President
Joe Biden made a potentially dangerous statement on Monday. In Tokyo,
he gave a flat “yes” to a reporter’s question of whether he is willing
to “get involved militarily to defend Taiwan.” “That’s the commitment we
made,” the president claimed.
In fact, the United States scrapped its formal commitment to defend
Taiwan in 1979, replacing a treaty of alliance with the Taiwan Relations
Act, which obligates the United States to help equip Taiwan to defend
itself.
This is the third time in
less than a year that Biden has publicly declared that the United
States would use force to keep Beijing from seizing the island. Once
again, the White House scrambled to clarify that the U.S. position has not actually changed: the United States continues to adhere to a One China policy and maintain “strategic ambiguity”
rather than clarity as to whether it would defend Taiwan. This approach
is a wise one that, as many administration officials recognize, has
served the United States well. But repeated gaffes risk being
interpreted as changes in policy. They increase the chance of damaging
peace and stability between the world’s two leading powers.
For
decades, China has refrained from attempting to conquer Taiwan by force
but has retained the threat to do so. Many analysts believe that Beijing
would prefer to use gradual pressures toward “reunification”
than to mount a costly and risky campaign of sudden conquest. The
possibility of full-scale Chinese aggression can never be discounted,
especially in light of the country’s growing military capabilities and
international ambitions. One reason Beijing’s calculus could change,
however, lies in Washington. If the United States appears to regard
Taiwan as an irrevocable strategic asset that could never join with the
mainland, then China may resort to plan B: launch an invasion out of
fear that it must act now or accept that Taiwan is lost forever.
No
single presidential utterance is likely to cause Chinese President Xi
Jinping to make a policy decision of enormous consequence. Xi and Biden
know each other from direct and continuing conversations. The People’s
Liberation Army already takes seriously the
possibility that the United States would intervene militarily in
defense of Taiwan. So Biden’s comment, in and of itself, may have little
effect.
More troubling, however, is the larger policy drift in
Washington to which the gaffe contributes. Over the past few years,
members of Congress have increasingly called for strategic clarity about using force to defend Taiwan and have promoted other steps to restore the appearance of diplomatic relations between
Washington and Taipei. Under Donald Trump’s administration, the United
States loosened restrictions on high-level contacts with Taiwanese
officials, and the Biden administration has issued new guidelines to
reflect “our deepening unofficial relationship.” Most important, these
measures have accompanied the growing hostility across U.S.-China
relations, as the world’s two leading countries engage in intensifying
economic, technological, and security competition.
At a minimum,
then, Biden’s vow to defend Taiwan risks conveying that the United
States is degrading the long-standing policies that have underpinned the
bilateral relationship and preserved peace and stability across the
Taiwan Strait. Even if Chinese officials were to accept the White
House’s clarification that U.S. policy remains unchanged, they may
conclude that the United States will grow only more determined to defend
Taiwan as time goes on and that China’s existing threats no longer
suffice to keep Taipei from drifting toward independence. In that case,
China could move up its timeline for “reunification” and become more
willing to risk military and economic conflict with the United States.
Indeed,
several influential senators sent exactly that destabilizing message to
Beijing by cheering on Biden’s ostensible misstatement. Senator Bob
Menendez, the Democratic chair of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, tweeted,
“President Biden is right. Credible deterrence requires both courage
and clarity—and Taiwan’s vibrant democracy deserves our full support.”
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham made the sentiment bipartisan:
“President Biden’s statement that if push came to shove the U.S. would
defend Taiwan against communist China was the right thing to say and the
right thing to do.” Likewise, Republican Senator Tom Cotton seized the
moment to urge Biden to
“restate our new policy of strategic clarity in clear, deliberate
remarks from a prepared text.” Whatever effect the gaffe may have in
Beijing, it is opening space to attack the status quo in Washington.
The
war in Ukraine demonstrates that it can be difficult to discern just
where red lines lie. Russia had long drawn a clear red line over Ukraine
joining NATO, but Russian President Vladimir Putin ended up launching a
full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February, citing mounting cooperation
between Kyiv and NATO, among other grievances, even though the alliance
was nowhere near admitting Ukraine as a member. The United States did
not know in advance what would cause Russia to go to war—and neither did
many Moscow elites who were stunned by Putin’s decision to invade. The
circumstances across the Taiwan Strait are very different, but it is
worth considering that no one knows how much liberty the United States
can take with its One China policy before Beijing will decide its red
line has been crossed. Even Xi may not know himself. For all involved,
it would be better not to find out. The stakes are too high.
|