US should be clear about Taiwan

Discord and confusion within the White House over Taiwan is unfortunate at a time when China is doubling down on its belligerence towards the democratic island state. Yet that is what emerged following Joe Biden’s unambiguous response last Thursday when asked by CNN whether the US would “come to Taiwan’s defence” if China attacked. “Yes, we have a commitment to do that,” the President said.

The White House media office lost little time in walking back Mr Biden’s explicit statement, apparently regarding it as diverging too far from the longstanding US policy on Taiwan of “strategic ambiguity”, promulgated in the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act. The Act pledges US help to Taiwan to defend itself but does not include a NATO-like commitment by Washington to go to war to defend it. US policy on China “has not changed”, the media office insisted. US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin and State Department spokesman Ned Price used similar language to reassure Beijing.

It may be that Mr Biden did go beyond the strict limitations of the Taiwan Relations Act in effectively pledging to go to war to defend Taiwan. Biden critics have implied that he did not understand what he was saying, even though, as a young senator from Delaware in 1979, he voted for the Act.

Many others believe he was on the right track in making an explicit commitment of strategic clarity, aimed at ensuring Beijing does not miscalculate and invade Taiwan. His statement followed another he made in August after the ignominious US withdrawal from Afghanistan, which left many allies wondering how much they could rely on the US. “We will respond,” he said, if there was any action against a NATO ally, adding, “same with Japan, same with South Korea, same with Taiwan”. In each instance, the US’s treaty obligations are different. But at a time when reports indicate China, in addition to other acts of militaristic aggression, has embarked on a hypersonic arms race against the US, Washington needs to be clear about the consequences of China attacking Taiwan.

Reports of China and Russia, as well as the US, building weapons that can reach speeds between Mach 5, five times the speed of sound, and Mach 27, equivalent to 32,000kmh, are alarming. As Richard Haass, president of the US Council on Foreign Relations, says, “ambiguity” no longer fits the situation facing Taiwan: “It’s time to change from strategic ambiguity to strategic clarity.” Mr Biden should bear that in mind at his summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping later in the year. The Chinese threat to prosperous, staunchly democratic Taiwan is real.