In a move that has sparked controversy and drawn criticism from China, the United States has quietly removed language from its official statements that explicitly opposed Taiwan’s independence. This change in wording has been interpreted by some as a subtle shift in US policy towards the self-governing island, while others maintain it is simply a routine update.
The State Department’s website previously included a fact sheet on US-Taiwan relations that stated, “We do not support Taiwan independence.” However, this phrase has been removed in a recent update. While the State Department has downplayed the significance of this change, stating that it remains committed to the “One China Policy,” which acknowledges Beijing’s claim over Taiwan, the move has nonetheless stirred unease in Beijing.
China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Guo Jiakun, expressed strong dissatisfaction with the change, stating that it “gravely backpedaled” on the US position on Taiwan and sent the wrong message to “separatist forces” on the island. Guo urged the US to stop emboldening and supporting Taiwan independence and avoid further damaging China-US relations and the peace and stability of the Taiwan Strait.
The timing of this change is particularly noteworthy, as it comes amid heightened tensions between China and Taiwan. China has been increasing its military activities around the island, including frequent incursions into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone. These actions have been widely interpreted as a show of force and a warning against any moves towards independence.
The US has long maintained a policy of “strategic ambiguity” regarding Taiwan, neither explicitly stating whether it would defend the island in the event of an attack nor ruling out the possibility. This policy is intended to deter China from taking any unilateral action against Taiwan while also discouraging Taiwan from declaring independence.
The removal of the explicit opposition to Taiwan independence could be seen as a subtle shift away from this policy of strategic ambiguity. Some analysts believe that it signals a greater willingness on the part of the US to support Taiwan’s self-determination, even if it does not explicitly endorse independence.
However, it is also important to note that the US has not formally recognized Taiwan’s independence, and its official position remains that the Taiwan issue should be resolved peacefully through dialogue. The State Department has reiterated its commitment to the One China Policy and its opposition to any unilateral changes to the status quo.
Despite these assurances, China remains wary of any moves that could be interpreted as a weakening of US commitment to the One China Policy. Beijing views Taiwan as a breakaway province that must be reunified with the mainland, by force if necessary. Any suggestion that the US is moving closer to supporting Taiwan’s independence is therefore seen as a direct challenge to China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The controversy over the removal of the anti-independence language from the State Department website highlights the delicate balancing act that the US must perform in its relations with China and Taiwan. The US must maintain its commitment to the One China Policy while also signaling its support for Taiwan’s right to self-determination. Any misstep could have serious consequences for the stability of the region.
In the coming months and years, it will be crucial for the US and China to engage in constructive dialogue to manage their differences over Taiwan. Both sides must avoid any actions that could escalate tensions or undermine the fragile peace that exists in the Taiwan Strait.
