We are comparing the current state of countries, yes?

No because what I described is part of a systemic process and is ongoing, has precedent, and has its supporters for future depravity.

Do you think Norway for example currently has an imperialist settler core?

Norway is a subimperialist petrostate of the imperial core. It does the bidding of its masters. It is, primarily, irrelevant, but it does sometimes act as a hanger-on in militarism and it certainly loves to pump the price of oil, e.g. supporting American sanctions on Venezuela that CEPR estimated to kill tens of thousands yearly. But naturally, that skips Westerners' human rights discourse entirely, they pretend sanctions aren't civilian-targeted dispossession. In addition, Norway just uses loopholes to hide its role in weapons sales, including to Israel.

What would you call China's ambitions regarding the nine dash line and Taiwan if not imperialist?

Getting off-track, aren't you? Or in your mind would you declare any imperialism you can find a human rights violation? If so, hoo boy is my thesis correct.

I'll entertain those two questions when they can be seated coherently, I.E. we have resolved the actual topic and can discuss what imperialism is, as those questions suggest you don't know.

The nine dash line is open to negotiations as recent ones with Vietnam have shown. "Taiwan", actually called the Republic of China, is the rump state of the losing side of the chinese civil war. It only exists because the US interfered. It considers itself China, the PRC considers it China. Only you ignorant people don't. It is a wholy internal matter of the chinese people.

There is no state called "Taiwan", get it already.

What would you call China’s ambitions regarding the nine dash line and Taiwan if not imperialist?

holy shit crack a history book

like literally learn the first fucking thing about the situation