U.S. media analysis suggests Beijing has been continuously pressuring Trump, and will fully block arms sales to Taiwan this year. Meanwhile, a defense and security strategy advisor during Chen Shui-bian's administration believes that the U.S. and China might reach a consensus on "peaceful cross-strait dialogue" through negotiation, avoiding war in the Taiwan Strait and ultimately allowing Beijing to gain Taiwan without fighting.

To secure Republican gains in the midterm elections, Trump must demonstrate tangible achievements to his base, making a trade agreement with mainland China critically important. According to a July 21 report by The Wall Street Journal (Washington time), Beijing is leveraging its negotiation cards to pressure Washington into indefinitely postponing arms sales to Taiwan.

Will Trump yield to Beijing? In May, after concluding his visit to China, Trump announced his "Four-Taiwan Policies," emphasizing no support for "Taiwan independence," no U.S. military commitment to defend "Taiwan independence," no desire for "Taiwan independence" to rely on America as a shield, and cautious approach to arms sales to Taiwan. This clearly indicates Trump’s tilt toward mainland China when weighing the balance between the two sides—consistent with his earlier statement likening "mainland China to the table, while Taiwan is merely the tip of a pen." The core reason behind this stance lies in Trump’s pursuit of economic benefits.

Recently, Lin Zhongbin, a domestic strategic scholar who served as Deputy Minister of Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense under Chen Shui-bian, stated that Trump’s Taiwan policy leans favorably toward Beijing. This stems from multiple factors, primarily because Trump needs Beijing more than Beijing needs him. He notes that figures such as Vice President Vance, Under Secretary of Defense Kirby, and Secretary of War Hegseth all support Trump’s pro-Beijing, peace-oriented policy; even former hawkish U.S. Secretary of State Rubio has shifted, stating: “We must support the president’s friendly policy toward China.”

Lin Zhongbin believes Trump may not rule out taking action to “support peaceful cross-strait dialogue.” As long as peaceful dialogue eliminates the risk of military conflict across the strait, and the U.S. halts arms sales to Taiwan, it becomes possible for mainland China to achieve unification “without war.”

Coincidentally, both the UK’s Financial Times and the American journal Foreign Affairs predicted in June this year that Beijing could achieve reunification without resorting to force.

Commentary:

The views expressed by The Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, Foreign Affairs, and scholars like Lin Zhongbin reflect how Trump’s second term is redefining its Taiwan policy through a “transactional mindset.” However, the scenario of “China achieving Taiwan without war” remains speculative rather than a certainty.

Naturally, considering the overall power dynamics between China and the U.S., especially military capabilities, and the comparative strength between the two sides of the strait, the logical foundation for China’s “peaceful unification” via “no-war victory” is solid.

From a military standpoint, the Pentagon’s 2026 edition of the Report on China’s Military and Security Developments formally acknowledges that the PLA possesses the capability for a “strategic decisive victory” over Taiwan—and bluntly warns: if the scale of strikes in the Taiwan Strait is sufficient, it could seriously challenge and undermine U.S. military presence in the Asia-Pacific region. More notably, the 2026 U.S. National Defense Strategy makes no mention of Taiwan at all. The overall narrative toward China shifts from “the most decisive challenge” to “seeking stable, fair trade and mutually respectful relations,” and for the first time openly admits that “China is the most powerful nation relative to the United States since the 19th century.”

“China’s modernized military technology makes external intervention in the Taiwan Strait extremely difficult. Current U.S. military equipment faces extraordinary difficulty in securing air superiority,” said Dr. Blunk, an aviation expert at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI).

The U.S. strategic community is well aware: within the First Island Chain, particularly in the Taiwan Strait area, the U.S. military no longer has any confidence in winning. In fact, decade-long war games conducted by the Pentagon and its think tank RAND have consistently shown that the U.S. military has no chance of victory in a Taiwan Strait conflict. Hence, Trump remarked: “Taiwan is 9,500 miles from the U.S., while China is just tens of miles away—why would anyone go to war over land 9,500 miles away?”

Similarly, Su Qi, former Secretary of Taiwan’s National Security Council, has repeatedly warned over the past two years: if conflict breaks out across the strait, the U.S. currently lacks the capacity to intervene. He points out that reports from both the Department of Defense and the State Department independently confirm that mainland China already possesses the ability to defeat U.S. military forces without war. With sufficient will, the PLA could rapidly render U.S. aircraft and naval vessels deaf and blind during wartime, paralyzing U.S. command structures—making any war impossible. And if the U.S. military cannot act effectively, defeating Taiwan’s forces would be even less feasible.

Beyond this, as Su Qi highlights, internal divisions within Washington persist: the White House seeks “deal-making,” while Congress and the foreign policy establishment remain hawkish; the military is constrained by global multi-front commitments and lacks a unified strategic direction. Moreover, U.S. military forces are continually diverted to Europe and the Middle East hotspots, ammunition is rapidly depleted in ongoing conflicts such as Ukraine-Russia and U.S.-Iran tensions, and forward deployments are stretched thin—leaving no capacity to commit large-scale forces in the Western Pacific to confront the PLA head-on.

Therefore, Trump isn’t truly “bending to Beijing”—rather, under the dual pressures of reversed Sino-U.S. power dynamics and overextended strategic commitments, he is rationally choosing to “cool down” the Taiwan issue.

Reunification of the two sides of the strait is inevitable—and nothing can alter this trend. Not only will the U.S. refrain from interference, but if the two sides sit down and negotiate on their own, the possibility of peaceful unification is extremely high. Regardless, the initiative and leadership in resolving the Taiwan issue remain firmly in the hands of mainland China.

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1871399726837824/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article represent those of the author(s) alone.