When President Bush received the Chinese Communist Party leader, Hu Jintao, at the White House, the Taiwan Haters Club was hoping that history would repeat itself, and that Mr. Bush would make remarks similar to those he did when he appeared with China’s premier, Wen Jiabao, on December 9, 2003.

Back then, when Mr. Bush was asked about a referendum that was planned to coincide with Taiwan’s presidential election on March 20, 2004, Mr. Bush recounted what he told Mr. Wen on the issue: “We oppose any unilateral decision by either China or Taiwan to change the status quo. And the comments and actions made by the leader of Taiwan indicate that he may be willing to make decisions unilaterally to change the status quo, which we oppose.” If that was not damaging enough, then listen to what Mr. Wen had to say: “We appreciate the position of the US government.”

A senior Bush administration official tried to play down the incident afterwards by claiming that Mr. Bush had also told his visitor that America would have to get involved if China tried to use coercion or force to unilaterally change the status quo. Nevertheless, Beijing, emerged as the winner as it had succeeded in pushing Washington to rein in Taipei.

All pre-summit signs this time around indicated that the Chinese were hoping Mr. Bush would unleash the “nuclear option” again and lambaste Mr. Chen for recently abolishing the National Unification Council – “NUC” – and its guidelines. Taiwan also seemed to be bracing itself for the worst. Taiwan’s de facto ambassador to Washington, David Lee, told reporters that unpleasant “surprises” couldn’t be ruled out.

So what a relief that Mr. Bush didn’t bow to Mr. Hu after all on Taiwan. At the arrival ceremony on the South Lawn, Mr. Bush simply reiterated the standard American line on the subject: “The United States maintains our one China policy based on the three communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act. We oppose unilateral changes in the status quo in the Taiwan Strait by either side, and we urge all parties to avoid confrontational or provocative acts. And we believe the future of Taiwan should be resolved peacefully.”

Careful observers could recognize that, while almost identical, what Mr. Bush said this time in fact was an improvement over previous statements. On top of “provocative” acts, words usually used to refer to Mr. Chen’s maneuvers, Mr. Bush added “confrontational” acts, adding China’s actions to the equation. That makes America seem more even-handed, as opposed to being harsher on the island democracy.

Mr. Hu, in his speech, said “President Bush, you and the U.S. government have stated on various occasions that you are committed to the one China policy, abide by the three Sino-U.S. joint communiques, and oppose Taiwan independence. We appreciate your commitments.” Here, the Chinese dictator was trying to put a false version on the record by ignoring the Taiwan Relations Act and twisting the U.S. position of not supporting Taiwan independence into opposing it.

Later in the Oval Office in front of Mr. Hu, Mr. Bush, to his credit, corrected the record and stated, “I assured the President my position has not changed. I do not support independence for Taiwan.” The acting senior director for Asian Affairs at the National Security Council, Dennis Wilder, also emphasized, “The president today, in every time he mentioned the subject, said he does not support Taiwan independence.”

Mr. Hu tried his tricks again in the Oval Office. Mr. Hu claimed that during the meeting Mr. Bush “said that he does not hope that the moves taken by the Taiwan authorities to change the status quo will upset the China-U.S. relationship, which I am highly appreciative.” Mr. Hu was giving the impression that Mr. Bush was siding with the Communist Chinese. Not quite, as Mr. Wilder also clarified.

If all these signals were not meant as a rebuff to Mr. Hu, then I don’t know what they were.

While I’m glad the White House held its ground and didn’t try to please Mr. Hu at the expense of Taiwan, it’s even more encouraging to see Taipei playing a more sophisticated game in getting its message to the Americans. On the very same day Mr. Bush was entertaining Mr. Hu, the Wall Street Journal editorial page carried a sharp article from the president of Taiwan headlined “We Believe in Democracy.” Highlighting Taiwan’s democratic credentials, contrasting with China’s continuous reluctance to embrace real and meaningful political reforms, is a very good strategy to appeal to the American mind.

“We believe in democracy and uphold the principle of popular sovereignty, which means that Taiwan’s future and our relations with China can only be determined by the will of Taiwan’s 23 million people,” Mr. Chen declared rightfully. How can America, especially under this administration, afford to be viewed as not supporting this simple and decent fact?

Mr. Liu is a former Washington-based columnist of Hong Kong’s Apple Daily.