George Bush’S Great America [EN]: Chapter 318

< Chapter 317 >

The reactions of neighboring countries were more tense than ever.

In Vietnam, public opinion was shifting towards a war of liberation and territorial expansion. In India, the idea of a full-scale war against China was gaining traction.

The most fervent public sentiment was in Taiwan. Setting aside the Communist Party, Taiwan arguably possessed the most legitimate claim to be the successor to the Qing dynasty.

Of course, the Communist Party, which had diligently repaid Qing dynasty bonds until the United States forgave them, was the most suitable entity. However, with China suddenly fragmented, no single entity could definitively claim rightful succession.

In any case, for Taiwan, the Chinese mainland was ancestral land that had to be reclaimed. This was a widely held belief, from ordinary citizens to politicians (excluding those deemed traitors), and was seen as the ultimate goal established when they were driven to the island.

However, reality presented challenges. The U.S. military, expanding its presence on Taiwanese soil under the guise of defending Taiwan, provided the Taiwanese military with outdated equipment, such as M109A6 Paladin self-propelled howitzers, in exchange for facilitating rapid U.S. deployment.

The core issue was that the U.S. military advocated for ‘peace,’ effectively preventing any foreign intervention in Chinese territory without U.S. approval.

If Taiwan were to assert, ‘Taiwan adheres to the One China policy; therefore, this is a civil war,’ the U.S. might have reservations but would likely step aside.

The ‘Communist Party’ had consistently made this claim. However, Taiwan’s chances of victory against the Chinese military were slim.

Considering the Sino-Indian border dispute, Taiwan’s likely fate was clear. Lanzhou and Chengdu had allied to counter the Indian army. Should the Taiwanese military land in territory controlled by the Guangzhou or Nanjing warlords, their combined military might would focus on the small island of Taiwan.

In such a war of aggression, expecting U.S. military intervention was unwise. The ideal scenario would involve mainland warlords disregarding the U.S. and conquering Taiwan under some pretext. This would prompt the U.S. military to mobilize, potentially seizing a portion of China, even if they couldn’t control the entire country.

It might take half a century, or even a century, but the territory gained would serve as the starting point for Taiwan’s recapture of China and the eventual downfall of the Communist Party.

Conversely, countries like Laos, Thailand, and Myanmar remained quiet. These three shared not only geographical proximity but also relatively amicable relations with China.

They quietly supported the Communist Party, avoided making public statements, and increased border troop deployments for defensive purposes only. However, the virtual cessation of trade forced their foreign ministries to actively engage with ASEAN [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] member states to find solutions.

Other countries faced similar dilemmas and confusion. However, thanks to robust trade with the United States, they didn’t immediately suffer severe economic hardship from the disruption.

Bhutan subtly aided India in the conflict, with politicians openly stating their willingness to deploy troops if India requested it.

On the other hand, some countries were constrained by their own internal issues. Nepal was undergoing a turbulent transition, dismantling its pre-modern absolute monarchy, where the king appointed members of parliament, and establishing a complete parliamentary cabinet system that excluded royal authority.

Furthermore, with generally positive public sentiment towards China, there was no compelling reason to send troops or act hostile, even if conditions were favorable.

In Mongolia’s case, their economic lifeline was abruptly severed, as both exports and imports were almost entirely dependent on China. Despite fervent appeals to Russia, no response was forthcoming.

Even the idea of invading China, occupying territory, and requisitioning supplies was a relic of the past. The era of conquest was over. The nomadic people had become too accustomed to urban life and agriculture, adapting to cars made of aluminum and steel instead of horses, and Soviet-style apartments instead of traditional gers [nomadic tents].

The modern Mongolian army was a shadow of the invincible Mongolian Empire army of old. While it possessed some size and could potentially put up a fight and occupy territory temporarily, a stabilized China would inevitably launch a counterattack.

In any case, Mongolia focused on stabilizing its internal affairs and urging Russia to find new sources of income. And then there’s Russia.

Russia, seemingly poised to intervene, remained surprisingly quiet. One might expect them to seize a warlord and meddle in internal affairs, or send troops to indebt the Communist Party. But they did none of that, with border soldiers merely preparing for the possibility of the conflict spilling over into Russia.

Kyrgyzstan, on the other hand, struggled to contain pro-war sentiment. Public opinion overwhelmingly favored war, primarily due to significant trade disruptions. Secondly, incidents of Chinese residents indiscriminately murdering Kyrgyz locals who criticized China ignited anti-Chinese sentiment.

Given pre-existing anti-Chinese feelings, this incident served as a potent catalyst. However, the government adamantly opposed declaring war. Who would initiate a war under the current circumstances?

If the entire world had declared war on China, the situation might be different. But even India, currently engaged in conflict, officially advocated for independence and peace while cautiously probing autonomous regions. Kyrgyzstan at war? An invasion when they couldn’t even stabilize their own country! It was absurd.

Tajikistan was steadily increasing its military strength, a decision driven by President Emomali Rahmon. Tajikistan’s national affairs were dictated solely by this dictator’s will, and such autocratic rule rarely leads a country in the right direction.

The stated reasons for the military buildup were border security, internal stability, and the annual civil war, but few believed it.

Afghanistan praised the government’s foresight in strengthening the border in line with U.S. military assistance and minimizing trade with China. It was the least affected country bordering China. While some individual business owners suffered losses, the national impact was minimal.

Finally, there was Kazakhstan, which Bush was closely monitoring.

“‘We support the Chinese Communist Party.’ I never thought I would have to say these words to the President of the United States.”

“I agree. We are more interested in the EU than China.”

Economically, Kazakhstan was closely tied to China, which was regrettable, but they were largely indifferent to China’s internal turmoil. The real issue was the stagnation of economic growth, which had previously averaged 12% annually. This prompted their interest in the EU. Unlike Asia, Europe offered stability.

However, immediate accession would likely involve the Eurasian Union rather than the EU – Russia’s attempt to create an Eastern European-Central Asian version of the European Union. The framework was in place, but filling it with substance was proving difficult, especially with Russia teetering on the brink of collapse.

Hence, the focus on the EU. They had no intention of joining the distant EU, but finding a reliable business partner in the current climate was crucial, and the EU seemed the most promising option. Kazakhstan had no desire to be associated with impoverished Central Asia.

Alternatively, they could strengthen trade with the Middle East via the Caspian Sea, but the Middle East was in disarray. While it seemed to be stabilizing after EU intervention, the EU’s efforts had failed, and the U.S. had taken over the troubled region.

Whether it was truly a takeover or not, the U.S. had clearly assumed control. However, even the U.S. seemed unable to influence Iran, or perhaps they simply had no intention of intervening. The Kurdish war of independence, escalating into a civil war within Iran, was intensifying.

In any case, the Middle East had become a lawless land, even in the 21st century. Of course, these groups never identified as bandits. They invariably espoused some ideology or slogan and labeled themselves as rebels or terrorist groups.

But if their livelihood depended on looting, wouldn’t that make them bandits?

Ultimately, trade requires goods to arrive safely and on time. In that regard, with the exception of Afghanistan, the Middle East was not a reliable trading partner.

Finding rebels or terrorist groups in Afghanistan had become difficult. Moreover, such groups were no longer primarily from Afghanistan. However, remnants of the scattered Taliban had returned, offering a potential point of contact.

Even these small groups were no match for the Afghan army, equipped and trained by the U.S. military. Furthermore, looting was far easier in other parts of the Middle East than in Afghanistan. When a job becomes too difficult, people seek easier alternatives.

The same applied to terrorists. Relocating to secure resources for smooth operations was common. These ‘rolling stones’ then had to engage in small-scale conflicts with the established groups.

Although often overlooked, Europe suffered significant economic damage. Europe and China had been close trading partners since before the Age of Exploration. In the era of globalization, they had become inextricably linked.

Finding inexpensive industrial products or souvenirs without a ‘Made in China’ label was difficult, and if found, they were likely from Southeast Asia.

The majority of European companies, large and small, had been producing OEM [Original Equipment Manufacturer] products, enticed by China’s cheap labor. And now, Europe was paying the price.

Ironically, the United States, which had been sidelined long ago, was the least affected by this crisis.

And the United States, in its relatively unscathed position, was finally turning its attention towards China. Only the President of the United States knew whether this was a continuation of 19th-century power plays or a genuine pursuit of peace.