> It has become very hard to see a path to its peaceful resolution. But anything else would be a tragedy with incalculable collateral damage...<p>Why? The article references "Outer Mongolia" too, nobody seems to be clamoring for reunification. State sovereignty splits over geographic areas and populations all the time. Why is reunification a necessity?<p>> U.S. support for Taiwan’s continuing separation from the rest of China is a perpetuation of foreign imperialist efforts to carve their country into spheres of influence, disrespect the right of Chinese to determine their own destiny...<p>Oh I see now.<p>Define "Chinese"?" Do Malay and Singaporean Chinese count? Isn't the author refusing to cede the fact that Taiwanese and mainland Han are diverging cultures an act of denying them self determination? <i>Why must the two groups remain together in perpetuity?</i><p>> Beijing has repeatedly emphasized its strong preference for accomplishing national reunification peacefully rather than with a use of force. It has offered to accept what amounts to a symbolic rather than substantive form of reunification to Taiwan. But to “win without fighting,” Beijing must show that, even if the U.S. backs Taiwan, its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) would surely win if the two sides were to return to combat, and that Taipei therefore has no realistic alternative to the negotiation of some form of reconciliation with Chinese across the Strait.<p>Voluntarily come under our sovereignty or else. See, we are peaceful!<p>> The PLA’s current shows of force are aimed at bringing Taipei back to the negotiating table, which the island abandoned when it elected leaders committed themselves to seek an identity separate from China. So far, Beijing’s shows of force have not changed Taipei’s refusal to talk about “peaceful reunification.” No talks mean no path to peace.<p>Again, they've democratically opted for self determination and sovereignty over themselves. Why can't the PRC do the same? Where's the imperialism here?<p>And that comes to the real truth of this matter. The PRC <i>is imperialist.</i> The majority of what we consider to be "China" is under occupation, and has been even under ROC and the Emperor before that. Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Manchuria, Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan, do I need to keep going? These are not regions within China, these are nations under Han imperialist rule, and they have been to different degrees for centuries. Arguing that these nations don't deserve self determination, and then <i>invoking anti-imperialism</i>, the complete lack of self awareness in this article is quite telling.