A strong “Amen” to your comments. But who is going to wake up the President and Congress? Right now, both are in hock to the left end of the Democrat Party, which will willingly and joyfully drag us all into the pit of history.
Arguably the utility of Strategic Ambiguity expired with the fall of the Soviet Union, and certainly it's well past expiration these days given the rise of Xi-ism and the CCP's aggressive "We will bury you (in consumer goods, but also weapons and cyber)" stance.
Stating as official US Policy "Sure, 'One China' and all that since it's your state religion and Taiwan doesn't really object to your practice of said religion, but Do Not Attack Any of Our Allies, Which List Includes Taiwan Among Others, or We Will Intervene Militarily" would lay everything out on the table nicely.
Sal has this exactly right. Strategic ambiguity may have made sense during the era of "engagement" when we tried to lure China into becoming a "responsible stakeholder" in the international community. Now we acknowledge we are in a new era of a strategic competition with as yet undefined rules of the road.. I think clearly defined red lines are the best way to avoid unintended military confrontation
I would also say that is you are going to make a gaffe, or speak the truth, then you need to empower the organization (mainly the Navy) that will back it up. Looking at the ship building projections and the rhetoric coming from the White House it doesn't add up.
A strong “Amen” to your comments. But who is going to wake up the President and Congress? Right now, both are in hock to the left end of the Democrat Party, which will willingly and joyfully drag us all into the pit of history.
Arguably the utility of Strategic Ambiguity expired with the fall of the Soviet Union, and certainly it's well past expiration these days given the rise of Xi-ism and the CCP's aggressive "We will bury you (in consumer goods, but also weapons and cyber)" stance.
Stating as official US Policy "Sure, 'One China' and all that since it's your state religion and Taiwan doesn't really object to your practice of said religion, but Do Not Attack Any of Our Allies, Which List Includes Taiwan Among Others, or We Will Intervene Militarily" would lay everything out on the table nicely.
Here’s hoping Taiwan has built some “bombs in the basement”.
Sal has this exactly right. Strategic ambiguity may have made sense during the era of "engagement" when we tried to lure China into becoming a "responsible stakeholder" in the international community. Now we acknowledge we are in a new era of a strategic competition with as yet undefined rules of the road.. I think clearly defined red lines are the best way to avoid unintended military confrontation
Internally it will also help us direct our intellectual and spending efforts towards those things that will best support that clarity.
I would also say that is you are going to make a gaffe, or speak the truth, then you need to empower the organization (mainly the Navy) that will back it up. Looking at the ship building projections and the rhetoric coming from the White House it doesn't add up.
Excellent.
Well said. Just discovered your blog and will be back.
I worry about our Navy leaders who sit by as their budget and fleet continues to shrink.
Also I wonder if the Taiwanese have the same marital spirit as the Ukrainians.