More than two-thirds of Taiwanese people would be willing to fight off a Chinese invasion of their island, a new survey found. Just over half of respondents believe that the United States would send its military to help.

Most Taiwanese people would be willing to defend their island against a Chinese attack, according to a poll published Wednesday. Most also believe that such an attack is highly unlikely in the next five years.

The poll, commissioned by the Institute for National Defense and Security Research, was released a day before Taiwan’s National Day.

Should Beijing attack, 67.8% of the 1,214 people surveyed said they would be “very willing or somewhat willing” to fight in defense of Taiwan; 23.6% said they would not be.

Almost 64% said China’s “territorial ambition” in Taiwan represents “a serious threat.” At the same time, 61% said it was not likely China would invade soon.

Some 52% of respondents said that they believed key ally the United States would come to their aid in the invent of a Chinese invasion. Yet, only 40% believed that the US would send its navy to “break” a potential blockade.

  • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 hours ago

    That shouldn’t preclude the Taiwanese from the right to self-determination

    • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Even so, it’s important to understand that the PRC views continued US support of Taiwan as part of a long standing policy to interfere with China’s right to self determination. Remember, the PRC came into existence after China was dominated by foreign powers for the better part of a century. If there is to be a peaceful resolution, as all parties proclaim to want, this perspective can’t be casually dismissed.

      • btaf45@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        41 minutes ago

        Even so, it’s important to understand

        That’s not the slightest bit important. The Republic of China views the PRC as interfering with China’s self determination. The Republic of China gets to choose its own leaders but the PRC is a dictatorship not chosen by the people. That means that the ROC speaks for millions more Chinese than the PRC does.

        If there is to be a peaceful resolution,

        The only possible terms of reunification would be the end of the Communist dictatorship. In such an event Taipei would likely be the initial temporary capital of a unified China because that’s where the experience of democracy is.

      • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I’d argue that position would hold more water if politicians didn’t need to be approved before running for office in Hong Kong. I think that’s emblematic of how seriously the CCP takes self-determination.

        • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Hong Kong is actually a perfect example for what I’m talking about. It was a concession China made to the British after losing the first Opium war. As such, it was always going to be a sore spot for the PRC. On top of that, the British only introduced a pretty limited form of democracy to Hong Kong shortly before it was supposed to relinquish control over the territory. The PRC saw this as an attempt by the British to continue interfering with the right for Chinese self determination. They believed the British were intentionally making it more difficult for the PRC to integrate Hong Kong into its existing political structures. After the handover, the PRC took extreme offense at pro democracy protestors using the old colonial flag for Hong Kong. That was because they perceived it as a call for further foreign interference in Chinese affairs.

          • btaf45@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            36 minutes ago

            On top of that, the British only introduced a pretty limited form of democracy to Hong Kong shortly before it was supposed to relinquish control over the territory

            On top of that, the Chinese dictator crushed democracy with military and police force in violation of the unification agreement – proving 100% it absolutely can not be trusted.

            The PRC saw this as an attempt by the British to continue interfering with the right for Chinese self determination.

            The Chinese have no rights whatsoever in the PRC regime because the Chinese cannot chose their own leaders and determine their own country’s destiny. By “right for Chinese self determination” you actually mean the DICTATOR’s right (one single individual!!) to prevent one billion Chinese citizens from running their own country as they see fit.

          • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            I mean yeah the British sucked, but those democracy concessions were hard fought by the people of Hong Kong. I don’t want the big power politics of the crown versus the PRC to distract from the fact that it took people out on the streets to gain it from the British just for them to be snuffed out by Beijing