>>45010
Well of course any nation would want that, particularly as the status quo works so well for them, they don't want a power to threaten them, no nation does.

>"rules-based international world order" is just euphemism for US hegemony
Not really it's a euphemism of the status quo if anything, they just don't want conflict or anybody to rock the boat. Of course they want to keep their position too but nations like Australia, France, Japan and the UK don't care so much about that and just want the situation to stay as it is.

>It should not be surprising that they would endeavour to break from the encirclement that the US has been building around them
Well as I have said that was a terrible way to go about it and only hurts their cause. Illegally claiming the area they have has only made the rest of the world see them as a nation that is rocking the boat and threatening the status quo and they don't like that and it has created a reaction, all they are doing is created an even tougher encirclement around them. There were far better ways to go about this for them.

>They wanted China, a single China, including mainland and island.
Of course they did, why would they not?

>Chiang kai shek and the KMT would never have approved of the servile attitude now displayed by the globohomo acolytes in the island.
Uhh... I'm not sure if you know this but Chiang Kai Shek was in control of Taiwan until 1975. Not only does he approve of it but he was the one that started it in 1950 and was doing it himself for 25 years. The alternative is to be part of the CCP.

>The "1 China 2 systems" stalemate was even accepted by the US, until they realized that China was rapidly growing from little more than a low-cost industrial park for their private sector into an actual competitor, and Obongo announced the "pivot" to Asia-Pacific
They still accept it, it's convenient for them.