Taiwan and the Need for Strategic Clarity

Communist China continues to threaten Taiwan.  Military exercises near the island nation that include amphibious landings, navy vessels trespassing into Taiwan’s waters, and combat aircraft invading Taiwanese airspace are all indicative of aggressive intentions by the People’s Republic of China (PRC).  These military maneuvers are meant to bully Taiwan and to warn the U.S. not to intervene.  Some experts believe that China intends to invade Taiwan and forcibly bring it into the Communist fold on mainland China.  In fact, President Xi of China has explicitly stated that he would use military force to unite Taiwan with the mainland if necessary.

The United States has a complicated relationship with Taiwan, but it is a very important relationship.  We do not have a defense treaty with Taiwan.  However, with passage of the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, the U.S. committed to arming the island democracy so it could defend itself.  The U.S. intentionally has never indicated whether we would send in the U.S. military if Taiwan was invaded by the PRC.  It is part of the policy called Strategic Ambiguity.  It is purposely vague as to whether the U.S. would join the fight if Taiwan were attacked.

Strategic Ambiguity harkens back to the beginning of the so-called One China Policy.  As the United States began formal relations with what was then frequently called Red China, we agreed to recognize mainland China as the only China. Further, this policy acknowledges China’s claim to Taiwan.  However, the U.S. does not endorse or recognize that claim. That is an important distinction. Just as Vladimir Putin sees Ukraine as a part of Russia, President Xi sees Taiwan as a part of China.  Again, the U.S. has never agreed with that view, even though we recognize China as “one China.”

The more recent history of Taiwan goes back to the conclusion of World War II.  As the communists on the mainland revolted against the government, the war was bloody and protracted.  Ultimately the communists drove the recognized government off the mainland.  It became a government in exile in Taiwan beginning in 1949.  For years, they claimed to be the only true Chinese government.  The Taiwanese nation even held the China-seat at the United Nations Security Council until 1971.

So much has changed since Taiwan became the seat of government for the defeated Chinese government in the 1940s. Taiwan is a democracy, electing its first president in 2000.  It has been an independent nation since 1949. It no longer identifies as a government in exile for the Chinese people. They make no claim to the mainland now.

Taiwan is one of the most prosperous nations in the world.  Taiwan’s semiconductor production is vital to international commerce. The Heritage Foundation scores Taiwan as number 6 in the world for economic freedom.  Taiwan operates under a constitution ratified in 1947, has an independent judiciary that upholds the rule of law, has a multi-party political system, and is one of the wealthiest nations in Asia.

These changes reflect a new geo-political reality that the U.S. and the West should evaluate as we examine our relationship with Taiwan.  The time for strategic ambiguity is past.  It is time for strategic clarity with the U.S. relationship to Taiwan. 

As Mike Pompeo, our Senior Counsel for Global Affairs,  reminds us, President Biden’s policies regarding Taiwan and his contradictory actions have been muddled and confusing.  For example, Biden did not invite Taiwan to the recent meeting of the new 13-nation Indo-Pacific Economic Framework initiative—even though it is one of the most prosperous nations in the world.  President Biden at times indicates that the U.S. would fight for Taiwan’s freedom if they were invaded—only to have the White House walk back his comments.  This type of messaging from the Administration does not indicate clarity or commitment when it comes to recognizing Taiwan as an independent nation or a willingness to come to its defense.

It is a serious strategic mistake to be unclear about the U.S. commitment to Taiwan.  It indicates either weakness, hesitancy, or confusion—none of which are good and all of which can give China tacit permission to interfere in Taiwan’s economic and political freedom—or take Taiwan by force.  The human catastrophe and world-wide impact of Putin’s aggression in Ukraine would be repeated in Asia with even larger repercussions. 

At this point, no one knows for sure what President Biden’s intentions or policies are regarding Taiwan.  It seems the Biden Administration is incapable at times of giving reassurance to our allies—or putting our enemies on notice.  The President lacks consistency and clarity as the leader of the free world and as Commander-in-Chief of the world’s most powerful military. It was not a confidence-builder when, in an interview with ABC News last year, President Biden included Taiwan on a list of allies the U.S. was duty-bound to defend—but did so in discussing the disastrous U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan.