WeChat QR Code

Home>News Center

(Opinion) Taiwan: Trump’s Bargaining Chip in US-China Relations?

2017-01-05 09:10:35       source:IPP Review

January 3, 2017


"On December 2, 2016, US President-elect Donald Trump put the decades-old One China policy into question by accepting a phone call from Tsai Ing-wen, the president of Taiwan. The One China policy — which previous US presidential administrations had adopted and abided by since 1979 — is the most important step the US government has taken to ensure a stable and healthy relationship with China and is arguably the foundation for post-1979 Sino-US relations. Although initial speculation indicated that it was Trump's ignorance of diplomatic protocol that caused this incident, individuals from both Tsai's administration and pro-Taiwan lobbying groups in the US later admitted that the call had been long-planned. In fact, following the call, Trump added that the US does not have to be bound by the One China policy 'unless we make a deal with China having to do with other things, including trade.' 


Trump's statement suggests that once he enters the White House, he will create more uncertainty for the One China policy — along with Cross Strait relations — and potentially use it as a leverage point to pressure China into making concessions on other contentious issues such as the South China Sea and trade. Although it is easy to use Taiwan as a counterweight against China, the trilateral relationship between the US, China, and Taiwan is much more complicated. For example, since the issue regarding the sovereignty of Taiwan is directly related to China's contemporary political identity and the Chinese Communist Party’s legitimacy, if the US government shows any signs of backtracking on the One China policy and helps Taiwan to increase its diplomatic standing, such moves could cross Beijing’s red line and potentially jeopardize the very foundation of post-1979 US-China relations. "


Read more:

http://www.ippreview.com/index.php/Home/Blog/single/id/320.html


NISCSS does not necessarily share in or endorse the opinions of off-site commentators.