US cleans up Biden's 'commitment' to defend Taiwan from Chinese invasion
The Biden administration is again playing cleanup after President Joe Biden said the U.S. would come to Taiwan's defense in the event of an invasion by mainland China -- despite decades of policy that leaves that an open question.
His comment prompted a stern warning from the People's Republic of China, which considers the self-governing island a breakaway province, especially since Biden has made it twice now in the last couple of months.
That's led to speculation that Biden may be pushing the boundaries of "strategic ambiguity," the longstanding U.S. policy that leaves unanswered whether and how the U.S. would intervene in a conflict across the Taiwan Strait. In recent months, as China has escalated its incursions into Taiwan's air defense zone and ramped up its rhetoric about reunion, some China hawks in Washington have called for an end to the policy.
But the White House, the State Department, and the Pentagon all said Friday there was no change in U.S. policy despite Biden's answer during a CNN town hall.
"There has been no shift," White House press secretary Jen Psaki told reporters. "The president was not announcing any change in our policy, nor has he made a decision to change our policy. There is no change in our policy."
Speaking at NATO headquarters, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said the U.S. would continue to provide Taiwan "the sorts of capabilities that it needs to defend itself." But he dismissed questions about a Chinese attack as a "hypothetical."
State Department spokesperson Ned Price went the further, telling reporters, "We have been nothing but clear when it comes to where we stand."
But Biden has been anything but clear. In August, the president told ABC News's George Stephanopoulos that the U.S. had a commitment to act "if in fact anyone were to invade or take action against NATO," Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. While that's true of the first three -- all treaty allies of the United States -- it isn't of Taiwan.
Instead, since a 1979 agreement, the U.S. has acknowledged the People's Republic of China as the sole legal government of China, including its position that Taiwan is part of China -- what's known as the "One China" policy. But under that agreement, the U.S. has maintained unofficial relations with Taiwan's government, which is defined by a 1979 law that then-senator Biden voted for. The law commits the U.S. "to assist Taiwan in maintaining its defensive capability," to oppose any one-sided changes in the status quo and to support a peaceful resolution to their differences, according to the State Department.
But Biden contradicted that again on Thursday, telling CNN's Anderson Cooper that he would have the U.S. military come to Taiwan's defense.
"If China attacked?" Cooper followed up -- and Biden responded, "Yes, we have a commitment to do that."
In response, China's Foreign Ministry issued its own warning about its "determination and ability to defend national sovereignty and territorial integrity."
"We urge the U.S. to strictly abide by the one-China principle and the three Sino-U.S. joint communiques, be cautious in its words and deeds on the Taiwan issue, and refrain from sending any false signals to the 'Taiwan independence' separatist forces -- or it will seriously damage to Sino-U.S. relations and peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait," said Wang Wenbin during a briefing Friday.
Some China hawks in the U.S. have been urging the administration to end "strategic ambiguity" and clearly commit to Taiwan's defense, arguing China's increasing pressure on the island is a signal it is preparing to retake it by force and that a clear U.S. commitment would deter that.
But Biden's own pick for U.S. ambassador to China disagreed, just one day prior to the president's comments. During his Senate confirmation hearing Wednesday, retired career ambassador Nick Burns called for strengthening the U.S. military position in the region and selling weapons to Taiwan to make it a "tough nut to crack."
When asked about ending "strategic ambiguity," however, Burns said, "My own view, and this is also the view ... more importantly of the Biden administration, is that the smartest and effective way for us to help deter aggressive actions by [China] across the Taiwan Strait will be to stay with a policy that's been in place."
It's not the first time an American president has had to walk back comments about Taiwan's defense. In 2001, shortly after he took office, George W. Bush told ABC News's Charlie Gibson he would also come to Taiwan's defense.
"With the full force of the American military?" asked Gibson. Bush responded: "Whatever it took to help Taiwan defend herself."
Biden, then the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, blasted Bush in an editorial, writing, "In this case, his inattention to detail has damaged U.S. credibility with our allies and sown confusion throughout the Pacific Rim."
"Words matter, in diplomacy and in law," Biden added.
ABC News's Karson Yiu contributed to this report from Hong Kong and Ben Gittleson from the White House.
When, if ever, will our President come to realize he isn't dealing with Corn Pop anymore?
Biden has to talk tough; because he has zero credibility on the world stage after Afghanistan. Nobody believes him; especially when his handlers walk back every last damn thing he says.
Even Biden thinks of himself as a threat to the US by his own damn words.
What do you bet that that's the last Town Hall meeting that Biden ever attends?
He'll probably do more of them on CNN or MSNBC so as to ensure another softball-throwing session.
" the longstanding U.S. policy that leaves unanswered whether and how the U.S. would intervene in a conflict across the Taiwan Strait.
That was the liberal "do-gooder' Jimmy Carter, who officially recognized the brutal Communist regime on mainland China as the one & only China. In the meantime he pledged to supply Taiwan militarily (somewhat), while leaving the enormous question of whether we would defend Taiwan up in the air.
Does anyone really think we will defend the free nation of Taiwan, especially with another weak willed lefty in the White House?
The window for the CCP to act is while this cognitive mess is still in the White House, surrounded by progressives.
If a situation comes to pass where defending Taiwan is an option, we shall see. In the meantime every administration, including Carter's has sent armaments to Taiwan which has also used it's technological and manufacturing prowess to develop and construct its own. Taiwan is being turned into a fortress. That the mainland tests Taiwan's advancing capabilities is normal what with Taiwan's recent development of slyly named offensive/defensive long range missiles capable of striking deeply into mainland China.
Some on this site refer to Taiwan as a free and democratic nation, but it has only become one, and slowly at that since 1987 ... as has been seen since then, many a nation has slipped the bonds of totalitarianism only to revert to them.
As they say in Brooklyn...."Ya right!"
As 'they' say in Manhattan ... "Only a fool predicts the future!"
The neccessay cleanups every time he opens his mouth are alarming. AS the Editorial board of the Wall Street Journal makes clear:
"Even with a friendly audience and softball questions, Mr. Biden’s performance revealed why so many Americans are losing confidence in his Presidency. One big problem is that Mr. Biden doesn't seem to know what he's talking about...
We take no pleasure in pointing this out, since the U.S. needs a President who can handle the strains of the job. Mr. Biden was never Demosthenes, and all Presidents stumble in speech. But Mr. Biden’s frequent public confusion about the major issues of the day is a reason for the growing public concern."
George W Bush, who does speak like Demosthenes compared to Biden, must wonder why he was attacked mercilessly by the same press who protects Biden.
I figured what he said on that issue was too good to be true.
We don’t even officially recognize Taiwan as an independent country, so it’s hard to imagine going to war to protect them.
I mean, that sucks. I think we should recognize and protect them, along with the rest of the civilized world, but Taiwan itself makes that difficult. There are factions within Taiwan (the pan-Blues, I think) who think they are the proper government not only of Taiwan, but of mainland China, as well. The pan-Greens want to be a separate, independent Taiwan.
So, until Taiwan can come together and decide who they think they are, it’s probably not reasonable to expect the rest of the world to come running to their defense.
So Biden is being criticized because he isn't being more of a hawk about Taiwan - already considered a pussy because he wanted to end a useless unproductive 20-year war that no other POTUS had the guts to do and bring Americans back home rather than more and more caskets. Tsk Tsk. What is it about his critics that makes me think of Arlo Guthrie's song "Alice's Restaurant"?
Wait a sec. I was wrong. It WASN'T a useless unproductive war. It was "The American Way".
It kept the arms manufacturers busy and its workers employed and kept the American economy alive and well. Now I understand why America has been providing more and more arms to Taiwan, and military "advisors" to Taiwan.
Because we are so much safer now from Biden's actions.
Taliban back in charge. ISIS/ISIL, Al Qaeda, and ISIS-K all operating freely in Afghanistan. With the added bonus of Biden abandoning US citizens, green card holders, and special VISA holders to their tender mercies.
The second Biden withdrew our terror threat level went up.
No one was arguing that it wasn't time to leave Afghanistan; but Biden fucked everything up. It is what he does best.
Must be easy to criticize coming from a country that has a military that could be drowned in a bathtub. Of course Canada doesn't need one as it has the US to protect it.
Canada has one tenth the population of the USA, and doesn't consider itself "The World's Policeman" and its economy doesn't need arms manufacturing to keep it viable so no reason to go around starting wars. Besides, I recall a poem by a Canadian poet (and can no longer find the poem or the poet) that had a line in it: "And leave our defence to the Yankees."
Don't worry we can send several million illegals Canadas way. That will bolster the flagging population.
As for defense- with Biden in charge Canada should be quaking in it's boots. If he can abandon US citizens; then he can abandon anyone.
LOL. I'm shaking in my boots.
I know of absolutely no one who considered ending the war in Afghanistan a bad thing, or anyone who criticized Biden for it.
Now, Biden DID face some well-deserved criticism for the mess that was our withdrawal from there.
Personally, even though it could have used better planning, I think the "mess" was inevitable. Much of it was probably caused by the Taliban, and even if a year was spent planning that would not differ.
It always had the potential to be messy. I know a lot of folks who think if we had just got people out before we evacuated the military, it would have been rather helpful. Doesn't that just seem to be a rather obvious plan?
Yes, you're right.
Put that shit into policy so we all know where the US stands.
Shouldn't the President set policy?
Or is someone else directing Biden?
Why are his own people having to walk back his statements?
Doesn't the President even know what his own policies are?