Follow us on social

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

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)
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Nato Summit Trump
Top photo credit: NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, President Donald Trump, at the 2025 NATO Summit in The Hague (NATO/Flickr)

Did Trump just dump the Ukraine War into the Europeans' lap?

Europe

The aerial war between Israel and Iran over the past two weeks sucked most of the world’s attention away from the war in Ukraine.

The Hague NATO Summit confirms that President Donald Trump now sees paying for the war as Europe’s problem. It’s less clear that he will have the patience to keep pushing for peace.

keep readingShow less
Antonio Guterres and Ursula von der Leyen
Top image credit: Alexandros Michailidis / Shutterstock.com

UN Charter turns 80: Why do Europeans mock it so?

Europe

Eighty years ago, on June 26, 1945, the United Nations Charter was signed in San Francisco. But you wouldn’t know it if you listened to European governments today.

After two devastating global military conflicts, the Charter explicitly aimed to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war.” And it did so by famously outlawing the use of force in Article 2(4). The only exceptions were to be actions taken in self-defense against an actual or imminent attack and missions authorized by the U.N. Security Council to restore collective security.

keep readingShow less
IRGC
Top image credit: Tehran Iran - November 4, 2022, a line of Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps troops crossing the street (saeediex / Shutterstock.com)

If Iranian regime collapses or is toppled, 'what's next?'

Middle East

In a startling turn of events in the Israel-Iran war, six hours after Iran attacked the Al Udeid Air Base— the largest U.S. combat airfield outside of the U.S., and home of the CENTCOM Forward Headquarters — President Donald Trump announced a ceasefire in the 12-day war, quickly taking effect over the subsequent 18 hours. Defying predictions that the Iranian response to the U.S. attack on three nuclear facilities could start an escalatory cycle, the ceasefire appears to be holding. For now.

While the bombing may have ceased, calls for regime change have not. President Trump has backtracked on his comments, but other influential voices have not. John Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, said Tuesday that regime change must still happen, “…because this is about the regime itself… Until the regime itself is gone, there is no foundation for peace and security in the Middle East.” These sentiments are echoed by many others to include, as expected, Reza Pahlavi, exiled son of the deposed shah.

keep readingShow less

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.