The "model" does not explain why the status of women in richer East Asia is lower than in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Central Asia, as per the most detailed gender equality indexes.
The "status of women" measure you use has too few datapoints, some of whom actually does not measure gender equality, but general well being/achievment of both sexes, and thus is prone to mistakes.
For example your measure claims bigger gender equality in education in East Asia compared to LatAm, simply because women receive more education in East Asia than in LatAm, while forgetting that men in EA receive more education too compared to LatAm, and so ultimately there are fewer college educated women compared to men in East Asia than in LatAm - and thus bigger education gap between the sexes.
And so there are more college educated women than men in Latin America, and more college educated men than women in EA, even though women (and men) receive more education in EA.
Thus not surprisingly, gender equality indexes show higher education gender gaps in EA, than in Latin America, Eastern Europe or Central Asia.
Same for crime rates. East Asia has a generally low crime rate, which though applies to both sexes, and thus is not a sign for gender equality. If women suffer less crime in EA, men suffer less crime too.
Do not mistake a higher standard of living with gender equality. Both sexes can be better off, yet the gender gaps may remain.
Western politicians' ans their hysterical rhetoric have painted their respective countries into a corner, such that diplomacy becomes impossible. If Putin is Hitler, Stalin, and Genghis Khan all rolled into one, an evil genius who does stupidly self-harming things just for meanness and lulz, how can you negotiate with such a monster?
This is exacerbated by the dysfunctional political systems in the West, in which the opposition party seeks, not the good of the country, but to score points at the expense of the ruling party. Anything short of pushing The Button is greeted with accusations of weakness and Munich, 1938 is ceremonially recapitulated.
Fascinating tour of our strategic horizons. A few niggles:
1. "American and Russian submarines are quiet and hard to track, Chinese submarines are loud and easy to track, and kill”. This is an urban legend. Chinese conventional subs are able to accompany, and even surface in the midst of, US Navy fleets undetected. And since China is by far the world leader in engineering (including atomic), expect PLAN boomers to go silent when the shooting starts.
2. "whether China could plausibly launch a sea-borne invasion of Taiwan against US military resistance?" A better question might be, "can China plausibly launch an air-sea embargo on Taiwanese exports against US military resistance?”. And the answer, clarified below, is a resounding 'yes'.
3. "While the U.S. Pacific Fleet is currently larger than the PLA Navy by tonnage, my rough calculations indicate that, on current trend lines, the PLA Navy will reach near-parity on this basis as well in fifteen to twenty years”. Since triremes abandoned bronze ramming prows, ship tonnage alone has counted for little (remember the poor Belgrano). Warships, like warplanes, are weapon platforms, not weapons. China's fleet is much bigger –allowing it to apportion firepower across a much broader area, newer, more advanced in design, and much, much more powerfully armed than the USN. Not only that, China's S2S missiles–against which the USN has no credible defense– cover the ocean as far as the Port of Darwin.
Beyond that, China's surveillance and detection systems are incomparably better than ours in their theater of war.
The "model" does not explain why the status of women in richer East Asia is lower than in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Central Asia, as per the most detailed gender equality indexes.
The "status of women" measure you use has too few datapoints, some of whom actually does not measure gender equality, but general well being/achievment of both sexes, and thus is prone to mistakes.
For example your measure claims bigger gender equality in education in East Asia compared to LatAm, simply because women receive more education in East Asia than in LatAm, while forgetting that men in EA receive more education too compared to LatAm, and so ultimately there are fewer college educated women compared to men in East Asia than in LatAm - and thus bigger education gap between the sexes.
And so there are more college educated women than men in Latin America, and more college educated men than women in EA, even though women (and men) receive more education in EA.
Thus not surprisingly, gender equality indexes show higher education gender gaps in EA, than in Latin America, Eastern Europe or Central Asia.
Same for crime rates. East Asia has a generally low crime rate, which though applies to both sexes, and thus is not a sign for gender equality. If women suffer less crime in EA, men suffer less crime too.
Do not mistake a higher standard of living with gender equality. Both sexes can be better off, yet the gender gaps may remain.
Western politicians' ans their hysterical rhetoric have painted their respective countries into a corner, such that diplomacy becomes impossible. If Putin is Hitler, Stalin, and Genghis Khan all rolled into one, an evil genius who does stupidly self-harming things just for meanness and lulz, how can you negotiate with such a monster?
This is exacerbated by the dysfunctional political systems in the West, in which the opposition party seeks, not the good of the country, but to score points at the expense of the ruling party. Anything short of pushing The Button is greeted with accusations of weakness and Munich, 1938 is ceremonially recapitulated.
Fascinating tour of our strategic horizons. A few niggles:
1. "American and Russian submarines are quiet and hard to track, Chinese submarines are loud and easy to track, and kill”. This is an urban legend. Chinese conventional subs are able to accompany, and even surface in the midst of, US Navy fleets undetected. And since China is by far the world leader in engineering (including atomic), expect PLAN boomers to go silent when the shooting starts.
2. "whether China could plausibly launch a sea-borne invasion of Taiwan against US military resistance?" A better question might be, "can China plausibly launch an air-sea embargo on Taiwanese exports against US military resistance?”. And the answer, clarified below, is a resounding 'yes'.
3. "While the U.S. Pacific Fleet is currently larger than the PLA Navy by tonnage, my rough calculations indicate that, on current trend lines, the PLA Navy will reach near-parity on this basis as well in fifteen to twenty years”. Since triremes abandoned bronze ramming prows, ship tonnage alone has counted for little (remember the poor Belgrano). Warships, like warplanes, are weapon platforms, not weapons. China's fleet is much bigger –allowing it to apportion firepower across a much broader area, newer, more advanced in design, and much, much more powerfully armed than the USN. Not only that, China's S2S missiles–against which the USN has no credible defense– cover the ocean as far as the Port of Darwin.
Beyond that, China's surveillance and detection systems are incomparably better than ours in their theater of war.