On Monday, during his first trip to Asia as president, Bidensaid the United States would get involved militarily should China attackdemocratic Taiwan, seeming to break with a long-held policy of not making clearhow the United States might react.
For the US commander in chief, it was the latest in a seriesof apparently off-the-cuff assertions that suggest his personal inclination isto defend the Chinese-claimed island.
But even some who favor jettisoning Washington"s policy of"strategic ambiguity" over Taiwan have criticised the president,arguing that his muddying of the issue risks accelerating China"s desire toact, without carrying the muscle of a formal security guarantee.
Other policy analysts though, such as David Sacks of theCouncil on Foreign Relations, said that Biden"s extensive foreign policyexperience, and the context in which he made the remarks – next to Japan"sprime minister and after the Russian invasion of Ukraine – suggested he didn"tmisspeak.
"I believe that this was not a gaffe," he said.
NO CHANGE
The White House, and US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, werequick to say that there was no change to the US position after Biden answered"yes" to a reporter who questioned him on whether the United Stateswould get involved militarily in the event of a Chinese attack on Taiwan.
Analysts say repeated similar comments earlier in hisadministration now collectively show the president"s personal inclination wouldbe to order some sort of intervention.
"He"s clear in his conviction that the US shouldrespond to Chinese military aggression against Taiwan. He"s ambiguous aboutwhat exactly that means and what commitment the US has made to Taiwan"sdefense," said Daniel Russel, the top US diplomat for East Asia during theObama administration.
Taiwan"s foreign ministry thanked Biden for his support, butChina"s foreign ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin responded to his remarks bysaying that Beijing has no room for compromise or concessions on mattersrelating to its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Biden has left himself considerable wiggle room,particularly on the question of whether so-called military involvement wouldmean sending US troops into battle.
The White House National Security Council and the StateDepartment did not respond to Reuters questions on that issue.
The Biden administration has repeatedly invoked Russia"sinvasion of Ukraine – to which the United States has been funneling billions ofdollars in military support – and signaled that China should not consider asimilar move on Taiwan.
But wary of triggering conflict with nuclear-armed Russia,the US government has been clear that its support to Ukraine does notconstitute direct US military involvement, even if it has involved supplyinglarge quantities of lethal weaponry.
While Biden"s remark may assuage some concerns aboutAmerican security partnerships given his administration"s refusal to riskoutright war with Russia, it could also raise regional concerns about thethreat of a US-China confrontation.
"I don"t see this as helping keep the region calm andTaiwan safe," said Douglas Paal, a former unofficial US ambassador toTaiwan.
"THE RIGHT OBJECTIVE"
Despite the Biden administration"s insistence that it is notstraying from a long-held "one-China" policy, which gives officialdiplomatic recognition to Beijing, not Taipei, the tone from both Beijing andWashington toward Taiwan has shifted.
Once uncommon sorties by China"s air force into Taiwan"s AirDefense Identification Zone (ADIZ) have dramatically increased in recent years,and Beijing has heightened harsh rhetoric against Taipei.
Meanwhile, the US government has stepped up engagement withTaiwan, continued arms sales to the island, and earlier this month the StateDepartment quietly updated its webpage describing unofficial ties to Taiwan,removing references to China"s position.
Bonnie Glaser, a Taiwan expert at the German Marshall Fundof the United States, said Biden"s comments could have the opposite effect ofdeterring China.
"I think that is the right objective, but I believe theconfusion surrounding US policy could undermine deterrence – it could provokethe attack that we seek to deter," she said.
Republicans, some of whom advocate ending the ambiguity policyaltogether, have criticised the repeated apparent haphazard nature of DemocratBiden"s remarks on Taiwan.
Dean Cheng at the conservative Heritage Foundation said thatif Washington were to abandon ambiguity toward Taiwan, it would best be donequickly.
"This creates the potential for a ticking clock inBeijing," he said of Biden"s statements on Taiwan. "If the Americansare slowly shifting toward strategic clarity, China might want to take actionbefore they"ve made that declaration."
