Three Links
Chinese 1979 foreign policy proposal
The Three Links or Three Linkages (Chinese: 三通; pinyin: sān tōng) was a 1979 proposal from the National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China (PRC) to open up postal, transportation (especially airline), and trade links between mainland China and Taiwan, with the goal of unifying Mainland China and Taiwan.
Before the establishment of the "Three Links", communication between the two sides were routed through intermediate destinations, primarily Hong Kong; Macau; Jeju, South Korea and Ishigaki, Okinawa Prefecture, Japan. The "Three Links" were officially established on 15 December 2008, with the commencement of direct flights, shipping and post.
History
In December 1978, Deng Xiaoping and his supporters won the 3rd plenary session of the 11th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, starting China's economic reform. This also began a new direction in the PRC's foreign policy. On January 1, 1979, Beijing proposed the Three Links of postal, commercial and transportation. It was also proposed together with the Four Exchanges, which included relatives, tourists, academic groups, cultural groups and sports representatives.
1979–1986: ROC response
In response to the Three Links, Republic of China (ROC) President Chiang Ching-kuo established the Three Noes policy (Chinese: 三不政策; pinyin: Sān Bù Zhèngcè). When the United States broke diplomatic ties with the ROC in 1979, the PRC believed that it had complete leverage in convincing the ROC government to talk. President Chiang refused, reiterating that there were to be "no contact, no negotiation and no compromise" (不接觸，不談判，不妥協) with the PRC.
1986–2000: Initial contact
The hijacking of a China Airlines cargo plane on May 3, 1986, shattered the Three Noes policy.
“Three Links” enters the record as chinese 1979 foreign policy proposal. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Three, Links and Chinese can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Three Links” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Three, Links and Chinese provides the most credible route into that argument.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 12, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q3275016. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1979, 2008, 1978 and 1986.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Three Links”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Three Links primary sources, Three Links archive and Three research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Three Links”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Three Links” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.