The United States has once again escalated tensions with China over the Taiwan question, highlighting what some perceive as double standards in its foreign policy on peace and war.
Recent actions by the U.S., including authorizing Taiwan leader Lai Ching-te to land on American soil and facilitating interactions with U.S. officials, have drawn sharp criticism from the Chinese mainland. Despite the U.S. characterizing Lai’s stay in Hawaii and Guam as merely a “stopover,” his 20-minute conversation with former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and remarks about “fighting together to prevent war” have been viewed by China as provocative.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry has reiterated its firm opposition to any form of official interaction between the U.S. and the Taiwan region, urging Washington to handle matters related to Taiwan with caution to avoid further escalating tensions.
Although the U.S. has publicly affirmed the one-China principle since 1972, recognizing that Taiwan is part of China, its recent actions seem to challenge this commitment. The approval of a $385 million arms deal to Taiwan, including weapons, radar, and communications equipment, has further strained relations between the two nations.
Ironically, while the U.S. staunchly defends its own territorial integrity and sovereignty, as evidenced by its own Civil War in the 1860s and numerous presidential remarks on the horrors of war, it appears less considerate of other nations’ concerns regarding the same issues. U.S. leaders like James Buchanan warned that the Union “can never be cemented by the blood of its citizens shed in Civil War,” and Ulysses S. Grant expressed he “never advocated [war], except as a means of peace.”
Given this history, one might expect the U.S. to exercise greater caution in actions that could inflame tensions elsewhere. However, its recent moves concerning Taiwan raise questions about its commitment to peace and adherence to the one-China principle.
As tensions rise, there is growing concern that such provocations could lead to unintended consequences, potentially destabilizing the region and impacting global affairs.
Reference(s):
cgtn.com
