Follow us on social

google cta
Csm_gang_4b26c6d1c5

Chinese official's unusually blunt comments over US-Taiwan raises eyebrows

The ambassador's statements are upping the ante. If both sides don't check their rhetoric, it could lead to a confrontation sooner than we think.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

In a recent NPR interview, Qin Gang, China’s ambassador to the United States, delivered an unusually blunt message on Taiwan, stating:  “If, ...the Taiwanese authorities, emboldened by the United States...keep going down the road for independence, it most likely will involve China and the United States...in the military conflict."

Although the ambassador also reiterated the Chinese intention to seek peaceful unification as a top priority, this new message clearly presaged a Sino-U.S. military conflict if China’s view of present trends continues. Such a statement amounts to an intensification of the escalating tit-for-tat deterrence signals that Washington and Beijing have been sending one another in recent years, and highlights the need for the two nations to discuss ways to de-escalate this worsening situation.  

This requires, above all else, combining deterrence with credible reassurance messages confirming that each side continues to abide by the original Sino-U.S. understanding reached at the time of normalization. That understanding traded a U.S. acknowledgement of the Chinese stance that Taiwan is a part of China and an assertion that Washington would accept any uncoerced, peaceful resolution of the issue, for a Chinese adherence to a peaceful path toward unification as a top priority, while retaining the possibility of a use of force as a last resort.

To sustain this understanding, Washington urgently needs to breathe new life into its One China policy, first, by explicitly rejecting the dangerous notion, recently suggested in Congressional testimony by a senior U.S. defense official, that Taiwan serves as a U.S. strategic asset to be kept separate from China. Second, the Biden Administration should clearly state that it remains utterly opposed to any unilateral action by either Taipei or Beijing that would threaten peace across the Taiwan Strait, and unreservedly supports a renewed cross-Strait dialogue to stabilize the situation.

For its part, Beijing should end its saber rattling toward Taiwan and affirm that its pursuit of peaceful reunification should occur without the coercion (defined as an unambiguous application of direct pressure to force a preferred outcome) that many Chinese observers now believe is necessary. It should also convey a clear willingness to talk with Taiwan president Tsai Yingwen if she openly rejects a One China, One Taiwan policy stance and actively resists efforts by the U.S. or others to place the island within Washington's Asia defense perimeter, as some U.S. observers now suggest must occur. Neither action is in the interests of Taiwan under present conditions.

While the Washington and NATO face-off with Russia over Ukraine now dominates the headlines, the steadily worsening Sino-U.S. face-off over Taiwan presents a far more likely prospect of war between two nuclear powers.  All sides must take the recent comments by China's new ambassador to Washington as a clear indication of the urgent need to take decisive steps to arrest the slide toward confrontation and possible conflict.


Qin Gang, PRC ambassador to the U.S. (Munich Security Conference 2020/public domain)
google cta
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Trump and Lindsey Graham
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump, with Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), speaks to reporters aboard Air Force One en route from Florida to Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, U.S., January 4, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Does MAGA want Trump to ‘make regime change great again’?

Washington Politics

“We must abandon the failed policy of nation building and regime change that Hillary Clinton pushed in Iraq, Libya, Egypt and Syria,” then-candidate Donald Trump said in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in 2016.

This wasn’t the first time he eschewed the foreign policies of his predecessors: “We’re not looking for regime change,” he said of Iran and North Korea during a press conference in 2019. “We’ve learned that lesson a long time ago.”

keep readingShow less
Toxic exposures US military bases
Military Base Toxic Exposure Map (Courtesy of Hill & Ponton)

Mapping toxic exposure on US military bases. Hint: There's a lot.

Military Industrial Complex

Toxic exposure during military service rarely behaves like a battlefield injury.

It does not arrive with a single moment of trauma or a clear line between cause and effect. Instead, it accumulates quietly over years. By the time symptoms appear, many veterans have already changed duty stations, left the military, moved across state lines, or lost access to the documents that might have made those connections easier to prove.

keep readingShow less
Iraq War memorial wall
Top photo credit: 506th Expeditionary Security Forces Squadron, paints names Nov. 25, 2009, on Kirkuk's memorial wall, located at the Leroy Webster DV pad on base. The memorial wall holds the names of all the servicemembers who lost their lives during Operation Iraqi Freedom since the start of the campaign in 2003. (Courtesy Photo | Airman 1st Class Tanja Kambel)

Trump’s quest to kick America's ‘Iraq War syndrome’

Latin America

American forces invaded Panama in 1989 to capture Manuel Noriega, a former U.S. ally whose rule over Panama was marred by drug trafficking, corruption and human rights abuses.

But experts point to another, perhaps just as critical goal: to cure the American public of “Vietnam syndrome,” which has been described as a national malaise and aversion of foreign interventions in the wake of the failed Vietnam War.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.