From Internet Freedom to Taiwan Arms Sales, Why Is the U.S. Going Back on Its Word?

Recently, the U.S. has dropped some heavy-duty “bombs” on U.S.–China relations.

First, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave a speech on the so-called concept of “Internet freedom” and criticized China’s Internet policies for no reason. Then, the U.S. government, ignoring China’s strong opposition and several serious attempts to negotiate, announced a new set of Taiwan arms sales, including Black Eagle helicopters, Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles and other advanced weapons and equipment.

The U.S.’s actions have interfered with China’s domestic affairs, which will inevitably have a negative impact on U.S.–China relations.

The U.S.–Taiwan arms sale has already violated China’s core interests. According to the U.S.–PRC Joint Communique on 17 August 1982, the U.S. promised to gradually decrease the quantity and quality of arms sales to Taiwan, eventually ending them completely. However, in the past 30 years, the U.S. has gone back on its promise a number of times, continually selling weapons to Taiwan and seriously interfering with the normal development of cross-strait relations. The U.S. government has repeatedly crossed the line regarding China’s national interests because there has always been a group of people in the U.S. Congress who cannot respect China’s peaceful development and who think of Taiwan as an “unsinkable warship” or frontline to control China. There are also American politicians who rely on political contributions from U.S. arms dealers to obtain their high positions. They then become the mercenaries and lobbyists of these arms dealers, forcefully promoting Taiwan arms sales. Despite this mess, U.S.–China relations have maintained an overall forward trend, but there is an ever-present risk of falling back.

Currently, U.S.–China relations are being tested. From Hillary Clinton’s speech to the announcement of new Taiwan arms sales, the U.S. has already created two problems for U.S.–China relations in just one short month, creating the impression that the U.S. is intentionally sabotaging the healthy development of U.S.–China relations. These actions are completely contradictory to the stance that U.S. leaders espoused earlier.

Before President Obama’s visit to China last year, the U.S. was supposedly not seeking to restrain China. In the midst of last year’s financial crisis, Hillary Clinton once claimed that the U.S. and China were in the same boat. However, in less than a year, the U.S. government has already begun to create lots of trouble for China. Could this be the American definition of being “in the same boat”?

As world superpowers, the U.S. and China have the power to create peace or disaster for all. If U.S.–China relations do not go well, then international politics, economics, anti-terrorism and other issues will inevitably be affected. Therefore, for the sake of the U.S.’s own interests and for world peace and stability, the U.S. had best stand by its promises and return to the path of promoting the healthy development of U.S.–China relations.

A country cannot stand if there is no trust. When handling U.S.–China relations, the U.S. has not kept its promises, so how can the U.S. gain the world’s trust?