There is no way of knowing whether Russian President Vladimir Putin has spent the past decade preparing for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but it is known that US President Joe Biden warned that the Ukrainian crisis was around the corner and that he was ready for a meeting with Putin in what would have been a last-ditch effort at diplomacy over the Ukraine tensions.
Biden issued a stark warning, vowing that it would be “a disaster for Russia” if it invaded Ukraine. However, when Washington started sounding the alarm about Russia’s impending attack, Europeans were in no mood to listen, with one EU diplomat even describing Biden’s warning as “warmongering.”
The US got the intelligence right, and Biden was certainly not making a false claim. As early as December last year, the Biden administration authorized a US$200 million military assistance package for Ukraine.
In the months before the invasion, White House officials began working on a strategy to counter Putin. They made multiple trips to meet their European counterparts, while Biden made regular telephone calls to European leaders, sharing confidential information.
By engaging in negotiations and mediations, the US has formed a democratic defense alliance with its European partners. While Ukrainians’ fierce resistance has played a significant role in derailing the Kremlin’s invasion, the US’ crucial role in diplomacy cannot be ignored.
The US-led alliance has dealt a significant blow to Russia, making Putin admit that inflation and unemployment would rise in his country.
However, the fly in the ointment is China.
The New York Times reported that prior to the Beijing Winter Olympics in early February, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) met with Putin and asked him to delay the invasion until after the Games had finished.
Despite China’s vehement denial, there is sufficient evidence of China’s alignment with Russia.
On the opening day of the Olympics, the two powerful autocrats issued a joint statement, saying that “friendship between the two states has no limits, no forbidden areas of cooperation.”
They promised to stand with each other, to endorse each other’s respective territorial ambitions in Taiwan and Ukraine, and to collaborate against the West.
Another example came on the day before the invasion, when a Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson told a news conference that the US is responsible for the Ukraine tensions.
When the invasion had begun and the UN voted on a resolution to condemn Russia’s actions, China unsurprisingly abstained.
These events and their inherent logic shed light on the March 18 talks between Biden and Xi, regardless of the their interpretation by Chinese state media and pro-China media in Taiwan.
After the two-hour talks, which were initiated by Washington, the US and China released their respective statements.
The White House issued a terse readout saying that Russia would pay a steep price for its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine and reinforced Biden’s warning of serious consequences if China provided material aid to Putin’s war effort.
It ended with: “The President reiterated that US policy on Taiwan has not changed, and emphasized that the United States continues to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo.”
The Chinese readout selectively quoted Biden’s remarks, not mentioning one word of his warning, and accentuated that Biden “does not support ‘Taiwan independence.’”
The talks were not primarily about Taiwan, and it is obvious that Xi was using the opportunity to put words in Biden’s mouth to facilitate a bid for the extension to his own rule.
After the talks, international media unanimously pointed out that the US and China were “singing different tunes” and “coming up with their own interpretations.”
The odd thing was that a certain pro-China outlet in Taiwan used the readout issued by China’s Xinhua news agency and published a front page article under the headline: “Biden-Xi engaged in feverish talks of Taiwan, Biden: US does not support Taiwan independence.”
No fervent discussion happened in the first place, and the fact that the Taiwanese outlet used an even more tawdry title than Xinhua was contemptible.
Would Biden really say “no” to Taiwan independence?
On March 11, one week before the talks with Xi, Biden signed the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, which includes a ban on the use of any maps by the US Department of State and its foreign operations that “inaccurately” depict Taiwan as part of China.
The act stipulates that “none of the funds made available by this act should be used to create, procure, or display any map that inaccurately depicts the territory and social and economic system of Taiwan and the islands or island groups administered by Taiwan authorities.”
Consequently, any US map published by a state department-affiliated agency must mark Taiwan in a different color than China.
Asked about the US’ stance on Taiwan’s status in November last year following a telephone call with Xi, Biden said: “They have to decide — Taiwan, not us. We are not encouraging independence.”
In light of these events, is Biden really “against” Taiwan independence?
It is no surprise that Xinhua barks for the Chinese Communist Party, but it is a shame that pro-China media in Taiwan are doing the same.
Chin Heng-wei is a political commentator.
Translated by Rita Wang
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
After 37 US lawmakers wrote to express concern over legislators’ stalling of critical budgets, Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) pledged to make the Executive Yuan’s proposed NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.7 billion) special defense budget a top priority for legislative review. On Tuesday, it was finally listed on the legislator’s plenary agenda for Friday next week. The special defense budget was proposed by President William Lai’s (賴清德) administration in November last year to enhance the nation’s defense capabilities against external threats from China. However, the legislature, dominated by the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), repeatedly blocked its review. The
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) said on Monday that it would be announcing its mayoral nominees for New Taipei City, Yilan County and Chiayi City on March 11, after which it would begin talks with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) to field joint opposition candidates. The KMT would likely support Deputy Taipei Mayor Lee Shu-chuan (李四川) as its candidate for New Taipei City. The TPP is fielding its chairman, Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), for New Taipei City mayor, after Huang had officially announced his candidacy in December last year. Speaking in a radio program, Huang was asked whether he would join Lee’s
RSS