Rarely do diplomats resort to such blunt language as a senior U.S. diplomat used on Taiwan this week.

The tone of his message was: We’ve tried to tell you in private. You ignored us. NOW LISTEN UP! Your scheme to hold a referendum next year that would change the name of your island is idiotic and dangerous.

The referendum will only stir up trouble. Not just for you, but also for us. Stop now.

Even with that forceful message, my bet is that Taiwan won’t desist. Trouble lies ahead in the Strait. And the U.S. may get dragged into it.

The messenger was Thomas J. Christensen, deputy assistant secretary of state for East Asia, and the forum was a gathering in Annapolis, Maryland, of senior U.S. and Taiwanese officials, military officers and scholars. In other words, people who count.

Christensen said at the outset that the Bush administration wants to see a strong and moderate Taiwan, but that the island must recognize that it’s in a tight spot where a misstep could spark China into military action. I've boldfaced to make skimming easier. Full text available here.

“As much as we oppose Beijing’s threat to use force, we also take it seriously, and Taipei cannot afford to do otherwise. It is for this reason that Taiwan’s security is inextricably linked to the avoidance of needlessly provocative behavior. This does not mean that Taipei should or can be passive in the face of PRC pressure. But it means that responsible leadership in Taipei has to anticipate potential Chinese red lines and reactions and avoid unnecessary and unproductive provocations,” he said.

Christensen said holding a referendum on whether Taiwan should apply to join the United Nations under the name “Taiwan,” rather than the traditional but archaic “Republic of China,” makes no sense other than for “domestic political posturing.”

Far as I can tell, that makes sense. Everyone knows that Taiwanese would dearly like to become part of the United Nations. Everyone also knows that won’t happen as long as China holds veto power in the Security Council.

Christensen then gets to the nub: Taiwanese leader Chen Shui-bian is using the referendum to needlessly jab a stick in the eye of China. He’s doing it partly to win political points at home.

“What worries us, very specifically, is the issue of name change. This draft referendum raises the question of what Taiwan should be called in the international community. Moreover, it does so in what could be interpreted by many to be a legally-binding popular vote. In an ideal world, we would not have to worry about this. In the vernacular, we all speak of “Taiwan.” The State Department does, people in Taiwan do, even Beijing does. So why worry about using the same word in this more formal political and legal context? The simple reality is that, in the world of cross-Strait relations, political symbolism matters, and disagreements over it could be the source of major tensions or even conflict,” he said.

He accused Taiwan of trying to change the status quo, which both China and Taiwan have agreed to respect, and by doing so ignoring “the security interests of Taiwan’s most steadfast friend” – the United States.

He blasted Chen for describing Taiwan as already independent, and said that assertion, along with the referendum, amount to “needless provocations that are patently not in the best interests of the Taiwan people or of the United States.”

Boy, if the U.S. point man talks like that in public, imagine how blunt he is in private.

Since my posts about Taiwan bring a lot of responses, may I make a polite request? A lot of you are smart people on different sides of this issue. Let’s start postings from the presumption that Taiwan goes ahead with the referendum. What happens next? How might the Olympics constrain China? How can the United States avoid spilling blood over this?