U.s. Think Tank The U.s. "one China" Policy

Of many factors influencing the American foreign policy making, the role of American think tanks is the most important but least appreciated one. As independent institutions, think tanks are intended to conduct research and produce independent, policy relevant knowledge. Think tanks have developed from pursuing academic credibility to approaching power core. Today, most think tanks focus their attention on the adoption of their policy prescriptions. Thus, American think tanks can be thought as the weather vane indicating the direction of the U. S. foreign policy making.America's "One China" policy has been grown out of nothing, from persistence to vacillation, since the founding of the People's Republic of China. After being carried out for one decade, America's "One China" policy has been undermined by the evolution of international structure, American domestic politics, and think tanks themselves. Now America's "One China" policy includes three pillars, that is, the "One China" principle, peaceful resolution, and cross-strait talks. Accordingly American think tanks have always played a role in the above three aspects.To be specific, the long-term trends of American think tanks' role in America's "One China" policy are manifested in the following.Generally speaking, academic research think tanks have exerted mid-term and long-term impact on America's "One China" policy, such as insistence on the "One China" principle and cross-strait talks. The influence of policy advocacy think tanks is short-term, for example, on the issue of arms sale to Taiwan. Because of their special relationship with America government, however, governmental contract think tanks' influences can exert short-term, mid-term or long-term influence especially on the issue of how the United States will intervene in the potential cross-strait war.Secondly, because of the rising conservatism in American domestic politics, almost all of American think tanks prefer Taiwan to mainland China on those substantive issues, such as whether the U. S. should support Taiwan's efforts of "exploring international space", how the United States should define mainland China "threats" against Taiwan's security, etc. On those normative issues such as whether the United States should stick to its "One China" policy, whether the United States should promote cross-strait talks, academic research and governmental contract think tanks prefer mainland China while policy advocacy think tanks prefer Taiwan.Thirdly, different types of think tanks have different degrees of sensitivity to the changes in American domestic politics. Governmental contract think tanks are less sensitive because of their stable channels with the government while policy advocacy think tanks are most vulnerable. Academic research think tanks are in between.At the same time, there are three limits to American think tanks' influence on America's "One China" policy. They are disagreements among and inside think tanks on specific issues, the domestic environment of American politics, and the international structure, or more precisely, the triangular relationship of Beijing, Washington, and Taipei. This suggests that there is still much room for diplomatic operation in terms of China's US policy.