Since coming into office, the Biden administration has worked tirelessly to restore relations with allies to compete with China multilaterally. Since the inception of their campaign, the Biden team has repeatedly stressed that American foreign policy would focus on patching up its relationships with allies, taking China’s challenge seriously, and regaining leadership in international organizations. Judging from recent developments, we can see that the administration has made significant progress in the first two goals.

Before the recent Sino-US meeting in Alaska, the US had a meeting with Japan, South Korea, India, and other countries. National Security Advisor Sullivan also met with national security advisers of Germany, France, and England online. These meetings set up a posture that the US prioritizes allies over China. In addition, the US unleashed a series of actions targeting China, such as intensifying sanctions on Hong Kong officials and investigating into practices of Chinese tech companies and listing five companies as threatening US national security. Interestingly, Japan, which often does not take sides, voiced strong opposition to China’s human rights violations and disruption of regional stability amidst US diplomatic actions. There were even news reports revealing that the US and Japan touched upon responding to China if it attacks Taiwan in their meeting.

The list goes on. After the Sino-US meeting, the US Secretary of State and foreign ministers of the other Five Eyes alliance (the US, the UK, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia) released a joint statement condemning human rights abuses in Xinjiang. Meanwhile, The Ministerial-level meeting of diplomatic representatives in the European Union passed a resolution blacklisting multiple Chinese officials responsible for such atrocities – the first time the EU sanctioned China since the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre over 30 years ago.

The EU sanctions four Chinese officials and one entity with actions such as travel bans and freezing assets. On the same day, the US sanctioned Chinese officials in Xinjiang based on the Global Magnitsky Act. The prime minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, followed suit. In response, China blasted such actions as interfering with their county’s internal affairs and reciprocated such symbolic sanctions on ten officials and four entities in the EU, including the Political and Security Committee of the European Union, officially antagonizing 27 officials of the EU member states.

Public reactions to these developments in Taiwan are twofold. Some consider US power has dwindled while China has amassed more power; others consider sanctions like this as inconsequential.

In reality, international sanctions are symbolic behaviors, which carry significant weight in diplomacy. Sanction is a manifestation of state power for achieving certain political purposes. While it is true that sanctions often directly influence a limited number of targets, but it sends strong signals to other countries on behalf of a country’s core values and policy priorities.

When MSNBC interviewed White House National Security Adviser Sullivan, he mentioned that sanctions are an essential tool in combination with others to communicate clear messages to our opposition to China’s violation of human rights. He maintains that China needs to be held responsible for such actions, especially those directly involved in those inhuman actions.

From the perspective of human rights, sanctions backed up by state power have the purpose of naming and shaming the targets and could also increase the awareness among other states, media outlets, and citizens concerning these tragedies. In the past several years, China has used its media and official statements to frame its actions in Xinjiang as improving Uighurs’ education and economic conditions in concentration camps. Such internal and external propaganda then could be refuted without reaching its intended influence.

Recent actions by the US to discuss sanctions with allies are clear demonstrations of multilateral diplomacy. Through safeguarding human rights, the US has once again assumed its leadership among democratic states in the international society to stand up to China’s oppression of human rights. China’s circumstances are warranted. China has been trying to alter the international society’s rules while running counter to the core values of democratic states by oppressing its minorities and democratic movements. These actions trigger other countries’ opposition to China.

International attention will shift to the EU and China’s investment agreement (China-EU Comprehensive Agreement on Investment). Both sides have settled major guidelines, and it is currently under review by the European Parliament. The review, however, is put to stop after Chinese boycotts of the EU. Inferring from existing trends, if the EU continues or amplifies its current stance toward China, the agreement is likely to go through. China has limited options to respond. To maintain an image of wolf warrior diplomacy under the scheme of Grand External Propaganda, China will have to react quite defensively and aggressively to meet its public’s expectations, which might pave China’s isolation on the world stage. 　

Some will say that American strategy to align with others is due to a reduction of its power which makes the US appear weaker in this power competition with China. However, from the perspective of international relations theory, US efforts at multilateralism are sensible; China is doing exactly the same by using an economic network such as the Belt and Road Initiative and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) to amass its power. These development are natural progressions from a unipolar to a bipolar international system. In fact, Hawks in the US are arguing that the US is not doing enough. They contend that the US should use automation and transfer of manufacturing sites to move away from the China-led global supply chain, engaging in a more serious decoupling with China.

In Taiwan, many are skeptical of the US’ ability to compete with China, and Tsai’s strategy of relying only on the US offers dim prospects. They argue that Taiwan should instead adopt a hedging strategy and maintain an equal distance’ from both the US and China to maximize its benefits.

However, these conjectures are negligible of the content of US multilateral foreign policy against China and core issues in cross-Strait relations. An opaque attitude toward China will signal to the US that Taiwan is not taking the same side as the US. In fact, it does not matter if Taiwan is pleasing China or even recognizing the “One-China” principle; China is unlikely to abolish its plan to take Taiwan back with force. A softer Taiwan will only be further isolated by China internationally, and its society will further be infiltrated with Chinese influence. The public in Taiwan needs to pay close attention to the development of Sino-US relations and be cognizant of the costs of cozying up to China.

(Fang-Yu Chen ([email protected]) is PhD in Political Science at Michigan State University. Twitter: @FangYu_80168

Yao-Yuan Yeh ([email protected]) is Associate Professor of International Studies and Chair of the Department of International Studies and Modern Languages at the University of St. Thomas, Houston. Twitter: @yeh2sctw

Austin Wang ([email protected]) is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Twitter: @wearytolove

Charles K.S. Wu ([email protected]) is PhD candidate of Political Science at Purdue University. Twitter: @kuanshengtwn)

Click here for Chinese version

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play