Pompeo's Stone Kills Two Birds, Stirs Ripples in Taiwan Strait
By Chen Xi
China Times, November 14, 2020
Soon-to-step-down United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated in an exclusive radio interview that “Taiwan has not been a part of China” when referring to U.S. policy towards Taiwan. As shocking as his statement is, Pompeo added that this Taiwan policy dates back to the administration of President Ronald Regan, and that the U.S. arms sales are also “living up to the promises that have been made between China and the Taiwanese people.”
Secretary Pompeo’s statement that “Taiwan has not been a part of China” is in line with the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) proposition over the years. In response, the DPP administration responded: “The Republic of China is a sovereign country. It is not part of the People’s Republic of China, which is an indisputable fact as well as the current status quo.”
According to certain media reports, some Taiwanese high-ranking officials have responded quite low-key but optimistically. Pompeo’s statement might be slightly different from the traditional American diplomatic rhetoric, but in essence, the U.S. “One China” policy is not the same as China’s “One China” principle.
In contrast to DPP’s optimism, several American experts on China, including former American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) Chairman Richard Bush and former AIT Director Douglas Paal, have pointed out that the position of the United States government in the past half century has always been that “The U.S. recognizes that the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government of China and acknowledges China’s position that there is only one China, and Taiwan is part of China.” Pompeo’s misrepresentation of the U.S. “One China” policy which mixed different complex issues altogether, would only confuse the outside world, making his statement seemingly insignificant.
As Secretary of State, Pompeo would certainly know the line concerning U.S. policy towards China. He would also know that Reagan’s “Six Assurances” and the Three Communiques are the key factors that have maintained peace across the Taiwan Strait for many years. Thus, how can Pompeo’s twisted remarks be taken lightly?
Johan Galtung, founder of the Peace Research Institute of Oslo (PRIO), pointed out in his book The Fall of the American Empire that from 1890 to 2001, the United States carried out a total of 133 military interventions around the world. In these military interventions and aggressions, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has always played an important role. Pompeo, who has been in charge of the CIA for many years, is no stranger to America’s intervention into the internal affairs of other countries, coming between political parties, as well as military invasions. At such chaotic time with the disputes of U.S. election still going on, one couldn’t be too careful enough to think that perhaps Pompeo may be using familiar CIA tactics upon the relationship between the United States, mainland China, and Taiwan.
On the one hand, Secretary Pompeo expressed his unyielding loyalty to President Donald Trump, and on the other hand, his recent Taiwan policy statement that is inconsistent with historical facts is stirring up the most sensitive nerves on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. Pompeo’s intention is dishonorable as he plans to kill two birds with one stone. More like “several birds”, as will be discussed below.
First, American lobbying politics and political contributions from large companies are important factors that maintain the presidential system and Congress. In the meantime, if the situation across the Taiwan Strait intensifies, then U.S. arms sales to Taiwan may become even more legitimate. Therefore, if Secretary Pompeo’s speech can cause a new wave of tension, then the United States could then legitimately continue to sell military weapons to Taiwan. Not only would this please the benefactors of the election period, this could also pave Pompeo’s future paths.
Second, President Trump’s defeat is a foregone conclusion, and what remains is an America riddled with holes. Secretary Pompeo’s remarks broke the tradition of bipartisan foreign policies in the United States, heightened the antagonism between the two parties, and also increased the conflict between China and the United States, which would create more chaos and problems for the incoming administration of Joe Biden.
Third, it may seem that the looming alliance between Taiwan and the United States is being strengthened since Secretary Pompeo has deliberately brought ambiguity into the “One China” policy, by giving a defined meaning to it, despite previously being under strategic ambiguity. However, Pompeo might actually be unmercifully pushing Taiwan into the frontline of the U.S.-China conflict.
Forth, Secretary Pompeo’s statement may provoke China into improperly responding through the long-delayed Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP), which is led by Beijing and will soon be signed. If China behaves improperly, then the prospective RCEP member states may become vigilant, which in turn may obstruct the development of RCEP.
Fifth, if China cannot settle into Secretary Pompeo’s remarks, or if Taiwan independence advocates take the opportunity to provoke the mainland, then there may be a certain degree of conflict rising across the Taiwan Strait. If that comes to pass, then the United States would then have all the excuses to intervene, bringing new levels of conflict or even a full-scale military confrontation in the Asia-Pacific region. Who is to say that the Trump regime which refuses to admit defeat wouldn’t then rise in the midst of the chaos and make a comeback?
It is safe to say that Secretary Pompeo’s intentions are unclear and leaders on both sides of the strait must proceed cautiously and insist on pursing peace as their ultimate goal. They must not be angered by the provocations of American politicians and certainly not join in agreement with the speeches of American aggressors. After all, Pompeo will soon no longer be part of the U.S. government.
From: https://www.chinatimes.com/opinion/20201114003291-262105?chdtv