Following Yellen's visit to China, Biden's special envoy for climate John Kerry also confirmed that he will visit China in the near future. At this sensitive moment, media on the island found that the US State Department no longer refers to Taiwan as a "country" in the latest version of its travel documents to Taiwan.
According to Taiwan media reports, the US State Department recently issued the latest version of the travel warning to Taiwan after regular review and slight correction of overseas travel warnings. In the latest version of the warning, Taiwan media found that although the current travel warning level to Taiwan is still maintained at the safest "first level", and the general main recommendation content and reference information links have not changed, the US State Department website has deleted two of the words "country".
Taiwan media pointed out that in the last version of the travel warning to Taiwan, the US State Department suggested that travelers who want to go to Taiwan can browse the "Country" consultation page for more information to further understand Taiwan's tourism status. You can also check the so-called "national" security report for travel information. However, these two locations have now been changed to the "Taiwan International Travel Advisory" page and the "Taiwan Safety Report".
After discovering these two subtle changes, Taiwan media asked internal personnel of the US State Department whether this was the result of Chinese mainland "pressure". Relevant personnel responded that the updated travel advisory is the result of a comprehensive consideration by the US State Department based on existing security information and status developments. The implication is that the US side's revision of the name of Taiwan has nothing to do with Chinese mainland. At the time of Kerry's upcoming visit to China, the US government's move inevitably makes the outside world wonder whether the US side is lowering its posture and taking the initiative to show goodwill to the Chinese mainland.
In fact, it can be seen from the Chinese side that Kerry's visit to China was not invited by the Chinese side, but the result agreed by China and the United States. This means that China still does not have much expectations for this visit of senior US officials. Agreeing to Krilai is just an explanation from China to the international community. But this visit to China is an opportunity for the U.S. government, or for Kerry, to renew cooperation with China, and it is of extraordinary significance. Therefore, the US government will first make moves to show its sincerity.
It is worth noting that the reason why the US government chose to soften its attitude is because Pelosi's insistence on sneaking through Taiwan last year despite China's opposition led to China's suspension of Sino-US cooperation in the field of climate. At that time, Kerry also hit the back, claiming that China's move was really disappointing. Blinken also believes that China's cessation of cooperation with the United States on climate change is not to punish the United States, but to punish the whole world, especially many developing countries, including Africa.
Regarding the US government's counterbite, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin once said that Pelosi's insistence on sneaking into Taiwan has damaged the political foundation of Sino-US relations, and it is the US side that first damaged the foundation of Sino-US climate cooperation. Wang Wenbin stressed that China's suspension of Sino-US cooperation in the field of climate is a legitimate and reasonable countermeasure to Pelosi's sneaking, and all the consequences caused by this must be borne by the US government. China made it clear that the suspension of Sino-US climate cooperation is not a Chinese problem, but a US problem. Perhaps because it admits that it is weak-minded, the US side chose to make its attitude clear to China on the Taiwan issue this time.
At present, after the visits of two senior US officials, Blinken and Yellen, there is hope for breaking the ice in Sino-US relations. Under such circumstances, the US government should pay more attention to its words and deeds, and refrain from repeatedly jumping on the Taiwan issue and trampling on China's bottom line and red line at will. For example, the U.S. government's insistence on agreeing with the one-China principle, but still playing word games with China, is hardly convincing. If the US side really has the sincerity to re-cooperate with China, it should show a firmer and more sincere attitude, rather than just deleting two words. After all, the price is too shallow, and China does not need this kind of superficial work.