Australia Must Play the Peacemaker on Taiwan

If in say five years from now Australia's relationship with China has been devastated, and our whole region split, by a US-China war over Taiwan, we will look back and wonder what we might have done to prevent it. We would probably identify this moment as the point of missed opportunity. Let's try to avoid that.

When George Bush won his first term as US president in 2000, China was the big problem on the strategic horizon. But the war on terrorism has given Washington and Beijing a chance to step back from their emerging strategic competition. China has generally supported the US after the attacks of September 11, 2001. The US has been glad of China's regional leadership in convening the six-party talks on the North Korean nuclear issue.

Washington has responded to China's concerns by strongly affirming its opposition to any moves towards independence in Taiwan. Last month in Beijing, the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, said the US supported reunification between Taiwan and the mainland. That would have gone down well with his hosts.

In fact US-China relations are probably now as good as they have been at any time since the communists took power in China more than 50 years ago. But this is no reason to be complacent. From both sides there is an element of opportunism in their rapprochement. The US needs to keep China on side while it deals with al-Qaeda and Iraq; China is happy to take advantage of US preoccupations in the Middle East to steal a march on the Americans in Asia, and expand its regional influence.

Deep down the relationship is as competitive as ever. Influential groups in Washington and Beijing harbour deep suspicions of the other's motives and long-term objectives. In particular, despite Powell's soothing words, Taiwan remains a potential flashpoint between the US and China. There are real concerns that Taiwan's President Chen Shui-bian may provoke a crisis by taking steps towards independence that cross Beijing's "red lines". If China responds with force, the US would almost certainly be drawn in, and Australia might not be far behind.

That would be a very tough moment for Australia. The Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, showed how awkward in August this year, when he said in Beijing that Australia would not feel obliged under ANZUS to support the US in such a crisis. That was a misreading of the treaty, but a fair reflection of Australian thinking. Australia is just not interested in being caught between these two great and powerful friends.

When he welcomed China's President Hu Jintao in Canberra last year, John Howard said Australia wanted "calm and constructive dialogue" between the US and China, and that Australia's aim was to promote such dialogue. And after Downer's comments in Beijing, Howard said Australia would work hard to prevent any conflict.

Here, then, is Australia's challenge - and its opportunity to fulfil Howard's objective for Australia to play its part in stabilising US-China relations. Simply, Australia should take advantage of the warmth between them to propose that the US and China negotiate an explicit agreement over the future of Taiwan.

A deal like this would not be as hard as it sounds. Both sides are committed to upholding the status quo over Taiwan. The risk of war arises because neither side really trusts the other to stick to that commitment. The US fears that China will try to compel reunification by force against the wishes of Taiwan's people. China fears that, if and when the crunch comes, the US will support Chen in moving Taiwan to full independence. In these situations, the potential for mistrust and misunderstanding can be reduced if both sides sit down together and clarify their aims and intentions.

The US would need to affirm that it would not support Taiwanese independence under any circumstances, and does support eventual peaceful reunification. Further - and here's the crunch - it would need to affirm the US would not provide military support to Taiwan in a conflict with China if that conflict was provoked by Taiwanese moves to independence. That seems a big step for the US, but in fact it goes no further than the Assistant Secretary of State, Jim Kelly, went in a statement to Congress last year.

China would need to affirm that it will not force Taiwan to reunify with the mainland as long as Taiwan does not take steps towards independence. It is hard to see what either side would have to lose by an agreement along these lines. And it would be a big boon to Taiwan as well. If Chen is sincere in saying that he does not intend to move Taiwan to independence, he has nothing to lose and a lot to gain by an agreement which reduces the risk of war.

Australia would not need to mediate between the US and China - they are quite capable of talking to each other directly. But we could help get the ball rolling by putting the idea of a deal over Taiwan on the agenda. Now is the time to do it, when US-China relations are in good shape. In the US, Bush's national security credentials put him in a strong position to override the anti-China lobby. And Howard has the standing and influence in Washington - and Beijing - to be able to put a big idea like this on the table. It's worth a try.