Biden – Xi Call: Status Quo for Taiwan By Ross Darrell Feingold
Former Asia Chairman, Republicans Abroad
Twitter: @RossFeingold

The short period of time between when the videoconference between President Joe Biden and President Xi Jinping was announced, and when it occurred, led to much anticipation as to whether the United States would persuade China to condemn Russia over the
invasion of Ukraine, pressure Russia to end the war, or succeed in persuading China not to provide military or economic support to Russia.

Prior to the call, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that “China will bear responsibility for any actions it takes to support Russia's aggression, and we will not hesitate to impose costs", and White House spokesperson Jennifer Psaki said “
This is an opportunity for President Biden to assess where President Xi stands”.

Media was similarly enthusiastic about the call. Bloomberg reported that Biden will seek “to coax Xi Jinping into ratcheting up pressure on Moscow to end its war in Ukraine”, Politico reported that the call “could play an outsize role in
determining the trajectory of the war”, and Reuters reported that the call comes at a “pivotal moment in U.S.-China relations”. This anticipation about the results of the call continued afterwards, with a commentary on CNN’s website referring to �
��The theatrics of a call that was closely watched around the world”.

Was such anticipation about the call realistic?

As the call was on Friday night in Asia, it is unlikely that people in East or Southeast Asia stayed up past midnight for official statements about the call to be released by the US or China governments, or for Psaki to hold a press conference to discuss
the call. It is unlikely it was “closely watched around the world”.

Only the most naïve would expect that a videoconference with Biden would cause Xi to significantly change its policies towards Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. China is already aware that providing military support to Russia, or engaging in business with
already sanctioned Russian companies, could result in sanctions on Chinese companies and government officials. However, China is accustomed to the United States government imposing sanctions or restrictions on Chinese companies as well as government
officials over various issues such as Xinjiang and Hong Kong, and China’s government is probably not worried about this threat from the United States. If China determines it is in its national interest to allow Chinese companies (including state owned
companies) to continue to do business with Russian companies, the threat of U.S. sanctions is unlikely to change China’s decision. China Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement after the call in which it quoted Xi Jinping as telling Biden, “
Sweeping and indiscriminate sanctions would only make the people suffer”.

Similarly, despite statements in recent weeks by Ukraine, United States or other country’s government officials hoping that China would use influence with Russia and Ukraine to act as a peacemaker, China so far has not sought such a role. In fact, in
conflicts such as civil wars, or wars between countries, China generally does not seek to be the sole mediator.

As for “theatrics” that might occur on the call, none occurred. It is not the style of Biden or Xi to be theatric in public statements or on calls with other national leaders. In fact, China’s statement after the call indicated Xi raised other
issues such as COVID-19 and Taiwan, even though at a press conference afterwards, Psaki said “the vast majority of it was on Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine”. Based on the speed at which China issued a statement after the call, and the
follow up on social media by Chinese diplomats and China’s official media, it appears that China, prior to the call, diligently prepared an “all of government” effort to present the call in a way favorable to China. It is too bad Biden’s aides
did not similarly prepare the United States version of the call, and instead, commentators in the United States criticized the Biden Administration for a call that allowed China to claim it has the “upper hand” in US-China relations.

Finally, on Taiwan, Psaki said “the issue of Taiwan was raised by the Chinese, and the President reiterated the U.S. policy on Taiwan has not changed”, in a statement the White House wrote “The President reiterated that U.S. policy on Taiwan has
not changed, and emphasized that the United States continues to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo”, and an anonymous Biden Administration official speaking to the media after the call said the “Biden administration has consistently
demonstrated rock-solid support for Taiwan and will continue to do so” though it is unlikely Biden told Xi on the call about “rock solid” U.S. support for Taiwan. As this author previously wrote, for now the Biden Administration continues to impose
on Taiwan a temporary restraining order on significant changes to the status quo.

The results of this call appear to be that China has yet to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, China will not play the role of peacemaker, China might still provide aid to Russia, and the United States confirmed for China that the United States
opposes unilateral changes to the status quo between China and Taiwan.

Ukraine government officials have thanked western countries and the United States for their support, though when necessary, they publicly criticize NATO countries such as over the refusal to transfer Poland’s Soviet-made fighter jets to Ukraine, or,
NATO’s refusal to implement a no-fly zone over western Ukraine. Will the day come when Taiwan’s government simultaneously thanks but also, when it best serves Taiwan’s interests, criticizes the United States?

https://www.chinatimes.com/cn/opinion/20220319002689-262104?chdtv

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)