Not Without Incident: Questioning Big Brother's Platitudes

Although White is potentially incorrect that China will supplant US hegemony in Asia, he is right to note that no matter what the US does, its options are limited and there are negative consequences whichever path it decides to take. As history almost always repeats itself, Washington will likely fight to retain its primacy. Beijing will meet this fight and the fallout could simply be an even more eroded US presence in Asia and alienated allies in the region, or it could leave the world, as Jonathan Schell argues in his book Fate of The Earth, written decades ago on the consequences of a nuclear war between the Soviet Union and the US, nothing more than a republic of insects and grass.

“The President of Taiwan CALLED ME today to wish me congratulations on winning the Presidency. Thank you!”[i]– Donald Trump

“If the U.S. monopoly capitalist groups persist in pushing their policies of aggression and war, the day is bound to come when the people of the whole world will hang them. The same fate awaits the accomplices of the United States.”[ii]– Mao Zedong

In the Biden administration’s latest National Security Strategy (NSS) they explicitly stated that “we do not recognize Taiwanese independence.”, and they also affirmed that the US adheres to One China policy.[iii] At the same time, however, the US also adheres to the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, where America funnels weapons into Taiwan to bolster their self-defense against coercion- meaning coercion from China, or what Xi Jinping and previous Chinese leaders have called ‘peaceful reunification’ between Taiwan and Mainland China. With a retaking of Taiwan perceived as imminent, think tanks and officials in Washington have called for sending more weapons to Taiwan and potentially intervening militarily on behalf of Taiwan, and members of Biden’s cabinet have tried to dissuade China from changing the status quo in Taiwan. The status quo is strategic ambiguity, where the US does not officially recognize Taiwanese independence, as noted in the NSS, but that the US also supports Taiwan’s right to self-defense. This is a dangerous contradiction, as if the US does not recognize Taiwan as a sovereign entity, then why is there even a debate over what actions the US and the West would take? Can China invading itself be seen as a coercive action?

The main arguments for why we should care if China takes over Taiwan (if one could call it that) are blabbering about the sanctity of the rules-based order, the importance of the chips industry located in Taiwan, resisting the overall coercion of China, or the democracies of the world standing up to autocracies, like China. In Biden’s NSS, it explicitly notes that “We oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side, and do not support Taiwan independence.”[iv] This is crucial to note, as it is a slight difference from the passage on Taiwan in Trump’s NSS released in 2017.[v] In the section focusing on democracies versus autocracies, Biden’s NSS notes that “The PRC’s assertive behavior has caused other countries to push back and defend their sovereignty, for their own, legitimate reasons.”[vi] ‘Other countries’ cannot include Taiwan, as technically Taiwan is not a country. If the Taiwanese government declares independence, it would be going against its agreement with the Chinese government, the 1992 Consensus, which posits that there is one country, two systems. It’s evident that if there were a unilateral change to the status quo around Taiwan from the US and the West, the White House would not object. Arguably, they are already engaging in a unilateral status quo change in their military exercises and heated discussion in prominent think tanks and speeches from officials, which is a unilateral change disguised as a respect for One China Policy and the agreement that the US has claimed to adhere to for decades.

Many things can be true at once, China’s coercive behavior can be contemptible, but the provocations and arrogance of the US and the West can also be real and at best, ill advised. China recently flew 21 warplanes over Taiwanese airspace, according to the Taiwan Defense Ministry.[vii] These actions by the CCP spark outrage in the West. Perhaps when we sail massive warships and fly jets around Taiwan, and send them heaps of armaments, it is seen the same way in China? The latest National Defense Authorization Act, a document that puts US defense spending at 858 billion dollars that’s on the books.[viii] There is a section focused on provisions for Taiwan, the Taiwan Enhanced Resilience Act.[ix] The NDAA explicitly says that the Department of Defense will seek to strengthen Taiwan-US security relations.[x] Again, if the US abides by One China Policy and does not recognize Taiwanese independence, why spend billions to enhance their resilience? The debate around a potential Taiwan crisis is not framed in a way that seeks to avoid war, as if it comes to that, the ruthless imperialists in Washington who retain control over US foreign policy and the arms industry that donates heavily to congress and the senate will happily sacrifice the US empire on the altar of the ‘liberal world order’ that people like John Ikenberry and Joseph Nye champion at the top of their lungs[xi].

The debate on Taiwan should begin with the questions that I have raised. The main question that should be at the core of discourse on Taiwan as a flashpoint in US-China relations is how can the US claim to not recognize independence, thus not treating it as a sovereign entity, and simultaneously spend billions of dollars and hours of speeches declaring that is must resist any Chinese attempts to reunify Taiwan?

The mere fact that there is a debate shows that we are not seriously adhered to true strategic ambiguity. We evidently adhere to strategic clarity, as we in unison agree that Taiwan is to remain independent from Chinese coercion. Under the Trump administration immense piles of weaponry was sent to Taiwan, and the US as well as its allies like Canada have conducted military exercises around the Taiwan Strait. After the recent meeting between Biden and Xi, the White House put out a statement that Biden made it clear to Xi that they will stand by Taiwan and that China must not disrupt the status quo, and “He raised U.S. objections to the PRC’s coercive and increasingly aggressive actions toward Taiwan, which undermine peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait and in the broader region, and jeopardize global prosperity.”[xii] How is it only Chinese actions that threaten stability in the region? A key reason why tensions continue to escalate is that the US and its allies see themselves as acting out of benevolence, and that they are collectively defending an ideal, the rules-based order. When the US sends warships around Taiwan, it is to deter Chinese aggression. When China does the same in retaliation, it is perceived as proof of Chinese aggression, and it justifies more exercises and acts of deterrence.

Actively Defending Empire

“But overseas there are no restrictions. The indiscriminate slaughter of real or imagined opponents is considered a prerogative of imperial power. Violence is the primary language we use to speak to the rest of the world.”[xiii]– Chris Hedges

China and the US practice what is euphemistically called ‘active self-defense’ by the CCP. The Chinese Foreign Ministry put out its own statement that declared Taiwan a red line for China, where they state that Xi “stressed that the Taiwan question is at the very core of China’s core interests, the bedrock of the political foundation of China-U.S. relations, and the first red line that must not be crossed in China-U.S. relations. Resolving the Taiwan question is a matter for the Chinese and China’s internal affair.”[xiv] If this is the case, and Biden was made aware that Taiwan is a red line, a core issue for China, then Biden’s blustering that he talked tough and told Xi that his aggression is not appreciated is dangerous and from the perspective of Beijing, it is meddling in the internal affairs of China. This would not be a novel approach from the US, but importantly, the lack of awareness shown by the White House on how China sees the Taiwan issues pervades all of US foreign policy.

Foreign Affairs did a poll recently within its own roster of foreign policy experts on whether the US should intervene militarily with boots on the ground if China invades Taiwan.[xv] The results were disturbing, as there were a handful who agreed strongly, and even most of those who disagreed only disagreed that the US should send troops. These experts who disagreed that the US should send troops argue that they should only send weapons and support the status quo, however, the status quo is contradictory and unsustainable. The consequences of going to war with China over Taiwan are catastrophic even in best case scenarios, where the use of nuclear weapons is avoided. Experts like David Sacks, who argued on a Council on Foreign Relations podcast that the US should not rule out sending troops to Taiwan to militarily intervene, as in his mind, traditional deterrence is not working with China, and the threat of direct US intervention would effectively deter China.[xvi] Until people like Sacks and other war hungry analysts are willing to pick up a rifle and fight for Taiwan, they should consider the impact of what they are arguing. It is quite chilling.

Biden has stumbled and said on three occasions that he will send troops to Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion.[xvii] Nancy Pelosi, in a high-profile visit, flew to Taiwan and pledged her full support for their independence, which she has done throughout her career.[xviii] Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a discussion with former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice that a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is imminent, and that more must be done to support Taiwan and to deter China.[xix] The US leadership is even more incoherent than it was during the Trump presidency, who was frequently criticized for being sloppy and chaotic, and his own statements often conflicted with his advisers. There are several such accounts of these conflicts in Bob Woodward’s epic trilogy on the Trump White House.

Trump was seen as an incredibly dangerous figure for the stability and security of Asia; however, the Biden administration has changed little operational policy, notably the tariffs imposed in Trump’s trade war with China remain and are under review. On declaratory policy, the Biden administration is far more incoherent and sloppier in its execution. Two main critiques of Trumps foreign policy, that it was unilateralism, not multilateralism, and that it represented a turn to an illiberal world order, rather than the liberal world order begun under Bush Sr., are even more true of Biden’s foreign policy. The US, although it sees itself as more reliant on allies stepping up, still seeks to retain its primacy in Asia. Biden’s unilateralism, like Obama’s and even Bush’s, is hidden under flowery rhetoric about democracy and liberal values, and as far as a turn to an illiberal world order, Biden does nothing beyond utter words like democracy and human rights. The Trump administration at least did not try to pretend that the US cared about human rights or democracy. Consider his 2017 interview with Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly, where in response to O’Reilly saying that “Putin’s a killer”, Trump said “We got a lot of killer, what, you think our country’s so innocent?”, or when he said that the US was leaving Syria, but that they’re taking the oil. The Biden administration is a return to beautifying horrid, unilateral policy.[xx]

Never Let Go

“Yet, just as Ukraine does not have the right to join NATO, Taiwan does not have the right to secede from China.”[xxi]– Jeffrey Sachs

There is no still conception of Asia without American hegemony, and the Washington establishment refuses to accept their rapidly changing reality. The ridiculous and wasteful defense budget in the latest NDAA captures this perfectly, as does the case of Taiwan. Unless the ruling class realizes that the international system is, as Immanuel Wallerstein argues, in a state of structural crisis, and that in the aftermath of the apex of this crisis, the US will no longer be a superpower, or as Michael Mandelbaum argues in his latest book, a hyperpower, nor will it necessarily be an era of Chinese hegemony, we may be escalating tensions to a critical point.[xxii]

There are other, more likely successors to America, like India. As John Ralston Saul argues in his book Collapse of Globalism, China and India have experienced meteoric rises due to their turn to nationalism and away from unfetter globalization and liberalization.[xxiii] As we see America doing the same, a collapse of the current world system is inevitable. The Taiwan issue is not only a potential flashpoint in US-China relations, but a flashpoint in the current world order, so far as such an order exists. If it does, it is certainly not liberal in nature or structure, as Ikenberry tried to reaffirm in his recent article for Foreign Affairs.[xxiv] Whether or not they accept it, the illiberal liberal class in the West is nearing the end of their reign. Whether they will be deposed by other powers like China or India, or if they feed on each other in their desperation remains to be seen. Taiwan is a test case for so much more than just the power of US empire or Chinese resolve.

There are those who argue that the costs of doing nothing far outweigh the costs of assisting Taiwan. In response to Hugh White’s recent Quarterly Essay, where he argues that no matter what the US does in the event of a Taiwan crisis, it will have negative consequences for it, Kevin Rudd rebuffed White as an ‘appeaser’ and he argued that Taiwan must be defended and not allowed to become part of Mainland China, which it technically already is.[xxv] In his newest book, Rudd made the case for managed strategic competition between the US and China, where the focus for both great powers should be innovation and an overall more economic outlook on competing.[xxvi] The main issue with Rudd’s concept is the notion of great power competition being ‘managed’, as it is evident that the US military and security elites act ruthlessly and without restraints around the world. To a lesser extent, the same is true of China. This is only because China has recently acquired the means to project hard power and to infiltrate the international system.

Who will manage the strategic competition? Biden? On three occasions Biden has said he will commit troops to Taiwan, and he has ramped up the hardline taken by the Trump administration towards China and in relation to Taiwan. A buffoon like Trump or his likeness? While Trump frequently spouts lunacy, his advisers crafted the combative policy towards China that Biden and his administration have taken up. It is impossible to manage competition between the US and China through diplomatic means, as between the leadership in US and China, there is little interest in diplomacy and more interest in competing visions for hegemony in the Indo-Pacific region.

In one of the more cool-headed responses to White’s Quarterly Essay, Sam Roggeveen argues that little of the criticism of White addresses his position that American national security is not threatened by China’s rise to leadership in East Asia.[xxvii] Roggeveen points out that “Australia is betting its future security on the proposition that Asia is critical to the United States, and that therefore the United States will be prepared to secure a favourable order in Asia, even if it means fighting China.”[xxviii] Although Washington still notes Asia as a critical region for American security, in the face of its decline, which contrary to the points of Rudd and others is real and accelerating, America can only afford to strain itself to retain primacy in Asia for so long.

Conclusion

“Yes … That’s the commitment we made.”[xxix]– Joe Biden

While the few politicians and pundits who express even the slightest anti-war sentiments, like Trump’s acolytes, the neo-isolationists, or news hosts like Tucker Carlson, are ripped apart and smeared as appeasers, the ruling class in Washington seeks war at all costs. Leadership in Asia is not in US interests but is it in the interests of the transnational global elite. China presents a military threat to this elite and the violent, exploitative system they oversee. This is not to suggest that China is comparable to America and the West on every scale, as although our freedom is limited here in the West, we still have some freedom and civil rights. As those rights shrink and are more aptly noted as privileges, a core pillar of the arguments that assert we must stand up to Chinese coercion is weakening. It is not, as the White House argues, democracies versus autocracies. This is an interesting change from the previous administration, as Biden constantly emphasizes the plight of the world’s democracies against its autocracies, especially at his ridiculous Democracy Summit. The US fails to live up to its professed values through acts like torture and rendition, imperial occupations, and strangling states like North Korea with sanctions. As Martin Luther King Jr. proclaimed, the constitution of the US is a promissory note. The US is not an evil empire, it simply fails to live up to the values outlined in its constitution and also in international law, nor is China an evil empire, as evident in the protests against the CCP’s zero Covid policy, showing that there are millions of Chinese citizens who reject the oppression of their government, however, Xi is the current president and the CCP is the current leadership in China. Thus, the US and its allies must learn to deal with them in a constructive and non-combative manner.

A Taiwan crisis could be the event that upends the current world system. As Wallerstein argues in his book on American decline, it is America’s meteoric success as a great power immediately following the end of the Cold War that sowed the seeds of its demise.[xxx] For Wallerstein, four symbols capture American decline, the Vietnam War, the 1968 revolutions, the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989, and the 9/11 attacks in 2001, and he writes that “Each symbol built upon the prior one, culminating in the situation in which the United States currently finds itself—a lone superpower that lacks true power, a world leader no- body follows and few respect, and a nation drifting dangerously amidst a global chaos it cannot control.”[xxxi] To this I add a fifth symbol, the exact order and nature of events to be seen, and that is the Taiwan crisis and however the US and the West chooses to respond. Wallerstein’s characterization of the US is even truer today, that it lacks true power, it is a world leader no one follows or respects, and it is drifting in a global chaos it cannot control nor can it exercise the influence it once could. Wallerstein published his book before the Bush administration chose to invade Iraq to depose Saddam Hussein in 2003. He argued that there were two potential scenarios for the US in the following decade.[xxxii] These were following the hawks with the disastrous consequences this would, and did, entail, or the US would realize the consequences of following the hawks would be too great. He noted that Bush’s options were limited, and this is even truer today over Taiwan. Where Wallerstein pointed out then that “The real question is not whether U.S. hegemony is waning but whether the United States can devise a way to descend gracefully, with minimum damage to the world, and to itself.”, it is now evident that the US chose to follow the hawks and the shadow government and the ruling class refuse to allow Washington to decline gracefully, and they don’t even pretend to acknowledge that the US is in decline, or are able to imagine a world where the US is not the regional hegemony in Asia.[xxxiii] Chinese hegemony is unthinkable. White echoes this point from Wallerstein when he writes “Taiwan is such an important test of America’s position in Asia because a crisis there would compel both Washington and its allies to confront the harsh facts which so far they have gone out of their way to ignore.”[xxxiv] This is critical and often ignored by those who critique White’s argument that he made in his Quarterly Essay and in his other writing.

Although White is potentially incorrect that China will supplant US hegemony in Asia, he is right to note that no matter what the US does, its options are limited and there are negative consequences whichever path it decides to take. As history almost always repeats itself, Washington will likely fight to retain its primacy. Beijing will meet this fight and the fallout could simply be an even more eroded US presence in Asia and alienated allies in the region, or it could leave the world, as Jonathan Schell argues in his book Fate of The Earth, written decades ago on the consequences of a nuclear war between the Soviet Union and the US, nothing more than a republic of insects and grass.

---

[i] Chandran, Nyshka. “Donald Trump Insults China with Taiwan Phone Call and Tweets on Trade, South China Sea.” CNBC, December 5, 2016. https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/05/donald-trump-insults-china-with-taiwan-phone-call-and-tweets-on-trade-south-china-sea.html.

[ii] Zedong, Mao. “Speech at the Supreme State Conference.” http://www.marxists.org, September 8, 1958. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-8/mswv8_14.htm.

[iii]The White House. “National Security Strategy,” October 12, 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf.

[iv] The White House. “National Security Strategy,”

[v] The White House. “2017 National Security Strategy: A New National Security Strategy for a New Era.” U.S. Embassy & Consulates in Australia, December 19, 2017. https://au.usembassy.gov/2017-national-security-strategy-new-national-security-strategy-new-era/.

[vi] The White House. “National Security Strategy,”

[vii] Yeung, Jessie, and Wayne Chang. “Taiwan Reports Record Incursion by Chinese Bomber Aircraft | CNN.” CNN, December 13, 2022. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/13/asia/taiwan-chinese-bombers-incursion-intl-hnk/index.html.

[viii] Harris, Bryant. “House Passes Defense Bill with More Taiwan, Ukraine Security Aid.” Defense News, December 8, 2022. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/budget/2022/12/08/house-passes-defense-bill-with-more-taiwan-ukraine-security-aid/.

[ix] House Armed Services Committee. “RULES COMMITTEE PRINT 117-70 TEXT of the HOUSE AMENDMENT to the SENATE AMENDMENT to H.R. 7776 [Showing the Text of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023],” 2022.

[x] House Armed Services Committee. “RULES COMMITTEE PRINT 117-70 TEXT of the HOUSE AMENDMENT to the SENATE AMENDMENT to H.R. 7776

[xi] Ikenberry, John G. “America’s Imperial Ambition.” Foreign Affairs 81, no. 5 (2002): 44–60. https://doi.org/10.2307/20033268., and Nye, Joseph S. The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone. 2022. Reprint, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.

[xii] House, The White. “Readout of President Joe Biden’s Meeting with President Xi Jinping of the People’s Republic of China.” The White House, November 14, 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/11/14/readout-of-president-joe-bidens-meeting-with-president-xi-jinping-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china/.

[xiii] Hedges, Chris. “The American Empire: Murder Inc.” Truthdig, January 4, 2016. https://www.truthdig.com/videos/the-american-empire-murder-inc/.

[xiv] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. “President Xi Jinping Meets with U.S. President Joe Biden in Bali.” http://www.fmprc.gov.cn, November 15, 2022. https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/202211/t20221114_10974686.html.

[xv] Foreign Affairs. “Should the United States Pledge to Defend Taiwan?” Foreign Affairs, November 16, 2022. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ask-the-experts/should-united-states-pledge-defend-taiwan.

[xvi] Sacks, David, and James Lindsay. “The China Challenge to Taiwan, with David Sacks.” Council on Foreign Relations, June 14, 2022. https://www.cfr.org/podcasts/china-challenge-taiwan-david-sacks.

[xvii] Brunnstrom, David, and Trevor Hunnicutt. “Biden Says U.S. Forces Would Defend Taiwan in the Event of a Chinese Invasion.” Reuters, September 19, 2022, sec. World. https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-says-us-forces-would-defend-taiwan-event-chinese-invasion-2022-09-18/.

[xviii] Lee, James, and M. Patrick Hulme. “The Strategic Logic of Nancy Pelosi’s Visit to Taiwan.” thediplomat.com, August 5, 2022. https://thediplomat.com/2022/08/the-strategic-logic-of-nancy-pelosis-visit-to-taiwan/.

[xix] Blinken, Antony, Condoleezza Rice, and Jim Mattis. “Secretary Antony J. Blinken at a Conversation on the Evolution and Importance of Technology, Diplomacy, and National Security with 66th Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.” United States Department of State, October 17, 2022. https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-a-conversation-on-the-evolution-and-importance-of-technology-diplomacy-and-national-security-with-66th-secretary-of-state-condoleezza-rice/.

[xx] Phillip, Abby. “O’Reilly Told Trump That Putin Is a Killer. Trump’s Reply: ‘You Think Our Country Is so Innocent?’” Washington Post, February 4, 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/02/04/oreilly-told-trump-that-putin-is-a-killer-trumps-reply-you-think-our-countrys-so-innocent/.

[xxi] Sachs, Jeffrey D. “Avoiding the Worst in Ukraine and Taiwan | by Jeffrey D. Sachs.” Project Syndicate, December 15, 2021. https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/defusing-ukraine-taiwan-crises-by-jeffrey-d-sachs-2021-12.

[xxii] Wallerstein, Immanuel Maurice. The Essential Wallerstein. 2022. Reprint, New York: New Press, 2000., and Mandelbaum, Michael. The Four Ages of American Foreign Policy: Weak Power, Great Power, Superpower, Hyperpower. 2022. Reprint, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2022.

[xxiii] Saul, John Ralston. The Collapse of Globalism. 2022. Reprint, Atlantic Books Ltd, 2018.

[xxiv] Ikenberry. “Why American Power Endures.” Foreign Affairs, November 3, 2022. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/why-american-power-endures-us-led-order-isnt-in-decline-g-john-ikenberry.

[xxv] Aly, Waleed, and Scott Stephens. On the Ethics and Politics of Public Debate: Quarterly Essay 87. 2022. Reprint, Black Inc. Books, 2022.

[xxvi] Rudd, Kevin. Avoidable War. 2022. Reprint, S.L.: Public Affairs, 2022.

[xxvii] Waleed, and Stephens. On the Ethics and Politics of Public Debate

[xxviii] Waleed, and Stephens. On the Ethics and Politics of Public Debate

[xxix] Brunnstrom and Hunnicutt. “Biden Says U.S. Forces Would Defend Taiwan in the Event of a Chinese Invasion.”

[xxx] Wallerstein. The Decline of American Power: The U.S. In a Chaotic World

[xxxi] Wallerstein. The Decline of American Power: The U.S. In a Chaotic World

[xxxii] Wallerstein. The Decline of American Power: The U.S. In a Chaotic World

[xxxiii] Wallerstein. The Decline of American Power: The U.S. In a Chaotic World

[xxxiv] White, Hugh. Sleepwalk to War: Quarterly Essay 86. 2022. Reprint, Collingwood, Victoria: Black Inc., An Imprint of Schwartz Books Pty Ltd, 2022.

Bibliography

Aly, Waleed, and Scott Stephens. On the Ethics and Politics of Public Debate: Quarterly Essay 87. 2022. Reprint, Black Inc. Books, 2022.

Blinken, Antony, Condoleezza Rice, and Jim Mattis. “Secretary Antony J. Blinken at a Conversation on the Evolution and Importance of Technology, Diplomacy, and National Security with 66th Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.” United States Department of State, October 17, 2022. https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-a-conversation-on-the-evolution-and-importance-of-technology-diplomacy-and-national-security-with-66th-secretary-of-state-condoleezza-rice/.

Brunnstrom, David, and Trevor Hunnicutt. “Biden Says U.S. Forces Would Defend Taiwan in the Event of a Chinese Invasion.” Reuters, September 19, 2022, sec. World. https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-says-us-forces-would-defend-taiwan-event-chinese-invasion-2022-09-18/.

Chandran, Nyshka. “Donald Trump Insults China with Taiwan Phone Call and Tweets on Trade, South China Sea.” CNBC, December 5, 2016. https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/05/donald-trump-insults-china-with-taiwan-phone-call-and-tweets-on-trade-south-china-sea.html.

Foreign Affairs. “Should the United States Pledge to Defend Taiwan?” Foreign Affairs, November 16, 2022. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ask-the-experts/should-united-states-pledge-defend-taiwan.

Harris, Bryant. “House Passes Defense Bill with More Taiwan, Ukraine Security Aid.” Defense News, December 8, 2022. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/budget/2022/12/08/house-passes-defense-bill-with-more-taiwan-ukraine-security-aid/.

Hedges, Chris. “The American Empire: Murder Inc.” Truthdig, January 4, 2016. https://www.truthdig.com/videos/the-american-empire-murder-inc/.

House Armed Services Committee. “RULES COMMITTEE PRINT 117-70 TEXT of the HOUSE AMENDMENT to the SENATE AMENDMENT to H.R. 7776 [Showing the Text of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023],” 2022. https://rules.house.gov/sites/democrats.rules.house.gov/files/BILLS-117HR7776EAS-RCP117-70.pdf.

House, The White. “Readout of President Joe Biden’s Meeting with President Xi Jinping of the People’s Republic of China.” The White House, November 14, 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/11/14/readout-of-president-joe-bidens-meeting-with-president-xi-jinping-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china/.

Ikenberry, John G. “America’s Imperial Ambition.” Foreign Affairs 81, no. 5 (2002): 44–60. https://doi.org/10.2307/20033268.

———. “Why American Power Endures.” Foreign Affairs, November 3, 2022. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/why-american-power-endures-us-led-order-isnt-in-decline-g-john-ikenberry.

Lee, James, and M. Patrick Hulme. “The Strategic Logic of Nancy Pelosi’s Visit to Taiwan.” thediplomat.com, August 5, 2022. https://thediplomat.com/2022/08/the-strategic-logic-of-nancy-pelosis-visit-to-taiwan/.

Mandelbaum, Michael. The Four Ages of American Foreign Policy: Weak Power, Great Power, Superpower, Hyperpower. 2022. Reprint, New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2022.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. “President Xi Jinping Meets with U.S. President Joe Biden in Bali.” http://www.fmprc.gov.cn, November 15, 2022. https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/202211/t20221114_10974686.html.

Nye, Joseph S. The Paradox of American Power: Why the World’s Only Superpower Can’t Go It Alone. 2022. Reprint, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Phillip, Abby. “O’Reilly Told Trump That Putin Is a Killer. Trump’s Reply: ‘You Think Our Country Is so Innocent?’” Washington Post, February 4, 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/02/04/oreilly-told-trump-that-putin-is-a-killer-trumps-reply-you-think-our-countrys-so-innocent/.

Rudd, Kevin. Avoidable War. 2022. Reprint, S.L.: Public Affairs, 2022.

Sachs, Jeffrey D. “Avoiding the Worst in Ukraine and Taiwan | by Jeffrey D. Sachs.” Project Syndicate, December 15, 2021. https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/defusing-ukraine-taiwan-crises-by-jeffrey-d-sachs-2021-12.

Sacks, David, and James Lindsay. “The China Challenge to Taiwan, with David Sacks.” Council on Foreign

Relations, June 14, 2022. https://www.cfr.org/podcasts/china-challenge-taiwan-david-sacks.

Saul, John Ralston. The Collapse of Globalism. 2022. Reprint, Atlantic Books Ltd, 2018.

The White House. “2017 National Security Strategy: A New National Security Strategy for a New Era.” U.S. Embassy & Consulates in Australia, December 19, 2017. https://au.usembassy.gov/2017-national-security-strategy-new-national-security-strategy-new-era/.

———. “National Security Strategy,” October 12, 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Biden-Harris-Administrations-National-Security-Strategy-10.2022.pdf.

White, Hugh. Sleepwalk to War: Quarterly Essay 86. 2022. Reprint, Collingwood, Victoria: Black Inc., An Imprint of Schwartz Books Pty Ltd, 2022.

Wallerstein  Immanuel Maurice. The Decline of American Power: The U.S. In a Chaotic World. 2022. Reprint, New York: New Press, 2003.

———. The Essential Wallerstein. 2022. Reprint, New York: New Press, 2000.

Yeung, Jessie, and Wayne Chang. “Taiwan Reports Record Incursion by Chinese Bomber Aircraft | CNN.” CNN, December 13, 2022. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/13/asia/taiwan-chinese-bombers-incursion-intl-hnk/index.html.

Zedong, Mao. “Speech at the Supreme State Conference.” http://www.marxists.org, September 8, 1958. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-8/mswv8_14.htm.