Winning Gambit: Taiwan deserves a fair go on the international stage

Winning Gambit: Taiwan deserves a fair go on the international stage

As things developed, the ROC government was defeated militarily by the Chinese communists and went into exile across the Taiwan Strait in Taiwan. In 1949, the Communist Party of China declared itself the government of China, effectively usurping the role of the ROC.

Thereafter, the issue of who represented “China” at the UN could not be long suppressed. UNGA Resolution 2758 determined the “China Question” some 50 years ago in favour of the communist People’s Republic of China (PRC).

This Resolution did not state, however, that Taiwan was part of China, contrary to the repeated assertions of the PRC since then. Contrary to the PRC’s false claims, Resolution 2758 does not take a position on Taiwan, nor does it include the word “Taiwan”.

The long-term status quo is that the ROC (Taiwan) and PRC (Beijing) are separate jurisdictions; neither is subordinate to the other. The free citizens of Taiwan can be represented only by their freely elected government; the world’s only freely elected Chinese government.

The wrongful interpretation of UNGA Resolution 2758 has unjustly deprived Taiwan of the right to belong to the UN and its specialised agencies. And, despite Taiwan’s strenuous efforts to gain admission, it continues to be denied membership of the World Health Organisation (WHO) and International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), among other UN agencies, because the communist PRC always vetoes its petitions to join.

Taiwan’s exclusion from the UN and its agencies, in the face of Beijing’s intransigent opposition, does not mean that Taiwan has not been active on the international scene.

Since the onset of the covid pandemic, Taiwan has provided medical supplies, including its home-grown vaccine, to allies around the world. It has sent more than 550 tonnes of relief supplies to the people of Ukraine since the Russian invasion, and has donated more than $50 million to help alleviate the suffering of Ukrainian refugees.

Taiwan is today, moreover, a key link in the global high-tech supply chain. Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (TSMC), for example, is the world’s leading manufacturer of advanced semiconductors, also called computer chips.

Taiwan has a lot to offer. It is about time it was treated with justice in the organisation that was established to overcome the law of the jungle and protect the rule of law internationally.

___

Originally published at News Weekly. Photo by Timo Volz.

Thank the Source

US Marine: “I Didn’t Join The Military To Fight For Taiwan”

ZeroHedge | by Tyler Durden Saturday, Sep 24, 2022 – 09:45 AM

Authored by 13-year military veteran Dan McKnight,

Are you ready to go to war to “protect” a place, thousands of miles away from our nation, which we have no treaty alliance with and no overriding national interest? I’m not talking about Ukraine, even though we continue to pump that country full of billions of dollars in weapons and supplies in a proxy war against Russia.

I’m talking about Taiwan, located off the coast of China in the Pacific Ocean. Joe Biden just promised to defend it with the full military might of the United States. When I joined the U.S. Marine Corps Reserves, and later the Idaho Army National Guard, I signed up to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution and our Bill of Rights—not Taipei.

File image: US Marines/We Are The Mighty

Here’s the story.

After the Chinese Civil War ended in 1949, and Chairman Mao consolidated the rule of the Communist Party in Beijing, a small collection of anti-communists flew the coop and established themselves on the island of Formosa, about 100 miles from the mainland.

That’s where they’ve been ever since, developing from a military dictatorship to a parliamentary democracy with two major parties. One wants closer integration with Beijing, the other wants full independence. Both Taipei and Beijing claim to be the legitimate government of all of China.

In the 1970s, our government normalized relations with the Chinese mainland, and de-recognized the “Republic of China” in Taiwan, severing diplomatic relations and abrogating a defense pact.

For over 40 years since then our foreign policy has been guided by “strategic ambiguity.” We recognize there is “One China,” but that there’s some creases we’d like to see ironed out peacefully and without violence.

That’s why Nancy Pelosi’s visit last month to the island was so explosive. It was a high-level American leader playing recklessly with our diplomacy for the cameras. Now on Sunday, when 60 Minutes asked President Biden…

“…to be clear, sir, U.S. forces, U.S. men and women would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion?”

“Yes,” he answered.

You don’t get any clearer than that.

The administration has attempted to walk back the statement, and claims there’s been no change to “strategic ambiguity.” This is the third or fourth time the White House communications department has had to “correct” the commander in chief about our relationship with Taiwan.
So who’s actually guiding policy in our country? It’s not Joe Biden and his rapidly decking cognitive abilities. It’s the War Party, the same group that’s been dictating U.S. foreign policy for over seventy years.
That includes Republicans like Mitt Romney too. That carpetbagger just voted for a new bill slithering through Congress called the “Taiwan Policy Act,” which among other things will give the island $6,500,000,000 in military aid.
“We’re doing something that’s highly provocative and bellicose,” Romney said, not to disparage but to praise the legislation. Then there’s Senator Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, as faux conservative as they come. She says the American people have to fight for Taiwan and Ukraine on behalf of “international democracy.”
You know what I call that? Globalism.
Our soldiers are not cannon fodder for these imperial, one-world government schemes. They’re patriotic men and women who committed their lives to protect and defend our liberties and our borders.
I say let the Chinese, on the mainland and on Formosa, work out their own problems in their own neighborhood while we Americans focus on building the strongest and freest economy in the world. That’s America First.
But I’m not in charge.
Left to their own devices, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Mitt Romney, and Marsha Blackburn will start World War III and try to fight Russia and China at the same time. They’ll destroy our country and leave us to pick through the rubble.
That’s why you need to stop them.
Read the rest at The Libertarian Institute

SourceSouth Australian Gov Criminal Organisation

From Suicide to Dead and Buried… Germany Now Provokes China



FINIAN CUNNINGHAM

Not content with committing its nation to economic suicide from deteriorating Russian relations, the German government now wants to bury the corpse by sabotaging trade relations with China.

Robert Habeck, Germany’s trade minister, has riled Beijing by telling a G7 summit last week that Berlin was aiming to adopt a new China policy to “reduce economic dependency”. Habeck said Germany would strive to take tougher controls over Chinese foreign investment and move away from German reliance on China for key commodities such as semiconductors, batteries and other electronics.

Sounding tough in front of other Western members of the G7 forum (a redundant elite club if ever there was one), Habeck said, “the naivety towards China is over”. He said that trade relations would no longer be viewed in isolation from alleged human rights violations and other international concerns, presumably meaning China’s alleged hostility towards Taiwan.

Beijing slammed Habeck’s remarks and retorted that he was the one who is being “naive” in seeking to damage mutually beneficial bilateral relations.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz doubled down on the provocation at the weekend when he was asked about China’s position on Taiwan. Scholz implied that Beijing was the hostile party in recent tensions over the breakaway island territory. He cautioned China: “It is important that we ban violence from international relations.”

It was another red flag being waved by Berlin in China’s face. Scholz doesn’t seem to realize, or doesn’t want to realize, that Taiwan is a sovereign part of China. That is the legal fact of treaties at the United Nations and the internationally accepted One China Policy. It is the United States, Britain, Australia, France and Germany that are increasingly deploying military forces in China’s territorial waters that are causing dangerous tensions and obliging Beijing to take a tougher position on defending its sovereignty, including its rightful claims over Taiwan.

What are the German leaders playing at? The recklessness of their stance and the damage being inflicted on the nation’s economy make you wonder whose interests are they serving. Certainly, it would seem, not the interests of the German population.

Germany, the economic engine of the European Union, is crashing headfirst from its insane sabotage of energy trade with Russia. It reminds you of those slow-motion car crash tests where dummies are flung into the windscreen. Now it’s heading for a Chinese wall.

The self-imposed cutting off of gas supply from Russia is wrecking German industry and plunging the population into a winter of misery of untold poverty and hardship. Many observers including Russian President Vladimir Putin are baffled by the willful embrace of economic suicide that the German government is rushing into.

For decades, the German export-led economy has been driven by a copious supply of low-priced Russian natural gas and oil. The coalition government in Berlin, which took over from Angela Merkel’s administration at the end of last year, has cut off links with Moscow as part of its support for Washington’s policy to isolate Russia. Germany has gone all in to support the U.S.-backed Kiev regime with heavy weapons supplied to Ukraine in a war with Russia.

So much for Scholz’s admonition to China to “ban the use of violence in international relations”. Berlin is fueling the conflict in Ukraine and along with the U.S. and other NATO powers is preventing any diplomatic process to find a peaceful resolution with Russia.

If the death blow to the German economy was not bad enough from the reckless policy toward Russia, now Berlin wants to kill relations with Beijing.

China is Germany’s top trading partner for the past six years. Bilateral trade has grown steadily. This year’s commerce is heading to surpass the 2021 record high of over $240 billion in Chinese-German trade.

With its 1.4 billion population, China is a vital market for Germany’s exporters, especially the all-important auto industry that drives the German economy. Nearly 40 percent of global sales for Volkswagen, Audi, BMW and Mercedes are in China, spurred by the latter’s phenomenal economic development.

The Berlin government is putting its economic lifeline with China at risk by adopting a policy of wantonly provoking Beijing. In this, the German “leaders” are following Washington’s bidding. They have done this with regard to sabotaging Russian relations. Now they are bent on repeating the folly toward China.

It is notable that Habeck, the German trade minister, is a member of the Greens in the coalition government with Scholz’s Social Democrats. The other senior Green in the coalition is Annalena Baerbock who is the foreign minister. Both of them are pushing an irrational ideological position of damaging Russian and Chinese relations. The Greens want to convert Germany to renewable energy sources like wind and solar power. That’s how they justify doing away with Russian hydrocarbons. But the calculation is woefully misplaced. German industries and the wider population need Russian gas to run their factories and heat their homes. The folly of cutting off Russian energy is backfiring big time. The absurdity is that Germany is now going back to dirty fuel from coal in order to desperately fill the power vacuum that has been self-inflicted by Green ideologues.

More than Green ideology, however, is the real underlying ideology of Russophobia and Sinophobia. Habeck and Baerbock are blinded by their subservience to Washington’s transatlantic agenda of dividing Europe from having normal neighborly relations with Russia and China.

Washington’s agenda is to promote U.S. hegemony and its presumed unipolar dominance in international relations. In short, American imperialism.

An extension of that agenda is to incite antagonism toward China. The encirclement of Russia goes hand in hand with the encirclement of China. It is no coincidence that as Washington escalates tensions with Moscow over Ukraine and NATO encroachment, it is also feverishly inciting tensions with China over Taiwan and dubious allegations of human rights violations by Beijing.

U.S. President Joe Biden’s administration and Congress are pumping weapons into Ukraine and Taiwan (ER: both western Deep State enclaves) in a deliberate and one could say criminal bid to provoke military confrontation. The U.S. capitalist economy needs tensions and conflict to sustain its military-industrial complex, the beating heart of American capitalism.

If Germany’s Chancellor Scholz had any independence of thought, he would be better to remonstrate with Washington over the use of violence in international relations.

But there is no chance of Scholz and his government ever doing that. They are lackeys for Washington and are hopelessly brainwashed with ideological nonsense, Russophobia and Sinophobia.

This winter is already coming with dread for Germany and the wider European population over the policy choice to trash the cornerstone of Russian energy relations. With the further damage to German-Chinese relations, the Berlin political elite are shooting Germany and Europe in the head – twice.

German industries, businesses and workers are incensed by the stupidity of their so-called government, which is more accurately described as a Washington-backed regime in Berlin. Angry protests on the streets witnessed in recent weeks in Germany and elsewhere across Europe against self-inflicted economic misery are but a foretaste of the explosive social unrest brewing.

************

Source

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Visit Original Source

The Biden Administration Must Clarify U.S. Commitments To Taiwan Before Things Get Ugly

The Biden Administration Must Clarify U.S. Commitments To Taiwan Before Things Get Ugly

When asked point blank by “60 Minutes’s” Scott Pelley if the United States would come to Taiwan’s aid should China invade, President Joe Biden responded with a clear and firm answer.

Pelley: So unlike Ukraine, to be clear sir, U.S. forces, U.S. men and women, would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion?

President Biden: Yes.

However, before the interview even made it to air, an unnamed White House official contradicted the president, saying that U.S. policy had not changed, meaning that the U.S. makes no official declaration of whether it would come to Taiwan’s aid if China decided to invade. This policy is known as strategic ambiguity.

Were this the first instance of Biden pledging to come to Taiwan’s aid only to be rebuked by his own White House, it might be making more headlines. Alas, this isn’t the first time Biden has made such a promise. In fact, this whole dance between Biden and his officials has become somewhat of a pattern.

In October 2021 and May 2022, Biden made similar remarks, only to be rebuked by the White House both times. The latter declaration was all the more awkward considering it was made by Biden at a joint press conference with Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida. 

When asked if the U.S. was prepared to defend Taiwan, standing next to Kishida, Biden answered, “Yes, that’s the commitment we made.” He continued:

We support the One China Policy, but that does not mean that China has the ability — excuse me — the jurisdiction to go in and use force to take over Taiwan. So, we stand firmly with Japan and with other nations not to let that happen.

The first issue with this statement that should be noted is that Japan itself has no official policy on how it would act if China were to invade Taiwan. Though Japan has recently been more prone to expressing pro-Taiwan sentiment, there is no official alliance between Tokyo and Taipei.

The ‘One China Policy’ Fallacy

Aside from putting Kishida in an awkward position, Biden’s entire answer was drenched in contradiction.

To support the “One China Policy” means to maintain that Taiwan is nothing more than a part of China and that the rightful government resides in Beijing, not Taipei. So, if this is the case, why would China not have the right to use force to take over Taiwan?

Consider Hawaii. If officials in Honolulu decided to reject Washington and elect their own autonomous government, would the U.S. not have the authority to use force to solve the problem?

Of course, it’s not just Biden’s statement on the “One China Policy” that makes no sense. The policy itself is a Cold War-era relic that was never meant to make sense in the first place.

The “One China Policy” was enacted in 1979 when the Carter administration switched diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China (ROC) government in Taipei to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in Beijing. The reasoning for the decision was both political and economic.

Politically, the Carter administration intended to form closer ties with Beijing to essentially encircle the Soviet Union and exert further pressure on the Kremlin. Given that 1979 was right in the middle of the Sino-Soviet split, Washington and Beijing shared the same fears when it came to the Soviet Union, so an official partnership made pragmatic sense.

Carter also wanted to expand opportunities for American business in China, given the massive market potential China represented. Furthermore, closer economic integration with Beijing, as policy modernization theory predicts, would eventually transform China into a capitalist liberal democracy.

The “One China Policy” served as a means to both of these ends. Washington would pretend Taiwan was part of China, without officially recognizing that Beijing has sovereignty over the island. Try as the experts might to make sense of this agreement, it just doesn’t. Washington and Beijing both knew that, but logical language wasn’t the priority at the time.

Fast forward 43 years, and both the preconditions for implementing the “One China Policy” no longer exist, at least to the extent that they necessitate the maintenance of such an incoherent and potentially destructive policy. Russia is no longer the geopolitical threat it once was, as evidenced by its amateur efforts in taking over Ukraine. And even if Russia was a juggernaut, it is as close to a staunch ally as China has, so that removes any notion that Washington might be able to use friendly relations with Beijing to influence the Kremlin.

As far as the economic portion of the equation, the U.S. is already actively seeking to decrease dependence on the Chinese market, and any pipe dream policymakers had that China would eventually moderate toward a liberal democracy have been firmly put to bed. Unless those same geniuses consider genocide, religious persecution, and locking millions of citizens in their own apartments to be moderate measures.

Whether or not switching diplomatic recognition from the ROC to the PRC in 1979 was a good idea is debatable. What’s not debatable is that preconditions for doing so in the first place no longer exist. This not only renders the “One China Policy” illogical but impractical, as well.

Understanding then, that the “One China Policy” is nothing more than outdated gobbledygook, a serious reconsideration of strategic ambiguity is in order.

Strategic Ambiguity Will Backfire

The main idea behind strategic ambiguity is that by remaining vague about what it would do if China were to invade, the U.S. could dissuade Taiwan from declaring independence, a red line for Beijing, while at the same time dissuading China from using force against Taiwan. The logic being neither side knows exactly how the U.S. will react, so the best course of action is to preserve the status quo.

In reality, given the current circumstances, this logic no longer holds. Xi Jinping has made it abundantly clear that he intends on achieving the “Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation” by 2049, the 100-year anniversary of the founding of the PRC. Paramount in doing so is “resolving the Taiwan question.” In order to accomplish this feat, he has not ruled out using force if necessary.

Further evidence suggests that China’s window for taking Taiwan is narrowing. First of all, Xi Jinping is 69 years old, so if he intends to make good on his promise, he has an increasingly limited amount of time to make it happen.

Socio-economic considerations in China, including a rapidly aging population and slowing economic growth, also indicate China may reach the pinnacle of its national power sooner rather than later, meaning that the cost-benefit analysis necessary for achieving a large-scale invasion will also become increasingly grim.

And if Tsai Ing-wen’s government’s policy and Taiwanese national attitudes are any indication, if China plans to “re-unify” Taiwan, force will be the only option. After all, according to the latest survey data, only 6.4 percent of Taiwanese want to unify with China now or in the future, so the likelihood of any peaceful solution is fairy dust.

Maintaining a policy of strategic ambiguity isn’t fooling China, either. At this point, China is going to do what it wants based on its own domestic political calculations and the ambitions of its leader. The only thing that strategic ambiguity does is leave Taipei in limbo and our military underprepared.

Stop with the Word Games

Instead of playing word games where the president makes a declaration and the White House walks it back, the State Department should form a coherent policy. One that scraps strategic ambiguity altogether. This would allow the U.S. to take concrete steps to ensure the security of the Taiwan Strait. These would include formal military training exercises with the Taiwanese military, similar to those the U.S. conducts with South Korea, as well as potentially opening an embassy and stationing troops on the island.

Right now, in the wake of events in Afghanistan and Ukraine, U.S. credibility amongst its allies is seriously in question. By resolving to defend Taiwan, the U.S. could regain some of that credibility and convince other countries to join an anti-hegemonic coalition against China.

Moving away from strategic ambiguity toward concrete support of Taiwan would empower other regional players, namely Japan, to make similar declarations. If the U.S. and Japan are both firmly committed to coming to Taiwan’s aid, Beijing would have to deeply reconsider if invading the island would even be feasible, let alone worth the damage it would incur.

If the State Department wants to continue to perpetuate the myth of “One China” to allow Beijing to save face, fine. However, it should be abundantly clear how the U.S. will respond if China decides to push its luck and invade Taiwan.

Trashing strategic ambiguity would make war less, not more, likely. It would also save members of the White House comms team a lot of unnecessary effort presently dedicated to running interference on their own president.

Source

SHORTAGE Documentary LIVE! Vatican Signals Global COLLAPSE, Vaxx DESTROYS Human Reproduction

SHORTAGE Documentary LIVE! Vatican Signals Global COLLAPSE, Vaxx DESTROYS Human Reproduction

Stew Peters Network Published September 20, 2022

The World Bank Group is promoting a new practice it calls “Climate-Smart Agriculture.” This is simply another cover up for GLOBALIST CONTROL.

Pope Francis has put the word out, ordering every entity affiliated with the Vatican to transfer all their financial assets into the Vatican Bank by the end of the month. This is a HUGE warning of an incoming global economic crisis.

Clayton Llewelyn joins to warn about the coming shortages are bound to impact America. Go to Heaven’s Harvest and use promo code “Shortage” to get 10% off their NEW freeze-dried, canned goods!

Prepare your family for famine and shortages by purchasing food through: https://heavensharvest.com/

Naomi Wolf joins to expose how Pfizer documents have collected vaccine injuries that target the reproductive system. Big Tech is covering up the crime scene, and China is involved!

Watch this new show NOW at https://StewPeters.com!

Visit our friends at Goldco! Call 855-706-GOLD or visit https://goldco.com/stew

Righteously stand against vaccine tyranny by supporting Christopher Key. Reset your testosterone by trying IGF1+:
https://www.vaccine-police.com/

Check out https://nootopia.com/StewPeters for help increasing your mental & physical strength to battle the deep-state’s KRYPTONITE plot against Americans!

Destress today, Stew crew sleep sound! Use promo code STEWPETERS10 at checkout for 10% off your order.
http://www.magbreakthrough.com/stewpeters

Check out: https://kuribl.com/ STEW20 for 20% off your order or premium CBD!

CACOA is a super food, and may be the missing link to strength and happiness. Buy it now: https://shop.earthechofoods.com/stew

Check out: https://patriotsbreakfastclub.com/, for premium coffee, mugs, and more! Use promo code STEW10 at checkout for 10% off!
Go Ad-Free, Get Exclusive Content, Become a Premium user: https://www.stewpeters.com/subscribe/

Follow Stew on Gab: https://gab.com/RealStewPeters

See all of Stew’s content at https://StewPeters.com

Watch full episodes here: https://redvoicemedia.net/stew-full-shows

Check out Stew’s store:
https://stewmerch.com

SourceSouth Australian Gov Criminal Organisation

Biden’s ‘60 Minutes’ Interview Proved Once Again He Isn’t Running The Country, So Who Is?

Biden’s ‘60 Minutes’ Interview Proved Once Again He Isn’t Running The Country, So Who Is?

President Joe Biden sat down for a rare, one-on-one interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes” this past weekend, and it went about as well as you’d expect.

In addition to dismissing public concerns about skyrocketing inflation and his family’s foreign business dealings, America’s commander in chief decided to lay out his administration’s supposed policy with respect to the ongoing China-Taiwan issue.

“We agree with what we signed onto a long time ago,” Biden said in an apparent reference to the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act. “There’s a ‘One China Policy,’ and Taiwan makes their own judgments about their independence. We are … not encouraging [them to be] independent. … That’s their decision.”

Under the “One China Policy,” the United States acknowledges that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is the sole government of China and that Taiwan belongs to China. The U.S. does not, however, recognize the PRC’s claims to territorial sovereignty over Taiwan.

While Biden’s remarks about Taiwanese independence fall in line with the United States’ long-standing policy toward the island nation, his next comments almost assuredly left White House staff hopping mad. When asked by CBS News’s Scott Pelley if the United States would come to Taiwan’s defense in the event of a Chinese invasion, Biden answered with an unequivocal “yes.”

“So, unlike Ukraine, to be clear, sir, U.S. forces, U.S. men and women would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion?” Pelley asked in a follow-up, to which Biden replied, “yes.”

After Biden’s remarks, Pelley noted how a White House official told “60 Minutes” that “U.S. policy [toward Taiwan] had not changed,” and that “officially, the U.S. will not say whether American forces would defend Taiwan.”

The remarks from Biden, if true, would greatly alter U.S. policy toward Taiwan. For decades, America has practiced what’s known as strategic ambiguity, wherein the U.S. won’t officially confirm whether it would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion.

Despite the magnitude of such a policy change, this is hardly the first time Biden has publicly expressed U.S. military support for Taiwan and the White House was forced to release a statement “clarifying” the president’s remarks. During a CNN town hall event with Anderson Cooper last October, Biden was asked point-blank if the U.S. would defend Taiwan from China, to which the president responded by saying, “yes, we have a commitment to do that.”

Not even 24 hours later did a White House official release a statement saying Biden “was not announcing any change in our policy” and that the administration would “continue to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo.”

A separate incident regarding a change in U.S.-Taiwan policy by Biden also occurred the following month in November 2021, when the president declared Taiwan “independent.” Once again, less than 24 hours later, Biden walked back his remarks.

Factoring in his numerous incoherent statements and ramblings about getting “in trouble” with his staff for engaging with the press, Biden’s Taiwan blunders and the White House’s repeated walk backs reveal what many Americans have suspected for the past year and a half, which is that Biden is not running the U.S. government.

As has long been held throughout American history, it is the president that heads up and steers U.S. foreign policy, not unelected bureaucrats. Yet that is exactly the situation the country finds itself in today.

At every turn of his presidency, Biden has abdicated his responsibilities to unknown White House staffers, who direct and carry out the government’s major policy initiatives while America’s commander in chief slinks away to his Delaware beach house at every available opportunity. In essence, Biden has become nothing more than a puppet, whose strings are being controlled by unnamed, high-level White House officials to shape America and her foreign policy through whatever means necessary.

Whether it’s getting lost on stage after giving a public speech or having his wife prevent him from answering press questions, Biden has demonstrated time and again that he isn’t remotely capable of handling the most basic tasks of a fully functioning human being, let alone those of a U.S. president. Under a different president — a Republican one — left-wing Americans and the media would be loudly calling into question Biden’s ability to serve. But sadly, Democrats are in charge. So instead, we’re stuck with a walker-back-in-chief whose oligarchic presidency is running the country into the ground.


Shawn Fleetwood is a Staff Writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He also serves as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood

Source

PROOF! Biden Is An Absolute Clown

PROOF! Biden Is An Absolute Clown

Matt Kohrs Published September 19, 2022

Enjoyed this video? Join my Locals community for exclusive content at mattkohrs.locals.com!

PROOF! Biden Is An Absolute Clown
Dumb Money w/ Matt Kohrs

🦆 Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/MattKohrsClips
🦆 Rumble Channel: https://rumble.com/c/MattKohrs

SourceSouth Australian Gov Criminal Organisation

Biden: U.S. Troops Would Defend Taiwan in Event of Attack from China

President Joe Biden said Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes” that U.S. military forces would defend Taiwan if there were “an unprecedented attack” from China.

Anchor Scott Pelley said, “On the same day we spoke to the President, Putin met with China’s leader Xi Jinping. There’s concern that Russia’s attempt to force reunification with Ukraine could inspire China to attack the island of Taiwan. U.S. policy since 1979 has been to recognize Taiwan as part of China but remain silent on whether the U.S. military would defend the democratic government there. This is among the places where our interview runs into controversy.”

Pelley asked, “What should Chinese President Xi know about your commitment to Taiwan?”

Biden said, “We agree with what we signed onto a long time ago. And that there’s a One China policy, and Taiwan makes their own judgments about their independence. We are not moving. We’re not encouraging their being independent. That’s their decision.”

Pelley said, “But would U.S. forces defend the Island?”

Biden said, “Yes, if, in fact, there was an unprecedented attack.”

Pelley said, “After our interview, a White House official told us U.S. policy has not changed. Officially, the U.S. will not say whether American forces would defend Taiwan. But the commander-in-chief had a view of his own.”

Pelley asked, “So, unlike Ukraine, to be clear, sir, U.S. forces, U.S. men and women would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion?”

Biden said, “Yes.”

Follow Pam Key on Twitter @pamkeyNEN

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)