Congress finds the following:
(1)
Taiwan is a free and prosperous democracy of more than 23,000,000 people and an important economic partner to the United States.
(2)
The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has long sought to subjugate Taiwan and has not renounced the use of force to do so.
(3)
The United States longstanding One-China Policy, which is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act, the three United States-China Joint Communiqués, and the Six Assurances, has guided United States-Taiwan relations across successive administrations and contributed to peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific.
(4)
From July to August 1982, before and immediately after the release of the United States-China Joint Communiqué on United States Arms Sales to Taiwan (“the 1982 Joint Communiqué”) on August 17, 1982, the Reagan Administration articulated six key foreign policy principles regarding United States-Taiwan relations.
(5)
On July 10, 1982, then-Under Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger sent a cable to James Lilley, then-director of the American Institute in Taiwan, detailing what the United States had not agreed to in its negotiations with the People’s Republic of China over the 1982 Joint Communiqué. He wrote—
(A)
“We have not agreed to set a date certain for ending arms sales to Taiwan”;
(B)
“We have not agreed to prior consultation on arms sales”;
(C)
“We have not agreed to any mediation role for the U.S.”;
(D)
“We have not agreed to revise the Taiwan Relations Act”;
(E)
“We have not agreed to take any position regarding sovereignty over Taiwan”; and
(F)
“The PRC has at no time urged us to put pressure on Taiwan to negotiate with the PRC; however, we can assure you that we will never do so”.
(6)
On August 17, 1982, then-Secretary of State Geroge Shultz provided Lilley with a version of the Six Assurances for Taiwan’s government to release, stating that the United States—
(A)
“has not agreed to set a date for ending arms sales to Taiwan”;
(B)
“has not agreed to consult with the PRC on arms sales to Taiwan”;
(C)
“will not play any mediation role between Taipei and Beijing”;
(D)
“has not agreed to revise the Taiwan Relations Act”;
(E)
“has not altered its position regarding sovereignty over Taiwan”; and
(F)
“will not exert pressure on Taiwan to enter into negotiations with the PRC”.
(7)
On August 17, 1982, then-Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs John H. Holdridge testified on behalf of the executive branch before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations about the 1982 Joint Communiqué that—
(A)
“[W]e did not agree to set a date certain for ending arms sales to Taiwan”;
(B)
“[The 1982 Joint Communiqué] should not be read to imply that we have agreed to engage in prior consultations with Beijing on arms sales to Taiwan”;
(C)
“[W]e see no mediation role for the United States”;
(D)
“We have no plans to seek any such revisions [to the Taiwan Relations Act]”;
(E)
“[T]here has been no change in our longstanding position on the issue of sovereignty over Taiwan”; and
(F)
“[N]or will we attempt to exert pressure on Taiwan to enter into negotiations with the PRC”.
(8)
On August 18, 1982, Holdridge testified on behalf of the executive branch before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs about the 1982 Joint Communiqué that—
(A)
“[W]e did not agree to set a date certain for ending arms sales to Taiwan”;
(B)
“[The 1982 Joint Communiqué] should not be read that we have agreed to engage in prior consultations with Beijing on arms sales to Taiwan”;
(C)
“[W]e see no mediation role for the United States”;
(D)
“We have no plans to seek any such revisions [to the Taiwan Relations Act]”;
(E)
“[T]here has been no change in our longstanding position on the issue of sovereignty over Taiwan”; and
(F)
“[N]or will we attempt to exert pressure on Taiwan to enter into negotiations with the People’s Republic of China”.
(9)
These six foreign policy principles, as articulated by Eagleburger, Shultz, and Holdridge, have collectively come to be known as the Six Assurances.
(10)
The House of Representatives and Senate passed a concurrent resolution “reaffirming the Taiwan Relations Act and the Six Assurances as cornerstones of United States-Taiwan relations” on May 16, 2016, and July 6, 2016, respectively.
(11)
The Asia Reassurance Initiative Act of 2018 (
Public Law 115–409) states that it is the policy of the United States “to faithfully enforce all existing United States Government commitments to Taiwan, consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 (
Public Law 96–8), the [three Joint Communiqués], and the Six Assurances”.
(12)
The National Defense Authorization Acts for Fiscal Years 2019 through 2025 (Public Laws 115–232, 116–283, 116–92, 117–81, 117–263, 118–31, and 118–159) each recognized the importance of the Six Assurances to United States-Taiwan relations.
(13)
The Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 (
Public Law 116–260) states that “[i]t is the policy of the United States to reinforce its commitments to Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act in a manner consistent with the “Six Assurances” and in accordance with the United States “One China” policy”.