Why doesn't the United States have a "clear strategy" and a clear commitment to send troops to the Taiwan Strait? Because military strength can't do it!
After Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, Chinese mainland adopted severe military countermeasures. US politicians and strategic circles have once again debated whether to change their "vague policy" on whether to send troops to the Taiwan Strait, because no matter how the United States sells weapons to Taiwan and no matter how it helps Taiwan to engage in so-called "porcupine tactics" or "hedgehog tactics," it will not be able to prevent Chinese mainland from reunifying Taiwan.
Previously, Richard Haas, president of the American Association on Foreign Relations, and others believed that strategic ambiguity has many shortcomings and should be changed to strategic clarity to deter Chinese mainland use force to attack Taiwan.
Former US Defense Secretary Esper, who recently visited Taiwan, also proposed to abandon the "vague policy" and turn to clarity, that is, to make it clear that if Chinese mainland reunify Taiwan by force, the United States will send troops to Taiwan. But successive U.S. presidents and incumbent officials have opposed abandoning "strategic ambiguity."
But Andrew J. Nathan, a China scholar at Columbia University, in an interview with Voice of America, argued that the decisive factor is not what the United States says, but whether the United States has a credible military deterrent to China.
If the United States does not have a truly credible deterrent, it doesn't matter what it says. Because the US Pentagon (Department of Defense) assesses that China currently has asymmetric capabilities that threaten US aircraft carriers and Air Force and Naval bases in Asia.
Therefore, Li Anyou believes that when the United States has not yet had an actual military deployment to implement strategic clarity, it is not in favor of turning strategic ambiguity into strategic clarity.
