The reluctant middleman
The Bush administration, while recognising that the situation in both the mainland and Taiwan has changed dramatically over the last three decades, has decided to stick to its 'one China' policy, despite admitted problems and inconsistencies.
Much has happened in the intervening decades. China, which was one of the world's poorest countries, has turned into an economic powerhouse, while Taiwan, then a dictatorship under president Chiang Kai-shek, has become a boisterous democracy.
'We'll stick to the three communiques until there is a better mechanism,' one senior US administration official said. 'The essence has not changed even though circumstances have.'
The Bush administration spelled out its China policy in unusual detail recently, during congressional hearings to mark the 25th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act, passed after Washington broke off relations with Taipei to establish ties with Beijing. The act commits the US to provide arms and to help Taiwan defend itself.
At the hearings, Assistant Secretary of State James Kelly explained that America's policy in the Taiwan Strait was to maintain the status quo. However, he pointed out that this is understood differently by the US, Taiwan and the mainland.
As far as the US is concerned, maintaining the status quo means that Beijing must refrain from using or threatening to use force against Taiwan, while at the same time Taiwan must 'exercise prudence' in managing all aspects of cross-strait relations. 'For both sides, it means no statements or actions that would unilaterally alter Taiwan's status,' he said.
Mr Kelly pointed out that Taiwan's President Chen Shui-bian has defined the status quo as being 'one country on each side of the Taiwan Strait'. Mr Chen has also repeatedly said that Taiwan is a sovereign and independent country. To him, then, maintaining the status quo means keeping Taiwan separate from the mainland.
To Beijing, however, Taiwan is not a country but - like the mainland itself - part of 'one China'. The political separation of Taiwan is a legacy of the civil war more than 50 years ago, and it is only a matter of time before China is reunified. Any declaration of independence by Taiwan would therefore, in the mainland's view, be an attempt to change the status quo.
The different understandings of 'status quo' makes the job of the US harder in urging both sides not to do anything to change it. Increasingly, however, both Beijing and Taiwan are relying on the US to help restrain the other.
The US has increasingly found itself caught in the middle. And since Beijing's threats have not had their desired results, it is increasingly putting pressure on Washington to keep Taiwan in line.
However, the US definition of provocative is different from that of the mainland. While Beijing found the holding of a referendum offensive, the US was willing to accept that Taiwan has the right, in principle, to hold referendums, although it should not provoke Beijing while doing so. Because Beijing and Taipei do not talk to each other, each wants the US to be its advocate, virtually casting Washington as an intermediary - a role it has repeatedly rejected. As a result, Washington has become much more involved in cross-strait affairs than in previous years.
However, this is not a role that it relishes. In fact, to extricate itself, the US incessantly calls on Taiwan and Beijing to resume their dialogue. After all, the US has been on record for more than 30 years as saying that it will accept any resolution that the two sides agree on, as long as there is no use of force. But this presupposes that the two will start talking to each other, something that looks unlikely with Mr Chen being inaugurated for a second term.
Frank Ching is a Hong Kong-based journalist and commentator
