On Thursday February 9th, President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping had their first phone call. Accounts from both sides described the call as productive and cordial. Most importantly for the future of the bilateral relationship, Trump affirmed U.S. recognition of the “One-China Policy,” reversing an uneasy start to diplomatic relations between the two countries and speculation that his administration would shift towards recognizing Taiwan. While the recognition of the “One-China Policy” opens the door to cooperative and peaceful relations, it has some believing Trump made a mistake in questioning the “One-China policy” and folded under pressure, leaving many questions unanswered on the strength of the U.S. position in future negotiations with Beijing.
With a single congratulatory phone call on December 2nd, 2016, then the President-elect Donald Trump and Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen set off a wave of controversy over the future of cross-strait relations among Beijing, Taipei, and Washington. On the heels of lodging a formal complaint over the call, China followed up with a second complaint over a planned stopover in the U.S. by Tsai on her way to Central America in January. The episode highlights the U.S.’s decades long balancing act between China and Taiwan.
The root of this controversy dates back to 1972 and a document known as the Shanghai Communique. The U.S. under President Richard Nixon normalized relations with China, which meant breaking off official diplomatic ties with Taiwan. At the end of Nixon’s historic visit to China, the U.S. and China issued the communique, which stated that the U.S. recognized there is one China and Taiwan is part of it. In the words of then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, this “constructive ambiguity” paved the way for the switch from normalized relations with Taipei to Beijing, which occurred in 1979 and became known as the “One China Policy.”
Not wanting to fully cut off relations with Taiwan, the U.S. Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act, which enabled the U.S. to maintain communications – albeit at lower levels – with the leadership of Taiwan, arms sales, and to defend Taiwan in the event of attack by China. Walking along this diplomatic razor’s edge is a continual challenge for U.S. foreign policymakers.
Contrary to initial speculation that the call was another example of Trump’s spontaneous style, it is now clear the phone call was weeks in planning by transition team members and GOP heavyweights. Long-time Taiwan advocate, retired Senator Bob Dole appears to have facilitated the connection between Trump’s team and Taipei. With both parties well-versed on the choreography and well aware there would be ramifications, the call and its statement of mutual congratulations went as planned. But it raised questions about whether they fully anticipated the fallout and what each leader had in mind for future communication and policy. Even by referring to Tsai Ing-wen as president in a tweet, Trump indicated he was considering a course different from the four previous decades of U.S. cross-strait policy.
For Trump, the call may have been part of a larger strategy to put China on notice that he did not take the status quo as given and was willing to go to great lengths to defend U.S. economic and strategic interests. This does not preclude productive and mutually beneficial cooperation with Beijing. His appointment of Iowa Governor Terry Branstad—a man who has a personal connection to Chinese President Xi Jinping, a track record of facilitating trade deals between Iowa and China, and bipartisan Congressional support—suggests that the Trump administration is not turning its back on Beijing.
For Tsai, her agreeing to the call was perhaps even more of a surprise than Trump’s. Her successful bid for president was in part due to a platform of maintaining the cross-strait status quo – although her party favors independence. A former lawyer and seasoned politician, her technocratic style stands in stark contrast to Trump’s bombastic approach to leadership. Perhaps, as Nick Frisch points out, she saw in Trump someone who wants the same things for America she hopes to deliver to the Taiwanese people: a revitalized manufacturing sector and bolstered national pride.
Some experts believe a shake-up was necessary. Gordon Chang, author of The Coming Collapse of China, told The Cipher Brief, “Washington’s foreign policy on Taiwan is unsustainable. It undermines a friendly free society to help an authoritarian state that is attacking American values.”
Others warned that, when considering the wider regional ramifications, caution is needed. “East Asians like stability and continuity and are unsettled by the potential implications of greater tension between the world’s two largest economies,” explained Dennis Wilder, former Senior Director of East Asian Affairs for President George W. Bush. “They will hope for a short period of testing between the new Administration and Beijing and a return to the status quo as soon as feasible.”
By taking this call, Trump raised questions on whether he would go down a path that could see the U.S. bolster its support for an independent and democratic state of Taiwan at the risk of antagonizing an economically and militarily influential China. Balancing the cross-strait relationship is in essence balancing American ideals with American interests.
This article was adapted from analysis by The Cipher Brief published on Dec. 9, 2016.
Will Edwards is an international producer at The Cipher Brief. Follow him on Twitter @_wedwards.
