Before his tenure ends on Wednesday, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Jan. 9 gave Taiwan another diplomatic gift by lifting the restrictions on contacts between senior US government officials and their Taiwanese counterparts. The effect on the relationship between Taiwan, China and the US remains to be seen.
Pompeo is the general of US President Donald Trump’s opposition to China. Last year, Pompeo gave a speech on US China policy titled “Communist China and the Free World’s Future” at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, calling on the world’s democracies to work together to restrain the rise of China, as its communist ideology is in contrast to Western democratic values. In a sense, his speech was a declaration of a new cold war.
The US Department of State’s announcements are significant. The cancelation of the self-imposed restrictions on contacts between the two nation’s governments means that the Taiwanese president, vice president, premier, foreign and defense ministers might all have the chance to visit Washington. This would raise the level of exchanges between US and Taiwanese officials.
The question is why Pompeo made the announcement about two weeks before leaving office.
In the past, the US restricted its officials from having contacts with Taiwanese officials whose position symbolize Taiwanese sovereignty. Pompeo claimed that the restrictions had been aimed to pacify Beijing, as they are based on the “one China” policy the US imposed when establishing diplomatic ties with the People’s Republic of China (PRC), allowing for only unofficial ties with Taiwan based on the US’ Taiwan Relations Act.
However, the US Congress in 2018 passed the Taiwan Travel Act, expressing the hope that the US government would boost the level of exchanges with Taiwan.
If Pompeo intended to fulfill the Taiwan Travel Act, he could have done so a year or two earlier. To be blunt, he might have worried that lifting the restrictions would affect US-China relations.
The symbolism far outweighs the meaning of the move made in his last few days in office. Pompeo is trying to leave a legacy without having to take responsibility.
Whether US president-elect Joe Biden’s administration will follow up on the move is beyond Pompeo’s control. If actions taken by the new administration lead to strong protest on the part of Beijing, and further deterioration of US-China relations, Pompeo will not have to deal with the problem.
Trump and his staff seem to have the same idea. Take, for example, the various sanctions on Chinese companies: They were imposed to restrict future US-China relations. On the one hand, the sanctions are seen as a consequence of the US-China trade dispute, but on the other, they narrow the options for the Biden administration in dealing with Beijing.
Whether the Biden administration will follow up on Pompeo’s move is uncertain. Answering questions from the media about the move, a member of Biden’s transition team said that the president-elect would fully abide by the Taiwan Relations Act and the “one China” policy. That stance is in line with that of previous US administrations, and it does not comment on the dropped restrictions.
The Biden administration will obviously not want to be tied by the Trump administration’s farewell gifts. How Washington handles its relations with China and Taiwan will be decided based on what the situation looks like after Biden’s inauguration on Wednesday.
Wang Kao-cheng is a professor in the Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies at Tamkang University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath