Follow us on social


House passes pro-Taiwan measures that are sure to look anti-China to Beijing

Though it carries some positive elements, TERA still contains harmful items leftover from the controversial Taiwan Policy Act.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific

The House today passed the Taiwan Enhanced Resiliency Act (TERA, formerly the Taiwan Policy Act) as part of the mammoth (4,408 pages) National Defense Authorization Act. 

TERA has some positive elements, including much needed efforts to get Taiwan to significantly increase its defense capabilities. Some of the most  negative measures in the original bill were also left out, including a set of highly provocative “findings” that defined Taiwan as a critical strategic asset for the United States.

Unfortunately, however, TERA as passed still contains elements that reinforce the existing one-sided and almost purely militaristic approach to the Taiwan problem. There is no recognition of the highly negative, interactive U.S.-China dynamic over Taiwan (and relations in general) that is moving us steadily toward conflict.

For example, to read TERA, you would never know that many of China’s most troubling actions are at least in part motivated by Washington’s steady erosion of the credibility of its One China policy. 

Instead, there are provisions that move the U.S. closer to establishing an official relationship with Taiwan. There is no longer a clear line in only supporting Taiwan’s entrance into international organizations that do not require statehood, for example. The legislation also endorses recent U.S. efforts to discourage nations from switching their diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China. This is an absurd policy given the fact that the United States has itself made such a switch. The U.S. steered well clear of all such behavior in the past, but apparently no longer.

In addition, despite legislators having removed the unnecessarily provocative “findings” from the act, co-Author Sen. Bob Mendendez (D-N.J.), in his introduction to the legislation, describes Taiwan as the “beating heart” to the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy. This reinforces the highly dangerous notion that keeping Taiwan separate from China under any conditions is a strategic necessity for the United States. 

Such a stance, if clearly reflected in Washington policy, would put us more, not less, firmly on the path to conflict with China over Taiwan. This is because no amount of U.S. military deterrence and close relations with Taiwan will deter today’s much stronger China from resorting to war if it concludes that America is actively seeking to permanently separate Taiwan from China. 

A policy of opposition to even peaceful unification is diametrically opposed to the One China policy (which accepts such the possibility of peaceful unification, and would thus give Beijing the incentive to entirely abandon its long-standing preference for peaceful unification).

In short, while likely serving to significantly augment Taiwan’s defense capabilities and pushing back against Chinese pressure and influence, the TERA reinforces much of the dangerous political elements of U.S Taiwan policy. In doing so, it will not appreciably reduce the possibility of a war with China over Taiwan. 

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi attends a meeting with Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen at the presidential office in Taipei, Taiwan August 3, 2022. Taiwan Presidential Office/Handout via REUTERS ATTENTION EDITORS - THIS IMAGE WAS PROVIDED BY A THIRD PARTY. NO RESALES. NO ARCHIVES.
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
US flouts international law with Pacific military claims
The aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN 71) transits the Pacific Ocean Jan. 25, 2020. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Alexander Williams)

US flouts international law with Pacific military claims


In defiance of international norms and rules, U.S. officials are laying claim to the large oceanic area in the central Pacific Ocean that is home to the compact states.

Now that they are renewing the economic provisions of the compacts of free association with Palau, the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia, U.S. officials are insisting that the compacts provide the United States with exclusive control over an area of the central Pacific Ocean that is comparable in size to the United States.

keep readingShow less
Not leaving empty handed: Zelensky gets his ATACMs
President Joe Biden and First Lady Dr. Jill Biden greet President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Mrs. Olena Zelenska of Ukraine at the South Portico of the White House. (Photo by Allison Bailey/NurPhoto)

Not leaving empty handed: Zelensky gets his ATACMs


So it looks like Ukrainian President Zelensky did not leave Washington empty handed this week after all. According to reports this afternoon, the Biden administration has relented and will transfer long range ATACMs, long considered too escalatory for the conflict, to Ukraine in the “upcoming weeks,” according to POLITICO.

The ATACMs variant that the U.S. is reportedly considering, according to the Washington Post (which, unlike POLITICO says the administration is "nearing an announcement") uses controversial cluster munitions, another old "red line" for the administration in this war, instead of a single warhead. This is not exactly what the Ukrainians had hoped for.

keep readingShow less
Wall Street Journal

Editorial credit: monticello /

WSJ conceals Saudi funding of pro-Saudi nuke deal source


The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday that “Israeli officials are quietly working with the Biden administration on a polarizing proposal to set up a U.S.-run uranium-enrichment operation in Saudi Arabia as part of a complex three-way deal to establish official diplomatic relations between the two Middle Eastern countries,” according to U.S. and Israeli officials.

The article, authored by Dion Nissenbaum and Dov Lieber, largely showcases Israeli opposition to the deal. Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a group whose mission includes providing “education to enhance Israel’s image in North America…” was quoted opposing a uranium enrichment program on Saudi soil. He warned that “we’re one bullet away from a disaster in Saudi Arabia,” adding, “What happens if, God forbid, a radical Islamist leader takes control?”

keep readingShow less

Ukraine War Crisis