this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2024
281 points (97.6% liked)

World News

39033 readers
2645 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]

Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
quinten
NewsAutoMod
jordanlund
Tenthrow
little_cow
lemmyAtom
FlyingSquid
281
China's Xi accused the US of trying to trick him into invading Taiwan, but said he won't take the bait, report says (www.businessinsider.com)
submitted 5 months ago by MicroWave to c/world
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
  • Xi Jinping accused the US of trying to trick China into invading Taiwan, the Financial Times said.
  • The Chinese leader made the claim to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, per the FT.
  • One expert told BI it's a sign that China is "genuinely surprised" by the attitude of US officials.

…

For decades, the US has adopted "strategic ambiguity" toward Taiwan, positioning itself as the country's most steadfast ally, while declining to explicitly say whether it would come to Taiwan's aid if China attacked.

But the mood in Washington, DC, seems to be shifting, with Congress showing itself more "overtly supportive of Taiwan than only a few years ago," Graeme Thompson, an analyst with the Eurasia Group, told Business Insider in November.

…

"The US has plenty of public figures now talking of Taiwan like it is a new Ukraine, and some even saying it needs to be diplomatically recognized," Brown added.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Eh, no.

Western Germany recognized the border between Poland - the Oder-Neisse line in 1970.

Additionally, while Western Germany recognized the GDR was its own state - starting 1972 - they didn't recognize its right to exist under international law. The German constitution stated up until the reunification:

The whole German People remains compelled to fulfill the Unity and Freedom of Germany by virtue of its right to free self-determination.

This implied there was only one Germany, in area and population greater than just Western Germany.

Also, German public broadcast used the upper left map for weather reporting up until the 70s, when they switched to the one on the top right without any borders. After the reunification, the bottom one was used:

Additionally, reunified Germany put numerous GDR leaders and a few soldiers on trial for murdering those trying to flee the GDR. However, the courts had to argue with the GDR's constitution - which fortunately for the courts was quite the self-contradictory document.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Western Germany recognized the border between Poland - the Oder-Neisse line in 1970.

There was no final settlement until 1990. Because you cannot give up claims on territory you don't actually control, the ROC is in a similar situation with Mongolia. In Germany's case there's the additional complication that until 1990, occupation statutes still applied.

This implied there was only one Germany, in area and population greater than just Western Germany.

No, it didn't. First off, the preamble isn't actually part of the constitution, secondly, it did not in any way or form claim rule or sovereignty over the Eastern states. "We'd like to re-absorb those territories" is a different thing than "those territories remain ours".

Also, German public broadcast used the upper left map for weather reporting up until the 70s, when they switched to the one on the top right without any borders.

Until the early 60s, both sides claimed to be the successor state to the German Empire, the GDR dropped that claim with the construction of the wall. After literally a decade of discussion the West changed to the Neue Ostpolitik in the early 70s and recognised the GDR as a separate state in its territory but did not change its own self-conception as successor state of the Empire. With that it also stopped applying the Hallstein doctrine, stopped to consider other states recognising the GDR as sovereign to be a hostile act.

Then came the two-state period, then there was a revolution in the GDR and while we call it reunification, legally it was the absorption of federal states which happen to be on the territory of the now-former GDR into the constitutional framework of the FRG. Nothing special, happened before with Saarland. If you want to draw a parallel to China I guess you can make one: To the until 1960 situation, with the PRC saying "There's going to be trouble, ROC, if you move to any other position, it's the status quo or proper unification no alternative".

Also, German public broadcast

...is not controlled by the government, least of all the federal government which is responsible, or at least co-responsible, for all foreign policy (but religion and culture because there the federal states are completely sovereign). It does reflect the political attitude back then: That the status quo borders were "arbitrary" and until there's a better set, the old ones still somehow apply even if it doesn't match the situation on the ground. The switch in 1970 was the broadcasters throwing their hands up in the air.

And you know what I think the map until 1970 is missing the border to Denmark if I'm not mistaken.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

You're right about the first part, I just remembered the Neue Ostpolitik marking a significant change.

As to the constitution: While the preamble isn't its own article, it's just as much a part of the constitution as every other part.

Here's what the Bundesverfassungsgericht (German Constitutional Court) ruled:

The German Reich continues to exist and still has legal capacity, but is not itself capable of acting as an overall state due to a lack of organization, in particular due to a lack of institutionalized bodies.[..]

The German Democratic Republic belongs to Germany and cannot be regarded as a foreign country in relation to the Federal Republic of Germany.

No constitutional body of the Federal Republic of Germany may abandon the restoration of state unity as a political goal; all constitutional bodies are obliged to work towards the achievement of this goal in their policies - this includes the demand to keep the claim to reunification alive internally and to persistently defend it externally - and to refrain from doing anything that would thwart reunification.

Untrustworthy, but not wrong source for the quotes

And while German public broadcast isn't controlled by the government, it is a good indicator for the political beliefs of the general population and the government.

The situation cannot be appropriately compared to the PRC and ROC, as there are significant differences. What can be compared is that the FRG never recognized the GDR as a state legitimated by international law. Just like the One-China-policy, the FRG had a One-Germany policy in its constitution.