By Zhang Siyuan–
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has recently made some remarks on the Taiwan question. In general, he emphasized two points: First, the US policy toward Taiwan has remained unchanged since late 1970s, and second, it opposes any changes to Taiwan’s status quo by force, threats, or coercion. Both points touch upon critical aspects of the Taiwan question between China and the US, and they need to be further clarified in terms of facts and positions.
The US has a tradition of employing ostensibly moral language to frame its diplomacy, including the above-mentioned points, all of which are uttered from the same routine. From this perspective, the US anti-China policy on the Taiwan question has indeed not changed, from then-US president Harry S. Truman’s speech in June 1950 when he put forward the “pending status of Taiwan,” to the signing of the Mutual Defense Treaty between the US and Taiwan in 1954, which declared that “the Parties separately and jointly by self-help and mutual aid will maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack and communist subversive activities,” to the “peaceful reunification” premise that the US bothered about during the negotiations on the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the US in the 1970s, to the claim in recent years that it “opposes any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side” of the Taiwan Straits, and to the recent deletion of important content such as “do not support Taiwan independence” on the “US-Taiwan Relations” page of the US State Department website citing evolving circumstances.
No matter what the US rhetoric was at different stages and how its cross-Taiwan Straits policies changed, its Taiwan policy has consistently aimed to obstruct China’s reunification and allow the two sides of the Taiwan Straits to be “peacefully divided” for as long as possible. If Rubio meant this when he said that the US policy toward the Taiwan region has remained unchanged since the late 1970s, then he was quite frank, and it is clear why he wanted to “oppose changing the status quo.” What is it he against? He opposes China changing the “status quo” that the US favors in which the Lai Ching-te authorities continue to cooperate with the US to maintain such “status quo.” Those “Taiwan independence” forces lacking national integrity are also willing to cooperate with the US to maintain the “status quo” to realize their “Taiwan independence” fantasies.
Consider who employs force, threats, or coercion to change Taiwan’s status quo. Recently, the Trump administration released $5.3 billion in previously frozen foreign aid, including $870 million in “military aid” to Taiwan region. The Lai authorities were quick to respond and ready to purchase weapons from the US and gain favor with the US. For a long time, the US has not only made a lot of money from arms sales to Taiwan, but also drained Taiwan residents’ funds through subsequent maintenance. According to statistics, during the first term of the Trump administration and the Biden administration, the US sold more than $26 billion in arms to Taiwan region.
In fact, Taiwan’s purchase of weapons from the US will ultimately harm itself. In June 2023, Taiwan’s defense department purchased 14 M-136 Volcano mine-laying systems from the US, planning to lay mines in several major areas such as Taoyuan, Taichung, and Tainan, all of which belong to Taiwan’s metropolitan areas. This poses risks to lives and heightens the threat of war. The most impressive political “achievements” of the Lai authorities that the Taiwan residents have seen so far are the “seven shortages”: the shortages of water, electricity, land, labor, talent, eggs and medicine. In comparison, the only thing that is not lacking is the defense budget that has been growing year after year. The US, in order to maintain the “status quo” it needs, and the Democratic Progressive Party, in order to use the US to continue to maintain the “status quo” of its position, have imposed force, threat, and coercion on the wealth of the residents in Taiwan island and the will of more than 1.4 billion Chinese to achieve national reunification. This should be the true explanation of the question we raised to Rubio.
There is but one China in the world, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China. Long before Christopher Columbus came to the Americas, Chinese people had already settled in Taiwan. Long before the independence of the US, Taiwan had become an inalienable part of Chinese territory. It is also one of the goals that must and will be achieved by the more than 1.4 billion Chinese people today in the process of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation. It is related to the country’s territorial sovereignty and the justice history demands.
On the Taiwan question, China has not done anything to hurt the US, but what the US has done has hurt China’s most important national interests and deepest national emotions. Back then, the US provided money and guns, and Chiang Kai-shek provided human resources to fight for the US against the Chinese people but ultimately failed. The Truman administration issued a white paper to explain to taxpayers where the money and guns were used. Today, the US is still using taxpayers’ money to provide military aid to Taiwan, and the Lai authorities continue to use the people’s money to gain US favor by purchasing arms. All of these will be in vain, and one day this will become evident.
More than 70 years of history is enough to make the Chinese people and the people of the world understand clearly what the US intends when it says its Taiwan policy “has remained unchanged” and it “opposes unilateral changes to the status quo.” If American politicians continue to play tricks on these issues and continue to go down the evil path of deviating from the provisions of the three China-US joint communiqués, and condone and support “Taiwan independence,” China stands prepared to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity at all costs. We will wait and see what choice the US will make.
The author is a commentator on international affairs. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn
