Is Taiwan Strategy No Longer Ambiguous? Biden's new statement sparks heated debate
U.S. President Joe Biden said during a visit to Japan on Monday (May 23) that if Taiwan is attacked, the United States will intervene militarily to defend Taiwan. Biden's remarks immediately attracted attention, but the White House immediately clarified that Biden's remarks did not mean that the United States would change its policy toward Taiwan.
This is at least the third time in the past year that Biden has made it clear that the United States will defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion. Western observers on Twitter generally believe that this time, no matter how the White House "corrects" Biden's claims, the US "strategic ambiguity" on Taiwan can be seen as over.
Politico China correspondent Phelim Kine wrote: "No matter how the White House and NSC staff take back (Biden's words), this marks the official end of the concept of "strategic ambiguity." If China attacks Taiwan, Biden is very It made it clear that it would automatically be an American war."
Richard N. Haass, president of the American Council on Foreign Relations, endorsed this, saying: "Considering China's military expansion, this is absolutely true. The goal now must be to narrow U.S. commitments and U.S./ally The gap between capabilities."
Successive U.S. administrations have always pursued a policy of strategic ambiguity over whether they would use military force to protect Taiwan's security.
But President Biden and the White House have repeatedly sent inconsistent signals on the Taiwan issue. In August and October last year, Biden was asked on different occasions whether he would provide protection in the event of a military invasion of Taiwan by China, and he answered in the affirmative. But the White House clarified every time after Biden's speech, saying that the president's remarks did not represent a change in U.S. policy toward Taiwan.
In the opinion of some US analysts, the inconsistent signals from Biden and the White House are not conducive to preventing China from using force against Taiwan.
Bonnie Glaser, director of the Asia Program at the German Marshall Fund in the United States, wrote: "The Biden administration should have a senior official come forward to deliver a comprehensive speech on U.S. policy toward Taiwan. Confusion and misstatement are more likely to weaken rather than enhance deterrence."
James Millward, a historian of China and Central Asia, asked: "Maybe these are not slips of the tongue, but tactics? The president's remarks clearly went beyond policy. The aide issued a statement saying he was just restating policy."
He believes it will only bring "more ambiguity" to "strategic ambiguity".
China watchers generally believe that no matter how the White House clarifies its Taiwan policy, the Chinese tend to believe that the "strategic ambiguity" in the United States is over.
China expert Bill Bishop wrote: "How many times has the White House tried to clear up Biden's 'slip of the tongue' about the U.S. defending Taiwan? Four? Xi Jinping, you would think the US would defend [Taiwan]. The 'strategic ambiguity' looks over.”
Jarome Taylor, director of AFP's Hong Kong/Taiwan/Macau branch, agreed: "Even if the White House once again says there is no change in policy, you can understand why China might believe the 'strategic ambiguity' is over."
Bryce C. Barros, an analyst at the German Marshall Fund in the United States, concluded: "There has been a lot of discussion about whether America's strategic ambiguity is dead or alive. But one thing that doesn't surprise me is that Beijing of officials must interpret the president's comments as strategic clarity."
