Follow us on social

google cta
The best course for Biden is to help Taiwan help itself

The best course for Biden is to help Taiwan help itself

The Trump's administration has left the new White House at a crossroads: keep poking Beijing or bring balance back to the situation.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

The United States has been making serious moves toward upending a balance between its support of Taiwan and its fragile relations with China — and it could lead to places Washington is not necessarily prepared to go.

In his last days in office, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced “self-imposed” limitations on diplomatic contact with Taiwan were null and void, allowing for deeper and more direct communication between American and Taiwanese officials. This decision was the culmination of the Trump administration’s abandonment of a decades’ long balance with China, a status quo that was first breached when Donald Trump received a congratulatory call from Taiwan’s president Tsai Ing-wen after the 2016 election. The phone call marked the first contact between a leader of Taiwan and an incoming U.S. president in almost 40 years. 

In those four years, the administration effectively abandoned the “One China” policy, the recognition since 1979 that the communist People’s Republic of China (PRC) is the official Chinese government, rather than the Republic of China (ROC), Taiwan’s official name — and that there is only one sovereign state of “China,” an implicit repudiation of Taiwanese independence.

Right now, Biden has two paths: reverse course and ratchet down the Trump administration’s new policy toward Taiwan, or continue in his predecessor’s path by implicitly promoting Taipei’s independence and engaging in deeper bilateral relations with the ROC. The former option, while potentially politically troublesome for Biden, could deescalate U.S.-China tensions. The latter, while scoring Biden political points at home, especially with China hawks, would certainly intensify the growing rift between Washington and Beijing, leading the United States down a dangerous path that could end in war with a nuclear power.

Should Biden choose to further ties with Taipei, he’ll be praised for supporting democracy and self-determination and standing up to the communist regime in Beijing. It’s clear from the recent cabinet confirmation hearings that both Congress and the new administration favors a tough stance on China. However, Beijing will respond with increased animosity toward both Taipei and Washington. Chinese sanctions on U.S. officials over “nasty behavior” on the Taiwan issue are just the latest in a series of back-and-forth sanctions between Washington and Beijing. Trump’s tariffs throughout his presidency set off a trade war that hurt both the American and Chinese economies. 

On the military side, the PRC and Taiwan have both increased military exercises in the region, and the United States has started training Taiwanese military forces for the first time since 1979 (the U.S. military denied those reports back in November).

Most recently, China sent warplanes into the Taiwan Strait, to which Biden’s new State Department responded by reaffirming its support for Taiwan. 

If this pattern of escalation did lead to a Chinese invasion, the United States cannot expect it would win in a war over Taiwan. War game simulations conducted by officials from the Pentagon and the RAND Corporation show the United States losing in such a situation, and quite badly, according to David A. Ochmanek, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for force development and current defense analyst at Rand. “It's had its ass handed to it for years,” he said, of the American side. Ochmanek revealed that for years, the U.S. team “has been in shock because they didn't realize how badly off they were in a confrontation with China.”

The best option for the American people is for the Biden administration to reaffirm strategic ambiguity toward Taiwan. If Biden chooses this course, a bipartisan attack from China hawks may ensue, accusing Biden of weakness on the issue and appeasement of the authoritarian PRC regime. This backlash would be especially strong given increasing American outrage over mass arrests in Hong Kong, and the recent U.S. declaration of Chinese actions against Uyghurs as genocide. Many might call for a stronger pledge to Taiwan to signal America’s commitment to protecting civil society and human rights, and to express an overall dissatisfaction with the PRC. Nevertheless, Biden has to play the long game here. 

The 1979 Taiwan Relations Act requires America to sell Taiwan defensive weapons and to consider any measures to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means “a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific.” Washington should continue to sell defensive arms to Taipei — something Beijing won’t like, but won’t fundamentally undermine U.S.-China relations. The United States should also encourage Taiwan to build up its own defenses to deter and protect against Chinese aggression. 

At the same time, Washington should maintain its longstanding recognition of the “One China” policy and avoid any actions that might suggest the United States would take an explicit stance on Taiwanese sovereignty, especially given the uncertainty of whether the United States could decisively defeat a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. 


Jinhua exercise at the Port of Taipei on June 29, 2011 in Bali, Taipei, Taiwan. (Shutterstock/ Carlos Huang)|The 2011 Jinhua exercise at the Port of Taipei on June 29,2011 in Bali,Taipei,Taiwan. (Shutterstock/Carlos Huang)
google cta
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
nuclear weapons
Top image credit: rawf8 via shutterstock.com

What will happen when there are no guardrails on nuclear weapons?

Global Crises

The New START Treaty — the last arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia — is set to expire next week, unless President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin make a last minute decision to renew it. Letting the treaty expire would increase the risk of nuclear conflict and open the door to an accelerated nuclear arms race. A coalition of arms control and disarmament groups is pushing Congress and the president to pledge to continue to observe the New START limits on deployed, strategic nuclear weapons by the US and Russia.

New START matters. The treaty, which entered into force on February 5, 2011 after a successful effort by the Obama administration to win over enough Republican senators to achieve the required two-thirds majority to ratify the deal, capped deployed warheads to 1,550 for each side, and established verification procedures to ensure that both sides abided by the pact. New START was far from perfect, but it did put much needed guardrails on nuclear development that reduced the prospect of an all-out arms race.

keep readingShow less
Trump Hegseth Rubio
Top image credit: President Donald Trump, joined by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, announces plans for a “Golden Fleet” of new U.S. Navy battleships, Monday, December 22, 2025, at the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump's realist defense strategy with interventionist asterisks

Washington Politics

The Trump administration has released its National Defense Strategy, a document that in many ways marks a sharp break from the interventionist orthodoxies of the past 35 years, but possesses clear militaristic impulses in its own right.

Rhetorically quite compatible with realism and restraint, the report envisages a more focused U.S. grand strategy, shedding force posture dominance in all major theaters for a more concentrated role in the Western Hemisphere and Indo-Pacific. At the same time however, it retains a rather status quo Republican view of the Middle East, painting Iran as an intransigent aggressor and Israel as a model ally. Its muscular approach to the Western Hemisphere also may lend itself to the very interventionism that the report ostensibly opposes.

keep readingShow less
Alternative vs. legacy media
Top photo credit: Gemini AI

Ding dong the legacy media and its slavish war reporting is dead

Media

In a major development that must be frustrating to an establishment trying to sell their policies to an increasingly skeptical public, the rising popularity of independent media has made it impossible to create broad consensus for corporate-compliant narratives, and to casually denigrate, or even censor, those who disagree.

It’s been a long road.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.