The U.S. President has once again said what he meant—and meant what he said

(Originaly published May 24 in “What in the World“) U.S. President Joe Biden once again stunned his own aides—and undoubtedly Beijing—using a press conference in Tokyo to up-end 40 years of American foreign policy and pledge to defend Taiwan in the event of invasion by China.

Biden’s aides are already trying to get a mulligan on this one, saying U.S. policy toward Taiwan hasn’t changed. Officially, the U.S. shares the “one-China” principle: that Taiwan is part of China, not an independent nation. The U.S. insists, however, that Taiwan be allowed to exist under its present, democratically elected government until it can negotiate reunification on its own terms. Taking Taiwan back by force is a no-no.

The question has always been to what extent the U.S. would go to prevent that. Since recognizing the People’s Republic of China, the United States has maintained a policy of “strategic ambiguity” over Taiwan, warning Beijing against taking its “renegade province” back by force but refusing to say for sure whether it would do anything to stop it. That kept both Beijing and Taipei off-guard: Beijing couldn’t be sure whether tangling with Taiwan meant war with the U.S.; Taiwan couldn’t indulge in any pro-independence urges without wondering whether Washington had its back.

Some in Asia, including Japan’s former prime minister Shinzo Abe, have argued that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended the usefulness of strategic ambiguity. With China’s military might growing, Abe argued that the risk was that Beijing would confuse Western restraint in Ukraine with a yellow light to take Taiwan. Strategic ambiguity was, thus, contributing to regional instability, he argued.

Biden can’t un-say what he said, no more than he can take back his implicit call in March for regime change in Moscow, when he blurted out that Russian President Vladimir Putin was a war criminal who must not be allowed to remain in power. He may not be stating official U.S. policy, but the U.S. President is saying exactly what he means. And what’s the difference?

Taiwan has already hailed Biden’s new pledge and cast its self-defense in the new Cold War newspeak, as part of maintaining security in the “Indo-Pacific.” This is the term for the region that has replaced “East Asia” or just “Asia” in foreign policy discussions to emphasize the inclusion and importance of India as a western bulwark against China’s regional ambitions. Alas, New Delhi is still on the fence when it comes to Russia, which Biden will be tip-toeing around when he meets today with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The danger is that Biden’s valentine to Taiwan pushes Beijing and Moscow into a new and dangerous embrace. Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger warned of just that—from a Ukrainian perspective—at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting this week in Davos, Switzerland.

Kissinger told the assembled plutocrats that the West needs to resist the temptation to use Ukraine to defeat or permanently weaken Russia. Instead, negotiations should resume to restore Ukraine to the buffer role it played before the invasion, he said, echoing calls by Jeffery Sachs and, in a new op-ed, by former Greek finance minister Yannis Varoufakis. Pursuing further gains against Russia, he warned, would be tantamount to war against Russia, which would destabilize Europe and potentially push Moscow into a permanent alliance with China.

Kissinger has, along with University of Chicago political science Professor John Mearsheimer, long warned against adding Ukraine to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, arguing that Ukraine should instead serve as a neutral buffer state like Finland. Alas, Finland has joined Sweden in applying for NATO membership, feeding Putin’s narrative that NATO poses a growing menace to Russia.

And the war in Ukraine is increasingly becoming a thinly disguised proxy war between Russia and NATO, with Ukrainian forces now shelling their Russian invaders with brand-new mobile M-777 howitzers, made in the United Kingdom and supplied by the U.S. The howitzers are only the first of a flurry of advanced Western weaponry headed for Ukraine, including Danish anti-ship missiles which will presumably be used to help crack the Russian blockade of Ukraine’s vital Black Sea ports.

Some might argue that Beijing and Moscow have already cemented an anti-Western axis, especially after Putin and China’s President Xi Jinping declared at the Beijing Winter Olympics just three weeks before Russia’ invasion that their relationship knew no limits. While Beijing has since declined to condemn the invasion, it hasn’t supported it either.

Why? Taiwan’s situation may resemble Ukraine’s, but it’s important not to confuse the two. Ukraine, as mentioned above, is a sovereign nation and Beijing has agreed publicly with Washington on its right to self-determination and called for an end to the war. Conversely, both Beijing and Washington agree that Taiwan is not a sovereign nation but disagree on its right to self-determination.

Xi last year repeated Beijing’s longstanding insistence that reunification with Taiwan must be fulfilled, but didn’t offer a timeline. And while Beijing has never ruled out using force in Taiwan, Xi has said he favors a sort of autonomy like that Hong Kong was given after the former British colony was returned in 1997.

But China isn’t exactly waiting for Taiwan to finally fall into its lap. A new security agreement with the Solomon Islands could allow a Chinese naval presence on Australia’s doorstep, helping cut off America’s key ally from the Pacific Rim and thereby secure China’s claims to the South China Sea. Naval dominance of the vital sea lanes there would in turn allow China to cut America’s allies to the north, South Korea and Japan, off from export markets in Europe and from Gulf oil.

China could then further isolate Taiwan, potentially forcing it to negotiate terms of surrender, er, reunification or face an invasion by China’s military. The U.S. Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines told the Senate armed services committee earlier this month that China was working to ensure it has the military capability to make good on that threat.

The question is whether Biden’s statement could provoke Beijing into acting before Washington can strengthen its Indo-Pacific alliances any further. The U.S. still has bases in South Korea and Japan and regularly sends naval forces through the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea. China’s forces have become increasingly assertive about demonstrating numerical superiority with incursions into both Japanese and Taiwan air defense zones. But analysts say they still lack the capability to take Taiwan forcibly.

Beijing’s initial response to Biden’s outburst was, in this context, surprisingly measured. Expressing Beijing’s “strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition” to Biden’s statement, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin charted a careful course designed to emphasize the common ground between Beijing and Washington on Taiwan, saying: “China has no room for compromise or concessions on issues involving China’s core interests such as sovereignty and territorial integrity.”