Follow us on social

google cta
Signal-2022-10-12-160321_001

Surprise high level talks could calm US-China tensions over Taiwan

But experts say Washington and Beijing still need to make concrete steps to improve bilateral ties.

Reporting | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

Following a tense few months of superpower shadowboxing, a flurry of talks have broken out between the United States and China. 

On Monday, U.S. Ambassador to Beijing Nicholas Burns met with Foreign Minister Qin Gang for the first time since an apparent Chinese spy balloon knocked U.S.-China ties off course earlier this year.

But the main attraction came on Wednesday and Thursday, when National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan sat down with Wang Yi — China’s top diplomat — for over eight hours of talks that the White House described as “candid, substantive, and constructive.” 

The pair discussed a series of thorny issues, including bilateral ties, the war in Ukraine, and rising tensions over Taiwan. In readouts from the talks, each side emphasized the importance of keeping open channels of communication and the need to stabilize relations between the two great powers.

Experts say the meetings are a welcome step, but concrete steps are still needed to reassure observers that ties are improving. “What is needed on both sides is a recognition of the fact that they both contribute to the downward slide in relations and thus both need to be willing to take actions to arrest that slide,” said Michael Swaine of the Quincy Institute.

“Countries around the world, including close U.S. allies, are looking for meaningful progress toward stabilizing the relationship and averting a crisis or worse over Taiwan,” Swaine added. “So has this meeting begun a process toward that end? And if so, when will we see tangible signs of such progress?”

Following the balloon incident, Secretary of State Antony Blinken canceled a major planned visit to China that has yet to be rescheduled. Tensions rose in the ensuing months, with each side trading barbs over Taiwan.

Beijing was particularly incensed at Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s high-profile meeting with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen, in addition to a spate of recent U.S. arms sales to Taiwan that China viewed as a sign that President Joe Biden was not truly committed to deescalation.

As ties continued to worsen, a top Pentagon official said late last month that China was no longer “picking up the phone when we’re calling them.”

“From Beijing’s perspective, Biden is gaslighting [Chinese President] Xi [Jinping], and a resumption of high-level talks would only serve to further encourage and legitimize this behavior,” reporter Ethan Paul argued in RS last week.

It’s unclear what led Beijing to change course so quickly. One possible explanation came yesterday, when Reuters revealed that, after the balloon incident, the U.S. decided to delay a number of “planned actions against China” in order to separate the flare in tensions from other aspects of the bilateral relationship. 

Regardless of why it’s happening now, reengagement could create significant upside for both parties, especially when it comes to the war in Ukraine, according to Anatol Lieven and Jake Werner of the Quincy Institute.

The Biden administration “can build on this meager but noteworthy shift in tone, recognizing that U.S. and Chinese interests are more often aligned than opposed, and explore what might be accomplished when the two most powerful countries in the world step away from confrontation,” Lieven and Werner wrote in RS today.

Hidden in the spate of recent talks was a meeting between Ambassador Burns and Beijing’s commerce minister, Wang Wentao. Burns described the conversation as an “open and detailed discussion on the bilateral trade relationship,” which has faced significant pressure as many in Washington push for a “decoupling” of the U.S. and Chinese economies.

As economist Adam Tooze recently noted, a less capricious approach to bilateral trade would go a long way toward calming relations between the two powers and avoiding a new cold war. 

“[I]t is hard to see how [Washington’s current approach], in which the United States arrogates to itself the right to define which trajectory of Chinese economic growth is and is not acceptable, can possibly be a basis for peace,” Tooze argued. “If the United States is still interested in global economic and political order, and it surely should be, it must be open to negotiate peaceful change. Otherwise, it is simply asking for a fight.”


National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan (via Reuters)
google cta
Reporting | Asia-Pacific
NATO
Top photo credit: Keir Starmer (Prime Minister, United Kingdom), Volodymyr Zelenskyy (President, Ukraine), Rutte, Donald Tusk (Prime Minister, Poland) and Friedrich Merz (Chancellor of Germany) in meeting with NATO Secretary, June 25, 2025. (NATO/Flickr)

Euro-elites melt down over NSS, missing — or ignoring — the point

Europe

The release of the latest U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS) has triggered a revealing meltdown within Europe’s political and think-tank class. From Berlin to Brussels to Warsaw, the refrain is consistent: a bewildered lament that America seems to be putting its own interests first, no longer willing to play its assigned role as Europe’s uncomplaining security guarantor.

Examine the responses. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz finds the U.S. strategy “unacceptable” and its portrayal of Europe “misplaced.” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, for his part, found it necessary to remind the U.S. that the two allies "face the same enemies." Coming from a Polish leader, this is an unambiguous allusion to Russia, which creates clear tension with the new NSS's emphasis on deescalating relations with Moscow.

keep readingShow less
Gaza war
Top image credit: Palestinians receive their financial aid as part of $480 million in aid allocated by Qatar, at a post office in Gaza City on May 13, 2019. Photo by Abed Rahim Khatib. Anas-Mohammed via shutterstock.com

Gaza's economy is collapsing. It needs liquidity now.

Middle East

As the world recently marked the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, and only days after the U.N. Security Council approved the U.S.-backed resolution outlining a new security and governance framework for Gaza, one central issue remains unresolved. Gaza’s economy is collapsing.

Political resolutions may redefine who administers territory or manages security, but they do not pay salaries, keep ATMs functioning, or control hyperinflation. Without Palestinian-led institutions independently allowed to manage money transparently and predictably, a Palestinian state risks becoming purely symbolic.

keep readingShow less
Polymarket ISW
Top image credit: Jarretera and jackpress via shutterstock.com

Think tanker altered Ukraine war map before big Polymarket payout

Washington Politics

On November 15, as Russian forces were advancing on the outskirts of the town of Myrnohrad in eastern Ukraine, retail investors placed risky bets in real time on the battle using Polymarket, a gambling platform that allows users to bet on predictive markets surrounding world events. If Russia took the city by nightfall — an event that seemed exceedingly unlikely to most observers — a handful of retail investors stood to earn a profit of as much as 33,000% on the battle from the comfort of their homes.

When nightfall came, these longshot gamblers miraculously won big, though not because Russia took the town (as of writing, Ukraine is still fighting for Myrnohrad). Instead, it was because of an apparent intervention by a staffer at the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a D.C.-based think tank that produces daily interactive maps of the conflict in Ukraine that Polymarket often relies on to determine the outcome of bets placed on the 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.