Despite the Hysteria, Blinken Was Correct That the US Does Not Support Taiwanese Independence

Secretary of State Antony Blinken has recently concluded a two-day visit to China. The purpose of the visit, as reported in the New York Times, was to "arrest the freefall in relations" between the two countries and to "pull relations out of a deep chill."

It is too early to determine if the trip can be considered a success on those terms, but it is a positive sign that the two could hold "candid, substantive, and constructive discussions on key priorities in the bilateral relationship and on a range of global and regional issues," something that has not happened for most of the Biden administration.

Yet, despite the lack of breakthroughs, the trip did produce one positive moment, which was when Blinken reiterated Americas long standing policy of not supporting Taiwan’s independence.

During a press conference held in Beijing, Blinken stated that "We do not support Taiwan independence. We remain opposed to any unilateral changes to the status quo by either side. We continue to expect the peaceful resolution of cross-strait differences. We remain committed to meeting our responsibilities under the Taiwan Relations Act, including making sure that Taiwan has the ability to defend itself."

Ironically, this was treated as the trip’s most controversial moment, as the reactions to his comments were a combination of cynicism and hysteria. Apparently, some thought that there had been a change in American policy on Biden’s part and that he was actually giving China a "green light" to invade Taiwan.

Such commentary is ignorant and dangerous, because all Blinken did was publicly articulate the One China policy, a policy that has been in place for over four decades. This policy, as adopted by the United States in 1979, is the diplomatic principle where America recognizes that there is only one China, and that the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government of that China. America, however, only acknowledges Chinese claims that Taiwan is part of China, without recognizing China’s sovereignty over the island.

This is akin to a legal fiction in which the involved parties pretend that something that is essentially untrue is, in fact, true so that progress can be made on other matters. Taiwan is clearly a self-governing island despite not enjoying all the benefits of an independent country, like official status in the United Nations or the exchange of ambassadors with most countries. Nevertheless, the One China policy is valuable because it brokered a compromise between rival powers. While neither China nor America received everything they wanted from the policy, it did give them enough to prefer the status quo over conflict. America was allowed to keep unofficial relations with Taipei and could trade freely with the island, as well as sell them weapons that were considered defensive in nature. But because America officially recognized the People’s Republic of China as the legal sovereign of China, it made it clear to the world that it would not be adopting a "two China policy" or a "one China and one Taiwan" policy, both of which implied Taiwanese independence. This enabled both countries to move forward and cooperate on more important issues, like opening China’s economy to the world as well as countering the mutual Soviet threat.

This was shrewd diplomacy on America’s part, and produced a peace that exists to today.

Unfortunately, America is now undermining this policy, leading to an increase in aggressive posturing from Beijing, such as sending fighter jets into Taiwanese airspace or conducting mock invasions of Taiwan.

For instance, since taking office, Biden has publicly stated four times that America would defend Taiwan if invaded. At one point he even compared America’s relationship with Taiwan to its defense obligations to NATO members, claiming that "We have made – kept every commitment. We made a sacred commitment to Article 5 that if in fact anyone were to invade or take action against our NATO allies, we would respond. Same with Japan, same with South Korea, same with – Taiwan. It’s not even comparable to talk about that."

And although these statements were eventually walked back by his administration, we still have Senators like Rick Scott of Florida introducing legislation that would allow the president to use military force to defend Taiwan, as well as Senators Bob Menendez and Lindsey Graham introducing the Taiwan Policy Act of 2022 which aims to designate Taiwan as a Major Non-NATO Ally.

When you consider that America is also expanding its troop presence and increasing its military aid with Taiwan, and has congressional leadership of both parties purposely provoking China by meeting with Taiwan’s president, it should not be too difficult to see why Beijing has grown suspicious that America is attempting to chart a path for Taiwanese independence.

This situation will not end well if American revisionism continues. Since the United States normalized relations with China in 1979, it has avoided conflict because it understood that the final status of Taiwan was something China would resolve with its military if it felt it was running out of other options. Present-day China is well aware that Taiwan is drifting away, with a majority of its people no longer considering themselves Chinese, but their own separate people. It is also aware that Taiwan is growing in strategic value to America, given its dominance of the semiconductor chip market and its transformation into a liberal democracy. The more America appears to support this trend, the more likely China will feel compelled to consider a military solution as its only viable option.

America must ask itself if it is prepared for another proxy war with a nuclear power. We have already witnessed the economic and human consequences of what happens when America fails to pursue smart diplomacy for vague principles. The war for Ukraine has already cost America over 100 billion dollars and counting. Not to mention the human costs to Ukraine and Russia, where the estimated casualties are over 350 thousand. Can America afford to repeat this mistake in Taiwan, where the consequences of war are expected to reach deeper into American society? It should be obvious that it cannot, so instead of antagonizing China over the status of Taiwan, America should seek to preserve the status quo, which begins with publicly reminding the world that there is only one China.

Brian Clark is a foreign policy analyst with a research interest in American Grand Strategy. He has been published in The National Interest, 19fortyfive.com, and The American Conservative.