Chinese President Xi Jinping's warning to US President Donald Trump during their recent Beijing meeting — that Taiwan could trigger 'clashes and even conflicts' and place bilateral relations in 'great jeopardy' — was not rhetorical posturing but a statement of structural reality, according to an analysis published in the European Times. The piece, authored by Khedroob Thondup, argues that Taiwan remains the defining fault line in US-China relations, simmering beneath every diplomatic exchange.

The Ambiguity at the Core

Thondup traces the roots of the current tension to the deliberate ambiguity built into Washington's 'One China' policy — a framework shaped by the Nixon-Mao rapprochement of the 1970s and later formalised through the three US-China communiques, the 1979 normalisation of relations, the Taiwan Relations Act, and the Six Assurances. Washington acknowledged Beijing's position without endorsing it, while sustaining robust unofficial ties with Taipei. 'This ambiguity was meant to stabilise relations, but in practice it institutionalised uncertainty,' Thondup wrote. That unresolved status, he argues, is what makes every summit between the two powers incomplete.

Why Taiwan Cannot Be Sidelined

The analysis identifies several interlocking reasons that keep Taiwan at the centre of global geopolitics. First, its geostrategic position: Taiwan sits astride the first island chain, a maritime corridor critical to US and allied defence planning. Second, its semiconductor industry makes it indispensable to global supply chains — a leverage point neither Washington nor Beijing can afford to ignore. Third, the Chinese Communist Party has tied its domestic legitimacy to eventual 'reunification' with Taiwan; any perceived weakness on the issue, Thondup noted, risks internal instability for Beijing.

Alliance Credibility and the Indo-Pacific Calculus

Thondup further argued that Taiwan is inseparable from US alliance credibility across the Indo-Pacific. Washington's security commitments to Tokyo, Seoul, and Canberra are, in his assessment, judged by the resolve it demonstrates on Taiwan. Any sign of American retreat, he warned, would send shockwaves through the region's alliance architecture. This comes amid broader concerns that missteps in arms transfers, diplomatic recognition, or military manoeuvres could trigger escalation — particularly given the limited clarity in international law governing such scenarios.

Summit Choreography and the Shadow Issue

'Summits between Washington and Beijing follow a familiar choreography; trade concessions, military hotlines, or climate cooperation are announced, but Taiwan remains the shadow issue,' Thondup wrote. Xi's direct language to Trump, he argued, underscores that beneath any surface-level cooperation lies a deeper contest over sovereignty and legitimacy. Notably, Xi's framing echoes the language of successive Chinese leaders: Taiwan is described as the 'core of core interests' — a designation that signals non-negotiability for Beijing even as Washington insists that credibility in Asia requires resisting coercion. The pattern suggests that no bilateral breakthrough on trade or climate can fully neutralise the Taiwan variable as long as its political status remains unresolved.