
Trump doesn't know how to deal with China. His cowardice only makes a war with Taiwan more likely
The belief that bad things come in threes is an old superstition with scant basis in fact. Still, in these disordered times, it's natural to wonder whether war in Europe and the Middle East will be followed by war in Asia. Nuclear-armed India and Pakistan, firing off insults and missiles, recently demonstrated how real that prospect is. Emboldened by its alliance with Russia, North Korea's unpredictable rogue regime threatens almost everyone.
Yet it is China's accelerating confrontation with US-backed Taiwan that forms the most alarming panel in this gloomy Asian triptych. China's president, Xi Jinping, has reportedly told his generals to be ready by 2027 to conquer the self-governing island, which he regards as stolen sovereign territory. US officials warned last week that China already has sufficient capability to invade now, with amphibious landing craft, D-day-style floating docks, paratroopers and expanded air combat and missile forces in a constant state of readiness.
Recent intimidating offshore military exercises – pessimists call them 'rehearsals' – and propaganda and disinformation offensives suggest that politically, too, Beijing is preparing for a fight. It denounces Lai Ching-te, elected Taiwan's president last year, as a pro-independence 'destroyer of peace'. For his part Lai is talking tough, describing China as a 'hostile foreign force' and enacting '17 strategies' to curb sabotage and spying. A new Taiwanese TV drama, Zero Day, depicts the frightful impact of an invasion on an unprepared nation.
While cross-straits tensions are certainly high, a war between China and Taiwan has often been predicted but has so far been avoided. Since 1979, when the US established diplomatic relations with Beijing and de-recognised Taiwan (while pledging to help it defend itself), peace has held. But calculations change and complacency is dangerous. China is vastly more powerful now than it was 10 or 20 years ago. And for Xi, who turns 72 in June, unification is a legacy project.
A range of other factors may be pushing Xi towards a fateful decision, notably Donald Trump's strange mix of anti-China aggression and personal weakness. The US president could hike his punitive tariffs on China's exports at any moment, threatening an estimated 9m manufacturing jobs. His hostility towards the US's biggest rival is evident, seen again last week in discriminatory curbs on technology transfers and Chinese student visas.
These crude attempts to damage a Chinese economy struggling with sluggish post-Covid growth and high unemployment are akin to holding a gun to Xi's head. Does Trump realise how deeply provocative this is? Chinese Communist party control ultimately depends not on elections but on economic success and shared prosperity. Deliberately or not, Trump is assaulting the foundations of the CCP's power and authority.
If pushed too hard, and egged on by hardline nationalist cadres, there's a risk Xi could call Trump's bluff with two questions. Does he want a trade war or a real war? Or would he prefer to cut a deal instead – and abandon Taiwan?
Were China to obstruct Taiwanese maritime traffic, launch covert cyber-attacks on Taiwan, or impose a full naval and aerial blockade that fell short of all-out invasion, it could force Trump into a humiliating climbdown. It's no secret Washington opinion is split over defending Taiwan militarily. Under Trump, the longstanding policy of 'strategic ambiguity' has turned into one of chronic pusillanimity.
Trump doesn't want a war in east Asia, and Beijing knows it. It also rightly suspects that, like bullies everywhere, his aggressive bluster conceals a coward's weakness. He refuses to fight for Ukraine, a core western interest, and kowtows to Russian aggression. He's terrified Israel will start full-scale wars with Iran and Syria, drawing in the US. His policies are driven by self-interest, money and fear, not principles, treaties or laws.
So when people ask if Trump will fight for Taiwan, the answer is not really in serious doubt. In recent months Trump has suggested that Taiwan, like European Nato countries, is exploiting the US security umbrella and not paying enough for its own defence. He has criticised Taipei for supposedly monopolising the semi-conductor market at the expense of US jobs, and imposed tariffs on its exports. None of this inspires confidence in his approach, should a crisis occur.
Some American commentators argue that Taiwan is a bear trap, to be avoided at all costs – music to Xi's ears. Security researchers Jennifer Kavanagh and Stephen Wertheim recently argued in Foreign Affairs that US leaders need a middle path. 'Instead of clarifying its commitment to defend Taiwan, Washington should … downplay the importance of keeping the island out of Beijing's hands,' they wrote. To many, that will sound like surrender.
Amid this policy confusion, Taiwan presents a vulnerable target. Lai's tough line is opposed by many in Taipei, where political schisms are purposely inflamed by Beijing. Defence spending is rising, but not fast enough. Promised US weapons don't arrive. The island's notional borders are breached at will by Chinese ships and aircraft. Its armed forces and military doctrines require urgent modernisation. These problems may improve over time – which is another reason why Xi may not wish to wait.
Conventional wisdom suggests Beijing prizes geopolitical and economic stability above all else. But what if this comfortable assumption is wrong? Xi surely frames the battle for Taiwan as part of the wider contest between the US and China for regional partners, military superiority and global hegemony. Now a golden opportunity is arising. Thanks to Trump's chaotic tariffs, domestic firefights, isolationist policies and wanton disruption of European and Asian alliances, the US now looks beatable.
In China, three is considered a lucky number. Hong Kong returned to the fold in 1997, followed by Macau in 1999. Xi wants to complete the hat-trick before he's done dictating. Watching Trump's Crazy Gang White House carry on, China's leader could be forgiven for thinking Taiwan – and its American protectors – are there for the taking.
Simon Tisdall is a Guardian foreign affairs commentator
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Trump names nominees to take over commands in the Middle East and Africa
President Donald Trump is nominating Vice Adm. Brad Cooper to take over as the top U.S. military commander in the Middle East, the Pentagon said Wednesday. If he is confirmed, it would mark just the second time that a Navy admiral has held the job. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in a statement that Trump also is nominating Air Force Lt. Gen. Dagvin Anderson to head U.S. Africa Command. Anderson would be the first Air Force general to lead the command, which was created in 2007. Cooper is currently deputy commander of U.S. Central Command and has extensive experience serving and leading troops in the Middle East. The current head of the command, Army Gen. Erik Kurilla, is slated to retire after more than three years in the post. It is a crucial role as the region has been shaken by conflict, with the Trump administration pushing to broker a ceasefire deal after 20 months of war in Gaza and pressing for an agreement with Iran in negotiations over Tehran's rapidly advancing nuclear program. A 1989 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, Cooper commanded naval forces in the Middle East for close to three years as the head of the Navy's 5th Fleet in Bahrain. He left in February 2024 to take over as deputy at Central Command, which oversees U.S. military operations in the Middle East and is based in Tampa. Army and Marine generals have largely held the Middle East job since it was created in 1983. And two of the recent leaders — former Army Gen. Lloyd Austin and former Marine Gen. Jim Mattis, went on to serve as defense secretary. Central Command covers 21 countries across central and south Asia and northeast Africa and has overseen the conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Syria and Yemen. The only Navy officer to ever lead Central Command was Adm. William Fallon, who resigned after a year and retired. At the time, Fallon said he was stepping down due to press reports that suggested he was opposed to then-President George W. Bush's Iran policies. He said the reports were wrong but the perception had become a distraction. Cooper is a surface warfare officer and served on guided-missile cruisers, destroyers, aircraft carriers and amphibious assault ships. He commanded a destroyer and a cruiser. During his time leading the 5th Fleet, Cooper set up the Navy's first unmanned and artificial intelligence task force, and he led naval operations against the Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. He also oversaw the Navy's role in Operation Prosperity Guardian, the U.S.-led coalition created in late 2023 to counter Houthi attacks on commercial ships in the Red Sea. He previously served as commander of Naval Surface Force Atlantic and commander of U.S. Naval Forces Korea. Cooper is the son of a career Army officer and got his master's degree in strategic intelligence from the National Intelligence University. Anderson, nominated to lead operations in Africa, is a pilot who has flown the KC-135 tanker, the C-130 transport aircraft and the U-28A surveillance aircraft used largely by special operations forces. He has flown more than 3,400 flight hours, including 738 in combat. He is currently serving as the director of joint force development on the Joint Staff. According to the Air Force, he commanded a special operations squadron, an expeditionary squadron, an operations group and a special operations wing. He also led the task force that coordinated the repositioning of U.S. forces from Somalia and headed Special Operations Command, Africa, from 2019 to 2021. Africa Command is the newest of the Pentagon's geographic commands and covers the bulk of the African continent. Much of the U.S. military's efforts there have focused on combatting extremist groups and training local forces. Anderson would be the seventh general to head Africa Command. To date, four of the previous leaders were Army generals and two were Marines. Anderson is from Ypsilanti, Michigan, and graduated from the ROTC program at Washington University in St. Louis.


Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
French brandy and liqueur-maker Remy Cointreau axes sales targets as Trump tariffs bite
The maker of Remy Martin cognac and Cointreau liqueur has become the latest global drinks company to abandon its sales targets in the face of the trade war declared by US president Donald Trump. Paris-listed Remy Cointreau, which has teamed up with The White Lotus actress Aubrey Plaza to promote one of its brands, said that the 2030 goals that it had set out in 2020 were no longer realistic. It blamed tariffs as well as persistently slow US sales. However, the company's shares climbed 4 per cent as it said the worst has passed in terms of sluggish sales. 'We believe this difficult phase is now behind us,' said chief executive Eric Vallat. Its rivals, including Diageo and Pernod Ricard, have also withdrawn their sales targets as the sector endures a sharp slowdown from previous boom years for pricey liquors. But Remy, which makes 70 per cent of its sales from cognac, mostly in the US and China, has suffered more than peers as drinkers in both nations ditch the brandy and both governments have levied tariffs.


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Value of Stormont Executive's office in Beijing questioned
The value for money of the Northern Ireland Executive's office in the Chinese capital has been questioned. The chair of the Assembly's scrutiny committee for the Executive Office suggested it cost around a quarter of a million pounds a year to run the office in Beijing. The Executive also has offices in Washington DC and Brussels. It has had a presence in Beijing since 2014, before then-first minister Arlene Foster opened an Executive bureau in December 2016. Executive Committee chair Paula Bradshaw said she had concerns around its value for money, after the committee heard from the three bureaux during a meeting last month. Executive Office official Brenda Henderson said she appreciated there is frustration around transparency and accounting for what they do. ' One of the things that I want to do is to get that coherency across all three bureaux and with the international relations team in Belfast to make sure that we have a clear narrative, that our communications plans can let you see, and let our ministers see, exactly who we're meeting, what is the outcome of that, what does it mean, the 'so what' question in terms of the Programme For Government,' she told MLAs. 'Work is already under way on that.' Ms Bradshaw followed up by asking at what point would they conclude it is not value for money, and that they could be doing other things with that money. Ms Henderson said there are different ways to measure value for money. 'One of the things that I know that the overseas offices do is that they build relationships, you have to build those relationships before you utilise them, but there are things about companies, investment, increased student places they bring,' she said. 'I think what we need to do is be more absolutely transparent about that and be clear about the metrics, what we can measure and that we stand in front of those.' Permanent Secretary David Malcolm said he can 'see behind the curtain', and knows what the Beijing office is doing, He expressed frustration it was not communicated. He said last month the vice minister for education in China visited Northern Ireland and signed an agreement with the Confucious Institute in Belfast and the Department for the Economy for a £34 million programme over the next 10 years. He also said in Beijing this St Patrick's Day, there were two community organisations led by Chris Hazzard, including young people who had never left Ireland before. 'There is significant work we're doing,' he said. 'We are also talking to the Chinese Consul about a mini conference here later on,' he said. 'The Chinese have agreed to fund three placements in Beijing through the Arts Council to give people the opportunity to break into the Chinese market. There is a tremendous amount we're doing.' He added: 'Not just in Beijing, in Washington, we punch miles above our weight in the representational role we get, and indeed in Brussels.'