo-Pacific remains a plural maritime system, or whether it becomes a China-centered security sphere.
It was never a plural maritime system. The question is whether the oceans in question are US-dominated or Chinese-dominated.
I think the unsaid part is that the US by and large upheld navigable seas for everyone up until recently but we can't expect this from China. (And regrettably from recent events, maybe not from the US either.)
They didn’t upheld navigable seas for everyone. Sanctions are a thing. They upheld the seas for anyone that wanted to join and play by its rules.
China is gonna rip apart Taiwan unless it stops trusting America and starts believe that war is inevitable sooner or later.