This video lecture will outline the basics of U.S. foreign policy toward China, with a focus on Taiwan. I argue the central idea of U.S. policy is “strategic ambiguity” – that the United States seeks to maintain the status quo by not acknowledging either Beijing’s or Taipei’s sovereignty over Taiwan. One caveat as I begin: I am not an expert on this topic; my goal with this video is to shape our in-class conversation about realism and the potential for conflict between the U.S. and China.
First, a little history reminder: China had a civil war between nationalist and communist forces from 1927-1949. In 1949, the communists won, establishing the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on the mainland while nationalist forces fled to the island formerly known as Formosa, where they declared Taipei the capital of the Republic of China (ROC).
Taiwan (or the ROC) was recognized by much of the international community as the legitimate government of China until the 1960s; the People’s Republic of China gained greater recognition in 1971, when it succeeded the ROC in the UN and gained its permanent seat on the UN Security Council. That year, the Nixon administration also began negotiations with the PRC, culminated in 1979, when the United States recognized the PRC and de-recognized the Republic of China as the “sole legal government of China.”
This is called the One China Policy – the U.S. formally recognizes only one country, although it does not acknowledge either Beijing’s sovereignty over Taiwan or any assertion of Taiwan as a sovereign state.
Overall the policy is one of strategic ambiguity, with the goal of maintaining the status quo. It is an effort to both deter any Chinese effort to integrate Taiwan into its polity (without offering formal security guarantees to Taipei) AND deter Taiwan from declaring formal independence (which would prompt Chinese retaliation).
The U.S. relationship with Taiwan is codified by the Taiwan Relations Act, which was further elaborated on with the Six Assurances stated by the Reagan administration. The Taiwan Relations Act established U.S. commitments to Taiwan’s security, authorizing trade relations and military sales. It also established representation in each country through the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and Taiwan Economic and Cultural Relations Office (TECRO).
Today, the US and Taiwan have a significant economic and military relationship. The US is Taiwan’s second largest trading partner (#1 is China) and Taiwan is the United States’ 9th largest export market. While the U.S. does not extend security guarantees to Taiwan (it is not a treaty ally), it makes regular arms sales and in 2021, Taiwanese President Tsai confirmed the presence of a small number of U.S. servicemembers on the island.
From the PRC’s perspective, Taiwan is a part of China and should not take steps to secede. Taiwan’s status is viewed in part as the last vestige of imperial control over Chinese territory (after the UK transferred sovereignty of Hong Kong to China in 1997 and Portugal did the same for Macao in 1999). The key diplomatic statement covering the relationship is the 1992 Consensus, in which Taiwanese and Chinese party leaders agreed that Taiwan and mainland China are part of “one China” without specifying what “China” means. The PRC’s redlines on Taiwan are clear: the Anti-Secession Law (adopted in 2005) sets three conditions that would justify China using “non-peaceful means” to guarantee its sovereignty:
- Formal secession from China
- Major incidents equivalent to secession, or
- All possibilities for peaceful reunification are exhausted
As part of its policy, China actively opposes Taiwan’s membership in international organizations and formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan. It has also recently increased military overflights of airspace claimed by Taiwan. American assertion of influence in the region typically takes the form of foreign military sales (FMS, as described earlier), transits through the Straits of Taiwan by U.S. naval vessels, and permission for high-level visits to either country.
So to summarize, China views Taiwanese moves toward full sovereignty as a threat that could entail military response, while the United States seeks to provide a “just right” level of security assurances to Taiwan to deter unilateral action by either country. The result is ambigious U.S. policy, but intentionally so – clarity would likely lead to worse outcomes for all parties involved, including potential conflict.