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.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS