If the Trump administration agrees to “oppose” Taiwanese independence, it will place the United States in a deeply uncomfortable moral and political position known as the “enabler’s dilemma.” By formally aligning its policy with Beijing’s goal, the U.S. would risk becoming complicit in China’s ongoing campaign of coercion against the democratic island.
An enabler is someone who, through their actions or inaction, makes it easier for another party to continue their destructive behavior. In this case, China’s destructive behavior is its relentless effort to intimidate, isolate, and threaten Taiwan into submission. A U.S. declaration of “opposition” would remove a major obstacle to this campaign, thereby enabling it.
This would put the U.S. in a contradictory position. On one hand, it would still be bound by the Taiwan Relations Act to provide the island with defensive weapons. On the other hand, its official political stance would be helping China to create the very threat that those weapons are meant to deter. It would be simultaneously arming the victim and politically siding with the aggressor.
This dilemma would taint every aspect of U.S. foreign policy. How could the U.S. credibly condemn Russian aggression in Ukraine if it is actively enabling Chinese aggression in the Taiwan Strait? How could it champion the cause of democracy and human rights when it has become a party to the suppression of a fellow democracy?
By making this concession, the U.S. would risk losing its moral authority on the world stage. It would move from being the primary defender of the international order to being a potential enabler of its most powerful challenger, a dilemma that would be difficult to justify and impossible to escape.
