Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the US House of Representatives, is rumoured to be planning a trip to Taiwan, which has infuriated China and thrown the White House into a major geopolitical quandary. It would be the first visit by such a senior U.S. official to the country in 25 years, and it would take place at a time when Sino-American ties are at their lowest point in decades due to rising Chinese assertiveness and increasing worries that China may try to annex the self-governing island by force. Fearing a catastrophic escalation in an already delicate situation, an enraged Chinese government has threatened “resolute and strong measures” if the trip goes ahead.
Pelosi has spent more than three decades in the Congress and has been a vocal opponent of China. In 1989, she raised a flag in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square to honour the victims of the violent crackdown on pro-democracy protesters. She is also not the first House speaker to travel to the self-governing island.
Republican Newt Gingrich, who was Speaker of the House at the time, travelled to Taipei in March 1997 after making a trip to Beijing where he openly cautioned the Chinese authorities, notably former President Jiang Zemin, that the US would support Taiwan if it were attacked.
At a time when the world is witnessing great power competition and the emergence of new theatres of conflict, there are rumours of a potential million-dollar arms sale from the US to Taiwan under the military-technical assistance programme. The world is witnessing an increase in US Naval activity in China’s backyard, and a stronger posturing by Taiwan, with the president attending their annual military drills for the first time. It is no surprise that Pelosi’s intended trip to Taiwan has put her in the spotlight and invited caustic criticism from Beijing.
TO GO OR NOT TO GO
The US has a long-standing policy of being purposefully evasive about whether it would defend Taiwan if China invaded. This is intended to dissuade the mainland from acting, without the US actually committing itself to war. This policy of ‘strategic ambiguity’ has been the key strategy adopted by Washington since the rapprochement began in US-China relations with American President Richard Nixon’s 1972 visit to the mainland and subsequent dilution of Washington’s relations with Taiwan.
The US Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act, promising Taiwan arms of “a defensive character,” and stating that any attempt to integrate Taiwan through force would be seen as a threat to peace and security of the pacific area and of grave concern. This has allowed the US to arm the island sufficiently to defend itself in the event of a Chinese attack without explicitly declaring that it will use force to defend Taiwan.
Moreover, Washington committed to gradually reducing its armament deliveries to Taiwan with the aim of eventually ending them totally in a 1982 deal with Beijing known as one of the “Three Communiques”. However, that same year, in response to Taiwan’s request for assurances regarding the US position on cross-strait relations, Washington formally agreed to six key points, known as the “Six Assurances”, including that it would not set a specific deadline to end all arms sales to Taiwan, effectively adding to the confusion.
The policy of strategic ambiguity has fared well for the United States and has allowed them to maneuver easily in the grey space they have tactfully created. However, Nancy Pelosi’s proposed trip could jeopardize this arrangement. As a result of this, deep discrepancies within the U.S. strategy toward the island have come to light. It is difficult to ignore the current indications that the President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the U.S. Military are not working in tandem.
Those in support of Pelosi, like Retired Admiral Scott Swift, consider the policy of strategic ambiguity dangerous in geopolitics as it could lead to misunderstandings and miscalculations. According to Richard Haass, Head of the Council on Foreign Relations, waiting for China to make a move on Taiwan before deciding whether to intervene is a recipe for disaster as ambiguity is now unlikely to preserve the status quo.
Gingrich came out in support of Pelosi on Twitter and questioned the US military’s opposition. Other Republicans, including former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, are also encouraging Pelosi to go ahead. Pompeo even offered to accompany her.
Joe Biden and his closest advisers, however, have made it clear that they are opposed to Pelosi, a fellow Democrat, travelling to Taiwan. According to their evaluation, the trip is not worth the danger, while the US is preoccupied with the war in Ukraine. They claimed that a trip to Taiwan would be a pointless provocation and little more than a gesture, which China would subsequently use for its own gain.
IN A BIND
Nevertheless, it is clear that the United States is currently in a bind. Pelosi’s absence would give the impression that Washington is allowing China to set restrictions on the type of interaction the United States has with Taiwan. Beijing already regards the United States as a superpower in decline, and such a move would further solidify these claims. It will give China the validation that its assertive strategic posturing in the region is bearing fruit. However, if Pelosi disregards Beijing’s warnings and decides to go, it might start a catastrophic new Taiwan crisis that could have significant repercussions for not only Taiwan but for the entire region.
At this point, a US decision to backtrack, will deter future high-level visits to Taiwan not only from Washington, but also other countries. Further worsening of cross-strait relations, without US support, could hamper Taiwan’s already limited economic and political relations with the rest of the world.
Since the visit comes ahead of the Chinese Communist Party’s National Congress and coincides with the anniversary of the founding of the People’s Liberation Army, much is at stake for Chinese leader Xi Jinping. Analysts anticipate harsher rhetoric with undercurrents of military threats from him since he cannot afford to appear weak.
LOSS OF BALANCE?
The US has carefully balanced its approach to the cross-strait problem so far, giving itself more leeway in how it approaches Beijing and Taipei, while reaping the benefits of relations with both. However, Pelosi’s visit might substantially alter these ties. For other nations in the area, like Japan and even India, that have benefited from the solid, growing relations between Washington and Taipei, any shift in the status quo poses a significant set of obstacles.
While the presumption that the current development is more symbolism than substance cannot be ruled out, a mutual escalation of tensions between US and China poses unfathomable dangers for the rest of the world, and thus, has the world cautiously watching as the developments unfold.
Pelosi’s conviction that it is important for the US to show support for Taiwan is admirable, but it is crucial to carefully consider the consequences of her decision.
Taiwan has significant bipartisan support in the Congress, but it is still unclear how much assistance the United States plans to offer Taiwan in the event that cross-strait tensions worsen as a result of Pelosi’s visit.
Esha Banerji specialises in Defence and Strategic Studies at the Savitribai Phule Pune University. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent the stand of this publication.
Read all the Latest News and Breaking News here
Comments
0 comment