Former US president Jimmy Carter’s legacy regarding Taiwan is a complex tapestry woven with decisions that, while controversial, were instrumental in shaping the nation’s path and its enduring relationship with the US.
As the world reflects on Carter’s life and his recent passing at the age of 100, his presidency marked a transformative era in Taiwan-US-China relations, particularly through the landmark decision in 1978 to formally recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legal government of China, effectively derecognizing the Republic of China (ROC) based in Taiwan. That decision continues to influence geopolitical dynamics and Taiwan’s unique role on the global stage.
One of Carter’s most controversial actions was the severance of formal diplomatic ties with the ROC. By recognizing the PRC and ending the mutual defense treaty with Taiwan, Carter aimed to realign US foreign policy to better address the geopolitical realities of the late 20th century. The move was a culmination of efforts by multiple administrations, including those of former US presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, to normalize relations with Beijing.
Carter’s decision was not taken lightly; it reflected a calculated shift designed to counterbalance Soviet influence during the Cold War. Recognizing the PRC allowed the US to engage with a significant global player, fostering a strategic partnership that served as a counterweight to the Soviet Union’s growing power. That diplomatic recalibration was critical in shaping the global balance of power, but it came at the cost of Taiwan’s formal status as a recognized US ally.
Despite the apparent abandonment of Taiwan, Carter’s administration ensured that the nation’s security and autonomy were not entirely forsaken. In 1979, the US Congress passed the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), a legislative framework that continues to underpin Taiwan-US relations. The TRA provided for the continuation of unofficial ties between the two entities, including the sale of defensive arms to Taiwan, and a commitment to maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.
The act was seen as a direct response to Carter’s derecognition of Taiwan, reflecting congressional concerns about the nation’s vulnerability in the face of growing PRC assertiveness. By ensuring the legal and political commitment of the US to Taiwan’s security, the TRA mitigated the immediate risks posed by the severance of formal ties and established a durable framework for Taiwan-US relations.
Carter’s foreign policy approach was deeply influenced by his emphasis on human rights and moral diplomacy. While his decision to recognize the PRC was often criticized as a betrayal of Taiwan, it can also be viewed as an attempt to foster a more stable and cooperative global order.
Carter’s administration recognized the PRC’s potential as a significant partner in addressing global challenges, including arms control, economic development and the reduction of Cold War tensions. That recognition did not negate Taiwan’s importance, but rather repositioned it within a broader strategic framework. Taiwan’s subsequent transformation into a vibrant democracy, and its growing economic and cultural ties with the global community are a testament to the resilience of the nation’s people and its ability to adapt to shifting geopolitical realities.
One of the defining aspects of Carter’s legacy is his moralistic approach to foreign policy, which often sought to prioritize long-term global stability over short-term political gains.
His administration’s decision to normalize relations with the PRC was framed as a necessary step to reduce the risk of conflict and enhance international cooperation. While that decision created significant challenges for Taiwan, it also opened opportunities for the nation to redefine its identity and role on the global stage. Taiwan’s development into a thriving democracy and a leading global economy is, in part, a reflection of its ability to navigate the complex realities created by Carter’s policy shift.
Critics of Carter’s Taiwan policy often highlight the perceived abandonment of a key ally. The termination of the Taiwan-US mutual defense treaty and the cessation of formal diplomatic ties left Taiwan vulnerable to potential aggression from China.
Those actions were viewed by some as a capitulation to Beijing’s demands, and a betrayal of American values of loyalty and support for democratic allies. However, a closer examination of the policy reveals a more nuanced picture. Carter’s administration worked to ensure that the substantive elements of the Taiwan-US relationship were preserved, even in the absence of formal recognition.
The TRA’s provisions for arms sales and security assurances underscored the enduring commitment of the US to Taiwan’s defense and stability, ensuring that the nation remained capable of resisting external threats.
Moreover, Carter’s decision to recognize the PRC must be understood within the context of the broader Cold War strategy. By engaging with Beijing, Washington was able to drive a wedge between China and the Soviet Union, thereby weakening the cohesion of the communist bloc.
That strategic realignment had significant implications for global security and stability, contributing to the eventual decline of Soviet influence. While Taiwan bore the brunt of the immediate consequences of that policy shift, the long-term benefits of a stable US-China relationship have had a profound effect on the global order.
The legacy of Carter’s Taiwan policy is also reflected in the nation’s resilience and adaptability in the face of diplomatic isolation. Taiwan’s transition from an authoritarian regime to a robust democracy in the decades following Carter’s presidency is a testament to its ability to leverage the opportunities created by the TRA and other international partnerships.
Today, Taiwan stands as a beacon of democracy in the Asia-Pacific region, with a strong economy and a dynamic civil society. That transformation underscores the nation’s capacity to thrive despite the challenges posed by its unique international status.
Carter’s legacy regarding Taiwan is not without its critics, but it also offers valuable lessons for contemporary policymakers. The delicate balance between engaging with major powers such as China and supporting smaller, democratic allies such as Taiwan remains a central challenge in US foreign policy. Carter’s approach highlights the importance of strategic pragmatism, and the need to prioritize long-term stability and cooperation over short-term political considerations. His emphasis on maintaining substantive ties with Taiwan, even in the absence of formal recognition, serves as a model for navigating complex geopolitical relationships in an increasingly interconnected world.
As the world mourns the passing of Carter, his impact on Taiwan stands as a multifaceted legacy, reflecting the complexities of balancing moral principles, strategic imperatives and the realities of international diplomacy. While his decision to derecognize the ROC and recognize the PRC was a controversial and deeply consequential shift, it also laid the groundwork for Taiwan’s evolution into a resilient and dynamic democracy. The TRA, a direct response to Carter’s policy, continues to serve as a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations, ensuring the nation’s security and autonomy in the face of ongoing challenges.
Carter’s legacy is a reminder of the difficult choices inherent in global leadership, and the enduring importance of fostering stability and cooperation in a complex and ever-changing world.
Y. Tony Yang is an endowed professor and associate dean at George Washington University.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS