Is this a hard suggestion meaning that anyone caught violating it would suffer a warning or a ban? Or would sharing some public, non-Indian sources that I hope forum members would think is as reliable as anonymous "reliable sources" with regards to Washington's internal policies be an exception?
First, Global Times, a more hawkish Chinese tabloid that, while not representative of official CPC policy, publishes opinions the party considers acceptable. The author is an assistant professor at the School of International Studies, Nanjing University. The author believes that a nuclear umbrella over Taiwan is wishful thinking, but he does not completely discount the possibility. He claims strong opposition from China is a deterrence to the policy being implemented, but Biden undoing Blinken's state visit within a day by insulting Xi shows how little respect America has for China's concerns.
Now, for a Taiwanese source.
The Diplomat is basically used to gauge public opinion over potential Western Pacific policies Washington and/or its lackeys hope to implement. The two authors are Legislative Assistants in the Legislative Yuan, Republic of China (Taiwan). They, like the GT article above, confirmed that Joseph Wu indeed have discussed including Taiwan under its nuclear umbrella. That such a policy is even brought up for discussion, in my opinion, is dangerous. The authors quoted Mearsheimer, who everyone else loves to quote on the issue of Ukraine due to his supposedly dovish and realist opinions.
Finally, an American source.
The author holds the Jessica T. Mathews Chair and is co-director of the Nuclear Policy Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Unlike the two previous articles that were published in 2023, this was published in 2017, when U.S.-China relations were still good. In fact, the relations were very good compared to how far they have deteriorated since.
This article calls for peace and for the United States to take a less aggressive posture towards nuclear weapon use. However, if people actually read the actual details of this proposed plan, they will find that this less hawkish policy still calls for a nuclear umbrella over Taiwan, even during nonnuclear conventional warfare. Also, since the plan is supposed to be less aggressive, this implies that the hidden or unspoken clauses within the U.S. 'strategic ambiguity' policy towards Taiwan, even back in 2017, was more aggressive than the plan.
The U.S. nuked Japan. General Douglas MacArthur wanted to nuke China but was ultimately stopped. People may argue that because MacArthur was stopped, the U.S. would similarly shirk from a nuclear commitment towards its Western Pacific lapdogs. However, the U.S. today is not the U.S. of the Cold War era. Henry Kissinger, who counseled against NATO expansion to the east, is now seen as too peace-loving, despite Kissinger engineering the collapse of the Soviet Union and indiscriminately bombing hundreds of thousands of civilians in Cambodia.
