In 2024, as with all Taiwan’s elections for president since 1996, the Chinese Communist Party repeatedly warned the people of Taiwan not to elect a candidate unwilling to accept China’s goal of eventual political, economic and military control over Taiwan.
In six of the eight elections, including the last three, the people of Taiwan defied Beijing’s instructions, this time giving the ruling Democratic People’s Party an unprecedented third consecutive term.
To make matters worse, from Beijing’s expansionist perspective, Taiwan’s new president, Lai Ching-te, has described himself as a “pragmatic worker for Taiwan independence,” an outcome that China has declared a red line that would trigger war across the Taiwan Strait.
Xi Jinping’s regime has labeled Lai a “troublemaker” and a “separatist.” His election may have been the last straw for Xi, who took power in 2012 declaring “the Taiwan question cannot be passed from one generation to another,” echoing Henry Kissinger’s 2007 warning to Taiwan that “China will not wait forever.” But, once again, the people of Taiwan had the temerity to ignore the Chinese Communists’ instructions.
Beijing’s initial peeved reaction to this impudence was to object in diplomatic channels to those countries that congratulated Taiwan on another successful demonstration of its democratic vitality. It has been stewing since January over an appropriately strong measure of “punishment” to impose upon the Taiwanese themselves and to warn the new Lai administration that it is on a dangerous path.
Beijing has now begun to manifest its displeasure with Taiwan by launching a new round of military exercises. China has encircled the island with a record 27 warships and 62 warplanes, 47 of which flew into Taiwan’s Air Defense Information Zone and practiced boarding runs — all actions that would be essential components of a Chinese blockade of Taiwan.
Unlike preparation for a full-scale amphibious invasion, which would clearly be seen by the outside world as an act of aggression, a blockade or embargo would be a less dramatic operation and require less elaborate advance preparation. China’s steadily expanding exercises have normalized expectations and could readily morph into the real thing almost before Taiwan and its allies realize what is happening. China could also employ a pseudo-blockade exercise as a feint while taking one of Taiwan’s smaller islands, such as Quemoy (Kinmen) or Matsu.
A blockade or embargo would also have the advantage of appearing as a quasi-passive operation, putting the onus for triggering conflict on any outside power seeking to break it. If a U.S. airlift were attempted and it erupted into conflict, it could be difficult to ascertain who fired the first shot and therefore which side bore the responsibility for starting a regional conflict. The potential ambiguity would inhibit third countries from taking sides.
As always, the best way to avoid the unpredictable costs of war is to deter it in the first place. America’s policy of strategic ambiguity on whether it would directly intervene to defend Taiwan has prevented an actual attack so far. But it has not deterred China from massively building up its naval, air and missile capabilities and its escalating exercises in preparation for the day it feels ready to carry out its threats. As long as the U.S. keeps open the possibility that it will not intervene — “it would depend on the circumstances” — the danger for Taiwan, the region and the world keeps growing.
President Biden has said four times that America will defend Taiwan; Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump each said it once. On all six occasions, however, the White House and State Department “clarified” that U.S. policy was unchanged. Biden needs to say it again, not as an ad lib answer to a reporter’s question but as a thoroughly vetted, official administration statement, carried out in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act and the international doctrine of collective self-defense. If China responds by attacking U.S. assets, that would effectively constitute a declaration of war against the U.S. and put at risk all that the People’s Republic of China has achieved since its founding in 1949.
Biden’s record of broken “red lines” as chief foreign policy architect for the Obama administration and as president require nothing less than strategic clarity on defending Taiwan. He must make clear that, directly contrary to China’s threat that “independence means war,” an unprovoked Chinese attack or blockade against Taiwan would bring America’s full diplomatic recognition of Taiwan — that is, “war means independence.”
Joseph Bosco served as China country director for the secretary of Defense from 2005 to 2006 and as Asia-Pacific director of humanitarian assistance and disaster relief from 2009 to 2010. He is a nonresident fellow at the Institute for Corean-American Studies and a member of the advisory board of the Global Taiwan Institute.