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 Venezuela
Top image credit: President Donald Trump monitors U.S. military operations in Venezuela, from Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida, on Saturday, January 3, 2026. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

Geo-kleptocracy and the rise of 'global mafia politics'

Global Crises

“As everyone knows, the oil business in Venezuela has been a bust, a total bust, for a long period of time. … We're going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country,” said President Donald Trump the morning after U.S. forces invaded Caracas and carried off the indicted autocrat Nicolàs Maduro.

The invasion of Venezuela on Jan. 3 did not result in regime change but rather a deal coerced at the barrel of a gun. Maduro’s underlings may stay in power as long as they open the country’s moribund petroleum industry to American oil majors. Government repression still rules the day, simply without Maduro.

keep readingShow less
Russian icebreakers
Top photo credit: Russian nuclear powered Icebreaker Yamal during removal of manned drifting station North Pole-36. August 2009. (Wikimedia Commmons)

Trump's Greenland, Canada threats reflect angst over Russia shipping

North America

Like it or not, Russia is the biggest polar bear in the arctic, which helps to explain President Trump’s moves on Greenland.

However, the Biden administration focused on it too. And it isn’t only about access to resources and military positioning, but also about shipping. And there, the Russians are some way ahead.

keep readingShow less
Iran nuclear
Top image credit: An Iranian cleric and a young girl stand next to scale models of Iran-made ballistic missiles and centrifuges after participating in an anti-U.S. and anti-Israeli rally marking the anniversary of the U.S. embassy occupation in downtown Tehran, Iran, on November 4, 2025.(Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via REUTERS CONNECT)

Want Iran to get the bomb? Try regime change

Middle East

Washington is once again flirting with a familiar temptation: the belief that enough pressure, and if necessary, military force, can bend Iran to its will. The Trump administration appears ready to move beyond containment toward forcing collapse. Before treating Iran as the next candidate for forced transformation, policymakers should ask a question they have consistently failed to answer in the Middle East: “what follows regime change?”

The record is sobering. In the past two decades, regime change in the region has yielded state fragmentation, authoritarian restoration, or prolonged conflict. Iraq remains fractured despite two decades of U.S. investment. Egypt’s democratic opening collapsed within a year. Libya, Syria, and Yemen spiraled into civil wars whose spillover persists. In each case, removing a regime proved far easier than constructing a viable successor. Iran would not be the exception. It would be the rule — at a scale that dwarfs anything the region has experienced.

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.