In recent years, the United States has placed Taiwan in the framework of its strategic competition with China. It has continued to play the Taiwan card, and has constantly hollowed out the one-China principle, resulting in escalating tensions across the Taiwan Strait.
But the Taiwan card is a double-edged sword. While attempting to use Taiwan to contain China, the U.S. has been brainwashed by the island’s Democratic Progressive Party authorities and fallen into a trap. It has become a cat’s paw for Taiwan independence separatists without even noticing.
Endless provocation
The U.S. has made constant so-called breakthroughs in its relations with Taiwan in recent years. Since President Joe Biden won the White House, his administration has loosened restrictions on interactions between American and Taiwan officials and connived to have members of Congress make frequent visits to the island. The idea is to create a “new normal” of U.S. political interactions with Taiwan. The U.S. has also come up with a steady stream of new narratives comparing the Taiwan question with the Ukraine crisis and disseminating the idea that UN Resolution 2758 left Taiwan’s status unresolved. This supposedly increases Taiwan’s international visibility.
In September, the Biden administration declared its 16th arms sales package to Taiwan, far exceeding Donald Trump’s 11 packages and setting a new record during a four-year presidential term. Biden has twice used his executive drawdown authority to provide military aid to Taiwan, and has promoted U.S.-Taiwan dialogue about the joint production, research and development of weapons. The intent is to develop a new mode of arming the island.
America’s Taiwan policy has always served its China policy. Making trouble in the Taiwan Strait is aimed fundamentally at achieving America’s strategic goal of outcompeting China. Taiwan lies is at the center of China’s core interests, and is the most sensitive and explosive issue in China-U.S. relations. Every time the U.S. puts on a show of supporting Taiwan, bilateral ties get a shock wave and suffer damage. By single-mindedly using Taiwan to contain China under the framework of strategic competition, the U.S. receives a backlash, which always reduces policy flexibility.
Inadequate commitment
Biden himself and multiple high-ranking officials in his administration have repeatedly stated that the U.S. is committed to the “one-China” policy. They say they do not support Taiwan independence or “two Chinas” or “one China, one Taiwan” and do not seek to use the Taiwan question as a tool to contain China. The messages have been delivered even on such occasions as the national leaders’ meetings in Bali, Indonesia and San Francisco.
Taking a closer look at how the Biden administration talks about “one China,” one finds that new attributive words — such as the Taiwan Relations Act, Six Assurances to Taiwan and “the peaceful resolution” of the Taiwan question — have been added to the U.S. vocabulary when describing the “one-China” policy. The new words have in fact conspicuously transformed the U.S. meaning even as it continues to claim that its policy has not changed.
To a great extent, the reason for this is that the U.S. wants too much: It wants to play the Taiwan card at will, yet avoid conflict with China. In the near term, the U.S. wouldn’t mind trouble, but not war, in the Taiwan Strait. And so it attempts to “manage China-U.S. relations “responsibly.” It considers statements denying support for Taiwan independence as signs of goodwill toward China. However, for the Chinese, who are accustomed to both listening to what one says and watching what one does, broken promises mean the rhetoric is empty and false.
Unprincipled connivance
Since Lai Ching-te took office as Taiwan’s new leader this year, he has assumed a dangerous posture — and by its words and actions the U.S. has signaled acquiescence. In his May 20 inaugural speech, Lai openly advocated a new “two-states” theory, conveyed his desire for independence and agitated for cross-strait confrontation. This escalated tensions. Yet U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken issued a statement congratulating Lai on his inauguration, which was called a “normal, routine process.”
In his Oct. 10 speech, Lai put forward new distortions, such as the notion that “the Republic of China has already put down roots in Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu” — openly challenging the historical and legal fact that Taiwan is a part of China. The U.S., as usual, called this language routine.
The U.S. assumes it is capable of controlling DPP authorities. However, Taiwan separatists don’t suffer from a lack of ambition and cunning. If the U.S. cannot maintain a cool head, it will be led by the nose and open itself to manipulation.
Facing harsh, complex cross-strait conditions, the U.S. — if it truly wants to meet China halfway — should stay true to its promises; faithfully return to the political commitments it made to China in the three joint communiques; support its promises with continuous, forceful actions; and genuinely match its words with actions.
The U.S. should have due reverence for history, respecting the fact that Taiwan’s return to China and its legal status have long been affirmed by a series of international legal documents (including the Cairo Declaration and Potsdam Declaration). It should face reality and respect the high sensitivity of the Taiwan question. It should recognize the extreme harm done by separatists and stand unequivocally on the correct side of history in opposition to independence. And it should support China’s peaceful reunification.
Forty-five years into their diplomatic relationship, China and the United States, as major powers, should focus on the welfare of their people and the future of humanity. America’s Taiwan policy has been deviating from the correct course for a long time. It should return to the right path as soon as possible.
