Click it and Unblock the Notifications
US President Donald Trump described Xi Jinping as a "great" leader and spoke of a "fantastic future" after their summit. Yet Xi used the meeting to issue a firm Taiwan warning. Xi called Taiwan the "most important issue" in United States‑China ties. Xi also cautioned that poor handling could even lead to war.
During the talks, Xi told Trump that Washington’s Taiwan approach now shaped the wider relationship. Chinese state media quoted Xi saying, "If it is handled properly, the bilateral relationship will enjoy overall stability. Otherwise, the two countries will have clashes and even conflicts, putting the entire relationship in great jeopardy." The remarks placed Taiwan above trade in the dialogue.
The summit’s signal reached beyond the Taiwan Strait and affected partners like India and Japan. Anushka Saxena from the Takshashila Institution told Firstpost that "the era of the US as a reliable constant is effectively over". Saxena said countries that relied on Washington for stability now faced new uncertainty in Asia’s security planning.
Saxena said India, Japan and Australia needed stronger self-led security plans. Saxena added that India should push strategic autonomy with urgency. That included domestic capability, diverse partnerships, and fewer plans built on US assurances. Saxena argued those promises might not hold under Trump, especially during periods focused on deals.
Saxena said Xi’s language at the Trump-Xi summit marked "an unprecedented escalation" on Taiwan. Saxena said Xi tied Taiwan directly to military confrontation risk. That link cut across Trump’s focus on trade and economics. Saxena also said Xi placed Taiwan at the top of the United States‑China agenda.
Saxena said Xi had raised pressure in stages. Saxena noted a phone call last year with Trump. In that call, Xi said the United States "must handle the Taiwan question with prudence, so that the fringe separatists bent on Taiwan independence will not be able to drag China and America into the dangerous terrain of confrontation and even conflict".
Reflecting on the pattern, Saxena told Firstpost, "Xi has set a new precedent even if it is incremental. After last year's warning, he has now told Trump not only that the United States has actively mishandled the Taiwan situation, but also that military sparring may be a very real possibility as a result." Saxena linked this to sharper signalling.
Trump’s wider regional record also formed part of the backdrop. Over the past 16 months, Trump rolled back tools used to manage China. These included alliances and technology controls. Saxena said Xi likely sensed a retreat. Saxena added, "Likely, Xi is taking advantage of the fact that Trump is less concerned with Taiwan and more with striking business deals. As a consequence, this summit has set the symbolic stage for further warning and the setting of new upper limits on Taiwan. It is also possible that Xi is emboldened by Trump's rather favourable stance towards him during the visit and the conversations on opening up for business and people‑to‑people ties," and noted Saxena’s role in Takshashila’s Geostrategy Programme.
Trump also publicly criticised Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi of Japan over opposition to China’s Taiwan plans. Saxena said Japan may need higher defence spending and deeper deterrence talks. Saxena also cited nuclear hedging and wider minilateral links. These could include Australia, India, the United Kingdom, and France.
"The Quad cannot remain the centrepiece of regional security and deterrence strategy if Washington is no longer holding the table. New Delhi should be working harder with Tokyo, Canberra, Seoul, Europe, and Asean to build a regional architecture that does not require American leadership at the apex. And, wherever it serves its interests, it should maintain its working channels with Moscow," Saxena said. Saxena argued the Quad looked weaker under Trump.
Saxena’s view was that Xi tied Taiwan more tightly to overall United States‑China ties, while Trump focused on business gains. Saxena said this mix shifted planning for India and Japan. It left both preparing for regional security with less dependable US support. The summit therefore reshaped assumptions across Asia without changing the core flashpoint.
Sign in with Google