If the new US President abandons the ‘One China’ policy, Beijing might retake the island by military force. The security dynamics in the Asian region is bound to be dramatically altered and the global consequences would be unpredictable, writes RAJARAM PANDA
Since Donald Trump scored a surprise victory in the US presidential elections in November, his unorthodox statements on international issues have been creating ripples across the world. Though there are talks in certain quarters that the implications of such statements are already being seen in Europe, the impact of changes
in the US policy under Trump administration is likely to be felt in Asia more intensely.
The first spark of the debate was triggered by the telephone talk that President-elect Trump had with the Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen when the latter dialled Trump to congratulate him on his victory. This was the first such contact with Taiwan by a US President-elect or President since 1979 when the US supported the ‘One China’ policy after breaking off ties with Taiwan (the Republic of China) and acknowledged that Taiwan is a part of mainland China.
It may be recalled that in 1949, Chinese Communist Party forces defeated the Government of the Republic of China in the Chinese Civil War and founded the People’s Republic of China, eliminating the ROC authority from mainland China. By speaking directly with the Taiwanese President, four decades of Sino-US diplomacy seems to be crashing down, or so it appears.
Beijing took umbrage at Trump’s audacious posture on the Taiwan Strait and used its state media to warn him against supporting Taiwan, suggesting that if provoked, China will support the US’ enemies militarily. Trump retorted that he is not willing to be dictated by China. Beijing sees the phone talk between Trump and Tsai as the former questioning the ‘One China’ policy, which is at the core of the differences. Trump said it would have been disrespectful to not take the call from Tsai congratulating him on his election as he was in the know hours ago that the call was coming. Such hardening of postures by either side does not present a happy picture for Asia. Trump’s charge was that Beijing “was not cooperating with America” on its handling of its currency, on North Korea and on tensions in the South China Sea, where China is building “a massive fortress”.
The state-supported Global Times, which comments regularly on foreign policy issues, observed in an editorial that if Trump abandons the ‘One China’ policy, supports Taiwan’s independence and continues to sell weapons to Taiwan, “China would have no grounds to partner with Washington on international affairs and contain forces hostile to the US”. It further observed that Trump is “naïve to think he can use the ‘One China’ policy as a bargaining chip to win economic benefits” from China.
This was in reaction to Trump’s remarks that the US has no compelling reason to subscribe to the ‘One China’ policy unless China is willing to make concessions on other things, including trade. Beijing questioned Trump’s “businessman way of thinking” and firmly said that the ‘One China’ policy is not open for trade. The editorial cautioned “modesty” on the part of Trump, while reaffirming that the issue of Taiwan is non-negotiable.
Reactions from Chinese academics were equally severe. Trump’s comments were dubbed as “immature” and that those were “manipulated” by US conservatives. Taking a regional perspective, the Beijing state paper opined that the ‘One China’ policy has maintained peace and prosperity in Taiwan and, if abandoned, cross-Straits ties would see a real storm. The editorial observed: “China would introduce a series of new Taiwan policies, and may not prioritise peaceful reunification over a military takeover if Trump insisted on his provocations”.
Trump seems to be firm on his stand on Taiwan and here lies the problem of likely escalation of tension with China. Rankled by Trump questioning the ‘One China’ policy, spokesman Geng Shuang warned that any changes to the way America deals with Taiwan could damage diplomatic ties between China and the US.
Besides questioning the ‘One China’ policy, Trump has also raised other issues related to China’s conduct, such as the tax and exchange rate policies, North Korea and its “massive military complex in the middle of the South China Sea”. There could be some merit in Trump’s stance on Taiwan as it is a flourishing democracy but the topic is toxic in Beijing as it has declared Taiwan as its “core interest”. Trump seems to have stolen a march on Beijing, and therefore, it could be provoked to move somewhere in the region to test Trump’s mettle. Chinese academics have started recommending the leadership to exercise such an option.
The argument is based on the presumption that a belligerent reaction by Beijing at the initial stage could make Trump retreat from the position he has chosen on Taiwan. The votaries of such a view say that if Beijing remains silent and prefers only making statements without backing them with strong action on the ground, Trump would get the message that his stance on Taiwan is pregnant with avoidable consequences. This group also argues that the earlier thinking of Beijing — that it would be easy to do business with Trump as he is a businessman, not an ideologue and isolationist, and therefore, pragmatic — is flawed as he seems to be preferring to risk confrontations even at the expense of setbacks to Sino-US bilateral ties.
China’s state-controlled media emphasised that as the world’s two biggest economies, it would be in the interest of the US and China if both show mutual respect to their political commitments, of which ‘One China’ principle is a part. The commentary cautioned that irrespective of the change in the Government, mutual interests are best served if political commitments are respected “rather than being ignored in an impulsive and self-deceiving way”.
Such an observation was made as China believed that Trump’s decision to take Tsai’s call was not simply impulsive, but because of months of lobbying by Senator Bob Dole, seen by Beijing as a foreign agent for the Government of Taiwan.
But his questioning the four-decade ‘One China’ policy and antagonising Beijing seems to be a well-thought-out strategy. While Trump is likely to nominate a long-standing friend of Beijing, Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, as the next US ambassador to China, he is likely to choose John Bolton, a former Bush administration official known for his advocacy for a tough China policy, as No. 2 at the State Department, who suggests escalating diplomatic ladder by receiving Taiwanese diplomats officially at the State Department as a step towards restoring full diplomatic recognition. Seen from this background, Trump’s phone talk with Tsai seems well-strategised.
As mentioned, Trump seems to have other considerations in mind when he took Tsai’s call. Besides demanding concessions on trade and criticising its currency policies, Trump questioned China’s military build-up in the South China Sea and its failure to block North Korea from conducting nuclear arms tests. Indirectly, Trump was questioning Beijing’s sincerity to do things which could help resolve regional problems. Trump is aware of the fact that there is discrepancy on tariffs on exported products entering each country. While China imposes levies ranging from five to 9.7 per cent on the US goods, America collects 2.5 to 2.9 per cent tariffs. This unequal treatment could have been bothering Trump, and it is reasonable, therefore, he is questioning this now.
Trump is a businessman with rich assets. He has made it clear that when he officially takes charge as the US President on January 20, 2017, his eldest children and his company executives would run his global business empire and he would have nothing to do with its management. He has also declared that he would take a token $1 dollar salary. However, it remains to be seen if Trump divests his holdings as retaining them could pose potential conflict of interest with the decisions he takes as the US President. That would be a tight-rope walk for him.
The US is hurt by China with devaluation of the yuan. Even the International Monetary Fund and economists widely view China’s efforts to prop up the yuan’s value as evidence that Beijing is no longer keeping its currency artificially low to make Chinese exports cheap. Chinese experts in the US also advise caution as they think that the entire relationship runs the risk of deteriorating as Beijing would be keen to show its resolve on the Taiwan issue. They warn that if Trump ends the decades-long practice, it might raise likelihood of misunderstanding and miscalculation, thereby setting the stage for a crisis between the US and China.
Michael Green, an influential scholar in the US, is of the view that ending the ‘One China’ policy would be a mistake, though Trump may have intended to send a message to Beijing that he would not be dictated on issues like Taiwan.
If Trump sticks to his announcement to abandon the ‘One China’ policy, there could be a real storm. If this happens, Beijing may be tempted to eschew to achieve unification by peaceful means and might prioritise to retake the island by military force. In such an eventuality, the security dynamics in the Asian region would be dramatically altered and the global consequences would be unpredictable. Though Taiwan might be happy at the turn of events, the overwhelming perspective there could possibly be that it should not be used for trade between two great powers. That seems to be Taiwan’s legitimate principle.
The writer is ICCR India Chair Visiting Professor at Reitaku University, Japan
The views expressed are his own and o not represent those of either the ICCR or the Government of India