US scholar advises China to abandon traditional strategic ambiguity, adopt structural ambiguity to deter Taiwan invasion.

Facing China's continued escalation of grey zone coercion against Taiwan, the international community and academia have been seeking more effective deterrence strategies. At a recent discussion in Washington, American scholars proposed significant adjustments to the US' long-standing policy towards Taiwan, advocating for the US to shift from traditional "strategic ambiguity" to "structural ambiguity." This move aims to raise the political and economic costs for the Beijing regime to unilaterally alter the status quo in the Taiwan Strait, while implementing more destructive economic decoupling measures to curb the rising geopolitical risks.

For a long time, the US' policy towards Taiwan has oscillated between "strategic ambiguity" and "strategic clarity." "Strategic ambiguity" hinges on the US not explicitly committing to sending troops to intervene in the event of a conflict in the Taiwan Strait, thereby constraining Taiwan from pursuing de jure independence and warning Beijing against taking reckless actions. However, with Beijing's recent frequent use of grey zone tactics, including maritime militia, military harassment, cyber attacks, and cognitive warfare, the traditional ambiguous strategy has become increasingly exhausted and unable to effectively restrain the rapidly expanding power of the authoritarian regime.

Against this backdrop, scholars proposed the "structural ambiguity" concept, which aims to break the passive situation of the past ambiguous policy. This new idea does not directly move towards complete "strategic clarity," but rather establishes a more concrete and multi-layered deterrence structure that lets Beijing clearly understand that any coercive actions against Taiwan would trigger unpredictable and costly countermeasures. This deterrence is not limited to the military sphere, but also covers diplomatic and economic aspects, with the goal of making China bear substantial economic and diplomatic consequences for its aggressive behavior.

In addition to the policy shift, this proposal also highlights the critical role of economic deterrence in the current great power competition. Scholars suggest that, in the face of Beijing's advancing pressure, the US and like-minded countries should consider adopting a more drastic economic measure called "avalanche-style decoupling." Unlike the previous emphasis on "risk elimination" or gradual supply chain reconfiguration, this more decisive economic approach aims to fundamentally sever China's lifeline to key technologies and markets, thereby serving as a bargaining chip to curb its military adventurism. This underscores the fact that economic security has become an indispensable part of national security.

These suggestions from academia reflect the US' policy towards China moving towards a more proactive and substantial deterrence direction. As the Taiwan Strait situation becomes increasingly challenging, the question of how to innovate policy tools to maintain peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region has become a crucial issue for the international community. The discussion from "strategic ambiguity" to "structural ambiguity" not only reflects a review of the defense mechanisms for the current Taiwan Strait status quo, but also foreshadows that the future interactions among the US, China, and Taiwan will see an even tighter and more complex connection between economics and strategy.