This past Saturday, I saw a debate between the Secretary of State and a distinguished expert in foreign policy. Our Secretary of State argued on the side of pro-strategic ambiguity, with points such as it would help reduce tension between the United States and the People’s Republic of China. Our Secretary believes that remaining strategically ambiguous helps us align with the PROC’s “One China Policy.” With the amount of US support being unclear, she believes Taiwan would not make any claims that would anger China into confrontation.
Her opponent, however, views the situation oppositely. While he acknowledged her points as valid and agreed that strategic ambiguity had worked well for America in the past, he believes that with China’s growing aggression around the Strait of Taiwan and Xi Jinping’s recent claims to have Taiwan reoccupied in the next 25 years will not be calmed by strategic ambiguity, and, if anything, it will make the US appear as weak. Instead, He argued for strategic clarity. “Making China guess what we will do in the event of an attack on Taiwan is one thing” he stated “But outright explaining to the PROC why the cons of an attack drastically outweigh the benefits is another.”
Listening to both speakers, I think that I would have to side with the case for strategic clarity. In an age where an attack from China grows more and more imminent, even with America’s use of strategic ambiguity, it is clear to me that strategic ambiguity has “run its course.” The geopolitical tension between the PROC and Taiwan is only growing, and being clear in our response to Xi Jinping’s aggression seems the only viable option to de-escalate the situation.
Sources:
"The Growing Danger of US Ambiguity on Taiwan" Foreign Affairs Magazine.
Hi August,
Your blog analyzes sources from the Secretary of State and a distinguished expert in foreign policy. I appreciate how you are able to marry those two sources and create your own conclusions of the best course of action. I also love your pictures as they provide relevant details on the situation.
I enjoyed reading your article as it explored key aspects of both strategic clarity and strategic ambiguity. The summaries highlighted important key aspects of the issue in a concise manner. I also appreciate the captions beneath each image, as it helps provide context about the situation.
August, I appreciate the clarity of the two arguments presented in your blog. I also appreciate your use of a map depicting the PROC's recent military exercises, giving us visuals of the growing conflict between Taiwan and China.
Love the focus on the two FP titans’ arguments re SA v SC. You accurately convey the essential points each strategy would convey. This summaries of the two speakers’ arguments are accurate and well done! Nice use of relevant visuals.