While corporate media has been preoccupied with coverage of Russia’s war in Ukraine over the past year, U.S. relations with China have deteriorated. The chill in diplomatic relations between Washington and Beijing has been accompanied by dangerous maneuvers involving U.S. and Chinese naval vessels and aircraft that each side blames the other for being “unnecessarily aggressive” and “provocative.”
Chinese officials have long condemned U.S. policy toward Taiwan, asserting there is only “one China,” with which it seeks eventual unification. The Biden administration angered the Chinese, by appearing to depart from the decades-long policy of “strategic ambiguity,” where the US is intentionally vague on how it would respond to any future Chinese attack on Taiwan.
After the U.S. military spotted what they described as a Chinese “spy balloon” in American airspace in February, Secretary of State Antony Blinken cancelled a planned visit to China for talks, but that trip has now been rescheduled for June 18. It is hoped that the resumption of diplomacy will help reduce tensions. Between The Lines’ Scott Harris spoke with Mel Gurtov, professor emeritus of political science at Oregon’s Portland State University and author of the book, “Engaging China: Rebuilding Sino-American Relations.” Here, he talks about the urgent need to reduce rising U.S.-China tensions in order to avert future conflict.
MICHAEL GURTOV: We tend to see Taiwan as separate from Beijing’s security interests. But that’s not correct, because we need to look at the world through Chinese eyes as well as our own. Strategic ambiguity has a pretty long history, about 45 years dating back to when the U.S. and China established formal diplomatic relations.
And from that time until now, it has actually served both sides pretty well. I mean, on one hand, for the United States, it has suggested that the United States might or might not come to Taiwan’s protection in the event of a Chinese attack. But it has stayed clear of making a formal statement on behalf of Taiwan’s defense because the U.S. knew, at least until recently, that to do so would be to run smack up against Chinese national interests.
And so we keep things or have been keeping things ambiguous. Meanwhile, on the Chinese side, they have always said going back to Mao’s time, that peaceful reunification would be the preferred way to bring about Taiwan’s unification with China. But on the other hand, they have never said that the use of force would not be used.
In fact, more recently, they have been beginning to say that they’re rethinking the whole policy of peaceful reunification. They are essentially responding to changes in American policy toward China that has essentially eroded the strategic ambiguity principle and especially with regard to the Republican right-wing, tried to replace it with strategic clarity. And that clarity is precisely the sort of thing which, if carried through on a number of fronts, political and military in particular, is going to result in war with China.
I mean, I have no doubt about that. And I think all my colleagues who are close observers of China would agree with that. For the right-wingers and unfortunately supported by many liberals in both houses of Congress, that clarity means that the United States would actually be quite willing to see Taiwan become an independent country, which violates one of the central principles that we have always subscribed to, namely that we believe in one China.
In fact, President Biden repeated that when he was with Xi Jinping in Bali. And so it would amount to accepting Taiwan and even advocating for it as an independent country. It would mean that the U.S. would be fully upgrading its diplomatic ties to Taiwan. It would mean that the U.S. would be pumping even more military aid than it already is, which is quite substantial, into Taiwan.
And in all those ways, it would turn the whole situation around in which Taiwan becomes an American protectorate. And, by the way, not necessarily to the liking of the folks on Taiwan themselves. But that’s where things are headed, especially if the Republican right-wing gets gets its way.
SCOTT HARRIS: What policy changes would you recommend the Biden administration undertake to ease tensions and improve relations that would benefit both countries?
MICHAEL GURTOV: The easiest thing to do would be to revert back to where we were in in the Obama years with regard to Taiwan. That is, to reaffirm strategic ambiguity and demonstrate it by reducing military aid except for purely defensive reasons to Taiwan, by not sending such high level people to to Taiwan. And significantly reducing the direct assistance that the United States gives to Taiwan in the form of military advisors and trainers.
All of these things were not part of U.S. policy in the Obama years and there’s no reason to have them now. But at the same time that we do that, we would also want China to agree to stop its air exercises that go over the median line between the mainland and Taiwan, or which go into Taiwan’s air defense zone.
In other words, stop harassment of Taiwan. I truly believe that a deal can be worked out that would essentially produce the status quo anti-Trump and would restore peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.
Visit Mel Gurtov’s website, In the Human Interest at melgurtov.com.
Listen to Scott Harris’ in-depth interview with Mel Gurtov, (17:52) and see more articles and opinion pieces in the Related Links section of this page.
For the best listening experience and to never miss an episode, subscribe to Between The Lines on your favorite podcast app or platform: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, Amazon Music, Tunein + Alexa, Castbox, Overcast, Podfriend, iHeartRadio, Castro, Pocket Casts, RSS Feed.
