Thread by @wentisung

As I read China's #Taiwan policy white paper's full text, confusion sets in -- it's unclear on relationship between 'unification' and 'national rejuvenation' (NR)

Is unification a #precondition to achieving NR? Or will China #demand/compel unification at all costs only after NR?

Two key statements on this sound a bit circular. English version:

1. "Complete Reunification Is Critical to National Rejuvenation"

2. "The Taiwan question arose as a result of weakness and chaos in our nation, and it will be resolved as national rejuvenation becomes a reality."

Chinese version sounds even more confusing:

1. 實現祖國完全統一是中華民族偉大復興的必然要求
2. 台灣問題因民族弱亂而產生，必將隨著民族復興而解決。

a. So is unification necessary piece of the puzze for achieving NR?

b. Or is unification akin to a pricey luxury that China desires, but may be able to hold-off on until it achieves NR? (#DelayedGrafitication) /3

The former suggests a firm deadline for unification at all costs: 2049.

The latter suggests more patience and a more "China will keep its eye on the 'bigger prize' (national rejuvenation) until 2049" mindset. /4

Revealing China's patience level & sense of urgency will affect:

1. Other states' threat perception and force-building plans.

2. Other states' cohesion, when coalition-building to offset and shape Chinese ambitions.

3. Taiwan's opportunistic accommodationism sentiment. /5

Wondering if the seeming ambiguity in the white paper is caused by:

1) Unintended wording imprecision?

2) My bad verbal logic? Or

3) Deliberately designed to increase compellence, while still maintaining an off-ramp (i.e. a commitment device that doesn't truly commit)? /end