TAIPEI (Taiwan News) — The U.S. policy of "strategic ambiguity" should be replaced with "strategic clarity," Rand Corporation political scientist Raymond Kuo said in a Foreign Policy Magazine opinion article on Wednesday (Jan. 18).
Kuo said that strategic ambiguity only works under three conditions: If the U.S. has “decisive military power” over China and Taiwan; if China and Taiwan want war more than the U.S. does; and if neither China nor Taiwan are “irrationally committed to going to war.”
Only if all three conditions are met, can the U.S. pursue such a strategy to assert its military might against whatever country threatens the status quo, Kuo said. “Because it doesn’t commit to any particular course of action, both adversaries are unsure about the U.S. reaction and therefore avoid escalation,” he said.
Today, the first two of these conditions no longer hold, he said. China now has the world’s largest missile force, the second-largest navy, and the third-largest air force.
Furthermore, Beijing’s increasing military power also prevents Taiwan from unilaterally acting out, Kuo said. “Taipei doesn’t want a war because it knows that it will be the first to suffer Beijing’s retaliation,” he said.
“Despite this, proponents cling to strategic ambiguity in large part because they worry that an unconditional security guarantee would enable Taiwan to entrap the United States into going to war against China,” he added.
American and allied power is what deters China, while ambiguity by itself has no benefits, the political scientist argued.
Strategic clarity could give an opportunity for Taiwan to build up its forces and adopt a posture that aligns with America’s defense strategy, he said. “As Taipei enhances its asymmetric defenses, the need for U.S. intervention decreases.”
Strategic clarity would be the solution to the political challenges blocking Taiwan from adopting a similar strategy as Ukraine in its fight against Russia, Kuo said. Offering clarity would benefit U.S. interests by “improving Taiwan’s defense, lowering the risk of a wider war, and containing China,” he said.
