• Kaja Kallas
  • Moussa Faki Mahamat
  • Adrian Zenz
  • Matthew Kroenig
  • Andriy Yermak
  • Vitaly Savelyev
  • Oleksandr Korniyenko
  • Dainius Kreivys
View All
IPSE'S AUTHORS LAST 24h
  • No New Authors inserted in the last 24 hours
Check all the Authors in the last 24h
IPSEs IN THE LAST 24H
  • Ravina Shamdasani
    Ravina Shamdasani “According to international law, Israel must ensure civilians have access to medical care, adequate food, safe water and sanitation. Failure to meet these obligations may amount to forced displacement, which is a war crime. There are strong indications that this [Rafah offensive] is being conducted in violation of international humanitarian law.” 2 hours ago
  • António Guterres
    António Guterres “I appeal to all those with influence over Israel to do everything in their power to help avert even more tragedy. The international community has a shared responsibility to promote a humanitarian ceasefire, the unconditional release of all hostages and a massive surge in life-saving aid. It is time for the parties to seize the opportunity and secure a deal for the sake of their own people.” 2 hours ago
  • Annalena Baerbock
    Annalena Baerbock “I warn against a major offensive on Rafah. A million people cannot simply vanish into thin air. They need protection. They need more humanitarian aid urgently … the Rafah and Kerem Shalom [Karem Abu Salem] border crossings must immediately be reopened.” 2 hours ago
  • Ayman Safadi
    Ayman Safadi “Tremendous effort has been made to produce an exchange deal that'll release hostages and realize a ceasefire. Hamas has put out an offer. If Netanyahu genuinely wants a deal, he will negotiate the offer in earnest. Instead, he is jeopardizing the deal by bombing Rafah.” 19 hours ago
View All IPSEs inserted in the Last 24h
NEW CONTEXTS IN THE LAST 24H
  • No New Contexts inserted in the last 24 hours
View All New Contexts inserted in the last 24h

Biden saying US would defend Taiwan if attacked by China shifting away from the policy of so-called strategic ambiguity

Page with all the IPSEs stored in the archive related to the Context Biden saying US would defend Taiwan if attacked by China shifting away from the policy of so-called strategic ambiguity.
The IPSEs are presented in chronological order based on when the IPSEs have been pronounced.

Grant Newsham
Grant Newsham

“This statement deserves to be taken seriously. It is a clear enough statement that the U.S. will not sit by if China attacks Taiwan.”

author
Retired U.S. Marine Corps colonel and now a research fellow at the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies
23 May 2022 2 3
Read More
Ross Feingold
Ross Feingold

“American officials will probably emphasise over the coming hours that Biden's comments meant the US would provide military equipment in the event of China's invasion of Taiwan. If he can have a do-over he'd probably change the way he replied to that question. Unfortunately, it causes a lot of confusion not just here in Taiwan, but in the United States as well as with China.”

author
Asia political risk analyst based in Taipei
23 May 2022 5 3
Read More
Wen-Ti Sung
Wen-Ti Sung

“This is both a useful 'slip of tongue' and a revealing reflection of a widely shared assumption within the US government. Biden has done this multiple times before, be it at the CNN Townhall in early 2021, or his statement about the non-existent 'Taiwan agreement,'. This time Biden's statement itself seems illogical but the sentiment and signal it sends are politically very useful.”

author
Political scientist who teaches at Australian National University’s Taiwan Studies Program
23 May 2022 4 3
Read More
Matthew Kroenig
Matthew Kroenig

“Some say it's a carefully coordinated campaign of ambiguity. Others say that Biden is senile and misspoke. I would argue that at this point the reason doesn't really matter. In the event of a war, it would always be up to the president to decide whether to intervene or not regardless of the formal policy. We now have a clear window on what Biden's decision would be. For years, US strategists argued the ambiguity was a good thing. It kept Beijing guessing but was not an explicit threat to intervene in what the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] would see as its internal affairs. As the US-China relationship has deteriorated, and the military balance in the Taiwan Strait shifted, many US strategists have called for the US to clarify its commitment.”

author
Deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security
23 May 2022 8 3
Read More
IPSEs by Context
May
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
0102030405
06070809101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031
IPSEs by City
IPSEs by Author
IPSEs by Entity
IPSEs by Country
arrow