Updated September 28, 2023
Taiwan: The Origins of the U.S. One-China Policy
On January 1, 1979, the U.S. government recognized the
Republic of China.” In October 1945, the ROC accepted the
government of the People’s Republic of China (PRC or
surrender of Japanese troops in Taiwan on behalf of the
China) as the “sole legal Government of China,” and
World War II allies, and assumed control of Taiwan.
severed official diplomatic relations with the Taiwan-based
Republic of China (ROC), which the United States had
China then plunged into four years of civil war. The forces
previously recognized as the sole legal government of
of the Communist Party of China emerged victorious and,
China. In negotiations leading to that switch and in follow-
on October 1, 1949, established the PRC. The ROC’s ruling
up negotiations in 1982, the U.S. and PRC governments
party, the Kuomintang (KMT), retreated to Taiwan and
reached understandings with each other related to self-
brought the ROC government with them. Between 1946
governed Taiwan, over which the PRC claims sovereignty.
and 1949, approximately 2.2 million KMT forces and
The U.S. government also offered commitments and
supporters arrived in Taiwan from mainland China, joining
assurances to Taiwan. The undertakings from that era
an existing Taiwan population that in 1945 numbered
underpin the U.S. “one-China” policy and experts widely
nearly 6 million. The KMT imposed martial law on Taiwan
credit them with maintaining peace in the Taiwan Strait.
in 1949 and kept it in place until 1987, when the party
yielded to popular pressure to democratize.
Today, the uneasy status quo over Taiwan is under strain.
The Soviet Union, the common foe that provided the
The United States continued to recognize the anti-
strategic rationale for U.S.-PRC rapprochement in the
communist ROC government as the legal government of all
1970s, is long gone. After decades of fast-paced economic
China. Yet in January 1950, U.S. President Harry S.
growth, the PRC is a global power whose leaders have
Truman indicated that the United States would not stand in
reportedly given China’s military a deadline of 2027 to
the PRC’s way if it sought to take Taiwan. Truman said the
develop the capability to take Taiwan by force. Taiwan has
United States would “not pursue a course which will lead to
transformed itself from an authoritarian regime into a
involvement in the civil conflict in China.”
democracy that seeks a bigger role in the global
community. Meanwhile, U.S.-PRC distrust is growing, with
The outbreak of the Korean War six months later stoked
frictions over the two governments’ implementation of their
fears of further communist expansion in Asia and prompted
Taiwan-related commitments from the earlier era being a
Truman to reverse course. He ordered the U.S. Navy’s
major contributor to tensions. In considering Taiwan policy,
Seventh Fleet “to prevent any attack on Taiwan.” More
U.S. policymakers, including Members of Congress, face
U.S. military support for Taiwan followed. In 1951, the
the challenge of how to balance U.S.-PRC historical
United States established a Military Assistance and
commitments, obligations under U.S. law, the desire to
Advisory Group on Taiwan. In 1954, following PRC
support a democracy, concern about PRC coercion, and
shelling of ROC-controlled islands next to the PRC coast,
U.S. interest in forestalling conflict in the Taiwan Strait.
the United States signed a mutual defense treaty with the
The following is an overview of the commitments that
ROC, intended as much to restrain the ROC from assaults
guide the U.S. one-China policy, and the contexts that
on the mainland as to deter a PRC attack. In 1955, the 84th
shaped them.
Congress passed the Formosa Resolution (H.J.Res 159; P.L.
84-4), authorizing the President to employ U.S. armed
Taiwan’s History Before 1971
forces to protect Taiwan and Penghu. (The 93rd Congress
Austronesian peoples first settled Taiwan about 6,000 years
repealed the Formosa Resolution in 1974’s P.L. 93-475.)
ago. Dutch and Spanish settlers arrived in the 1600s. The
Dutch drove out the Spanish, and an exile from the Qing
New Understandings 1971-1982
Empire—the predecessor polity to modern China—expelled
President Richard M. Nixon took office in 1969 and charted
the Dutch. The Qing took control of Taiwan in 1683, made
a new course for U.S. policy by pursuing rapprochement
it a Qing province in 1885, and ceded it to Japan a decade
with the PRC based on common enmity for the Soviet
later. Revolutionaries toppled the Qing Empire in 1911, and
Union. In 1971, Nixon’s National Security Advisor Henry
established a republic on mainland China, the Republic of
Kissinger made two secret visits to Beijing to lay the
China (ROC), in 1912. Taiwan remained a colony of Japan.
groundwork for a presidential visit the next year.
In 1943, U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, U.K.
In October 1971, U.N. General Assembly Resolution 2758
Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and the ROC’s leader,
(XXVI) recognized the PRC’s representatives as “the only
Chiang Kai-shek, declared in the Cairo Declaration that “all
legitimate representatives of China to the United Nations,”
the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese,” including
and expelled “the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek.” The
Taiwan (referred to as “Formosa”) and the nearby Penghu
United States, represented by its then-permanent
archipelago (“the Pescadores”), “shall be restored to the
representative to the U.N., George H.W. Bush, voted
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

Taiwan: The Origins of the U.S. One-China Policy
against the resolution, but did not rally sufficient opposition
contentious issue of U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. They took
to defeat it. PRC representatives replaced ROC
up that issue in the 1982 August 17 Communiqué, in which
representatives in both the General Assembly and the
the PRC states “a fundamental policy of striving for
Security Council, as the PRC assumed the rights and
peaceful reunification” with Taiwan, and the U.S.
obligations of China as a U.N. member state.
government states it “understands and appreciates” that
policy. The U.S. government states in the 1982
The 1972 and 1978 U.S.-PRC Joint Communiqués
communiqué that with those statements “in mind,” “it does
President’s Nixon’s groundbreaking 1972 trip to China
not seek to carry out a long-term policy of arms sales to
yielded the Shanghai Communiqué, the first of three U.S.-
Taiwan,” and “intends gradually to reduce its sale of arms
PRC joint communiqués that the United States views as an
to Taiwan, leading, over a period of time, to a final
element of its one-China policy, and the PRC views as the
resolution.” The U.S. government also declares “no
basis for U.S.-PRC ties today. In the document, the U.S.
intention” of “pursuing a policy of ‘two Chinas,’” meaning
government “acknowledges that all Chinese on either side
the PRC and the ROC, “or ‘one China, one Taiwan.’”
of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and
Taiwan is a part of China,” and states that the U.S.
While negotiating the 1982 communiqué, President Ronald
government “does not challenge that position.” The U.S.
Reagan authorized U.S. officials to convey to Taiwan what
side also “reaffirms its interest in a peaceful settlement of
have become known as the Six Assurances, statements of
the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves,” and
what the United States did not agree to in its negotiations
“affirms the ultimate objective of the withdrawal of U.S.
with the PRC. Those statements include that the United
forces and military installations from Taiwan.”
States did not agree to a date for ending arms sales, or to
consult with the PRC on arms sales, or to take any position
The 1978 U.S.-PRC Normalization Communiqué states the
regarding Taiwan’s sovereignty. (See CRS In Focus
terms under which the two countries agreed to establish
IF11665, President Reagan’s Six Assurances to Taiwan.)
diplomatic relations on January 1, 1979. In it, the U.S.
government recognizes the PRC government as the “sole
Policies Today
legal Government of China” and states that within that
The Joseph R. Biden, Jr. Administration describes itself as
context, “the people of the United States will maintain
upholding a longstanding U.S. “one-China” policy, guided
cultural, commercial, and other unofficial relations with the
by the TRA, the three U.S.-PRC joint communiqués, and
people of Taiwan.” The U.S. government also
the Six Assurances. U.S.-Taiwan relations remain
“acknowledges the Chinese position that there is but one
unofficial. U.S. government policy states that the United
China and Taiwan is part of China,” without endorsing that
States does not support Taiwan independence, opposes
position as its own. In an accompanying statement, the
unilateral changes to the cross-Strait status quo, is
Jimmy Carter Administration announced that it would
committed to meeting its TRA obligations to support
terminate the U.S.-ROC defense treaty, effective January 1,
Taiwan’s self-defense, and has an abiding interest in peace
1980, and withdraw its remaining military personnel from
and stability in the Taiwan Strait. U.S. policy, rarely stated
Taiwan within four months.
publicly, is to treat Taiwan’s political status as unresolved.
The U.S. government attributes frictions over Taiwan to
The Taiwan Relations Act (1979)
increasingly coercive PRC military and other activities
On January 26, 1979, after the United States broke official
around Taiwan. The U.S. government views such activities
ties with the ROC, the Carter Administration transmitted to
as challenging what Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken
Congress a bill to establish a framework for unofficial
describes as the “foundational” understanding in the three
relations with Taiwan. Some Members saw the
joint communiqués: that “any differences regarding Taiwan
Administration’s bill text as doing too little to ensure the
will be resolved peacefully.”
wellbeing of Taiwan’s people. As enacted, the Taiwan
Relations Act (TRA, P.L. 96-8; 22 U.S.C. §§3301 et seq.)
In 2022, PRC leader Xi Jinping stated that China would
includes multiple provisions that were absent from the
pursue “peaceful reunification” with Taiwan “with the
Administration’s draft, including the security-related
greatest sincerity and the utmost effort,” but added, “we
provisions for which the TRA is now best known. The TRA
will never promise to renounce the use of force.” The PRC
states that “the United States will make available to Taiwan
rejects the TRA and the Six Assurances as “unilaterally
such defense articles and defense services in such quantity
concocted” and insists that U.S.-China relations must be
as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a
built on the “common understandings” of the three joint
sufficient self-defense capability.” The TRA also states that
communiqués. The PRC objects to U.S. government
it is U.S. policy “to maintain the capacity of the United
interactions with Taiwan officials, viewing them as
States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion
violations of the U.S. commitment to maintain only
that would jeopardize the security, or the social or
unofficial relations with Taiwan, and as encouraging
economic system, of the people on Taiwan.” As the
“‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces.”
Administration requested, the TRA directs that unofficial
U.S. relations with Taiwan be carried out through a
Taiwan still refers to itself officially as the ROC. Its
nonprofit corporation, the American Institute in Taiwan.
president, Tsai Ing-wen, criticizes PRC efforts “to erase the
sovereignty” of the ROC and has stated that the ROC and
1982 U.S.-PRC Joint Communiqué/Six Assurances
the PRC “should not be subordinate to each other.” She has
As they negotiated establishment of diplomatic relations,
called for Taiwan to “embrace our global role.”
the U.S. and PRC governments agreed to set aside the
https://crsreports.congress.gov

---

Taiwan: The Origins of the U.S. One-China Policy

IF12503
Susan V. Lawrence, Specialist in Asian Affairs


Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12503 · VERSION 2 · UPDATED

---