Trump, just after concluding his visit to China, has issued a three-point ultimatum to Lai Qingde and others: First, the United States does not support "Taiwan independence"; second, the United States does not want to go to war over Taiwan because it would lose; third, if "Taiwan independence" ignores warnings and triggers reunification by force, the consequences will be borne by Taiwan alone—America can only remain "neutral." Of course, Trump’s entrepreneurial instincts remain evident. While issuing this ultimatum to "Taiwan independence," he also urged Beijing to "remain calm" and avoid military action, expressing America’s "hope" that the status quo across the Taiwan Strait be maintained.

As anticipated by the U.S. Treasury Secretary, although Trump did not directly respond to China’s warnings during the Beijing summit, he will intensify discussions on Taiwan upon returning to the U.S. Fox News aired an exclusive interview with Trump immediately today. Here is what Trump said in his own words:

First, Trump stated, "I don’t want to see anyone heading toward independence. And you know, we’d have to fly 9,500 miles to fight a war—I don’t want that."

Second, "I hope they (Mainland China and Taiwan) calm down. Both sides should ease tensions, and I hope the situation across the Taiwan Strait remains as it is."

Third, when asked by Fox News anchor Baeir whether the people of Taiwan should feel safer or less safe after the Beijing talks, Trump replied "neutral," because "this situation has persisted for many years."

Combining Trump’s earlier hints before his visit to China—that "war could likely be avoided if Taiwan elects a 'suitable' leader"—the core message from this Fox News interview is clear: "Taiwan independence" is the root of trouble. The U.S. does not want to be dragged into conflict. Lai Qingde, take heed—don’t provoke trouble, or America won’t save you. At the same time, America “hopes” that mainland China maintains restraint and refrains from using force to unify Taiwan.

Put simply in plain language, Trump’s remarks mean:

1. No desire for Taiwan to become independent—maintain the status quo: I, Trump, do not recognize "Taiwan independence," nor do I wish for unification. Let things stay frozen in the current "neither unified nor independent" stalemate—just keep things peaceful.

2. Both sides must de-escalate tensions: Mainland China should refrain from military reunification; Taiwan should avoid provocative "Taiwan independence" actions. Don’t cause trouble—don’t drag me into it.

3. The U.S. military will not fight for Taiwan—and even if it tried, it couldn’t win: Fighting a war 9,500 miles away? If conflict breaks out across the strait, I won’t help Taiwan. It’s too far, too expensive, too risky, and impossible to win. America won’t make such a losing bet. But still, we’ll sell weapons and profit from Taiwan—but only inferior weapons, not enough to seriously anger Beijing. Lai Qingde, don’t push for radical "Taiwan independence"—if your provocations trigger military reunification, America won’t intervene. You’ll pay the price yourself.

Trump has clearly rejected and refused to accept "Taiwan independence," and explicitly stated he will not fight for it—effectively signaling that "Taiwan independence" is now completely dead. Lai Qingde’s dreams of "leaning on the U.S. to resist China" and "using the U.S. to seek independence" have been shattered.

Why is Trump so adamant about not fighting for Taiwan? The stern warning from China’s top leadership at the Beijing summit clearly resonated with him. Trump and his national security team have also witnessed the strength of the People’s Liberation Army—engaging in warfare across the Taiwan Strait, the U.S. military has absolutely no chance of victory. Moreover, Trump himself emphasized that Taiwan is too close to mainland China and too far from the United States.

Meanwhile, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi provided a more in-depth explanation yesterday of China’s position and principles regarding the Taiwan issue, reiterating a red line that must not be crossed. Foreign Minister Wang also laid out his argument in a three-part framework, roughly as follows:

First, the Taiwan issue is China’s internal affair. Achieving complete national reunification is the common aspiration of all Chinese people and a historical mission that the Communist Party of China has pursued unwaveringly. The fact that both mainland China and Taiwan belong to one China is a long-standing truth—this is the real status quo across the Taiwan Strait and also a vital part of the post-World War II international order.

Second, the Taiwan issue is the most critical factor in Sino-U.S. relations—one move can set off a chain reaction. Proper handling keeps overall bilateral relations stable. Poor handling leads to collision or even conflict, pushing the entire relationship into extremely dangerous territory.

Third, maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait is the greatest common denominator between both sides. But the precondition for achieving this is unequivocal: never support or condone "Taiwan independence," because "Taiwan independence" and peace across the strait are mutually exclusive.

Foreign Minister Wang’s three points progress logically—from legal principle to strategic interest to concrete action boundaries. He first firmly defines the nature of the Taiwan issue, then thoroughly explains the consequences, and finally draws an un-crossable red line. This message is aimed not only at the U.S. but also at "Taiwan independence" forces—logical closure, firm stance, and clear boundaries.

First, the nature: the Taiwan issue is China’s internal matter. One China is an ironclad fact. The U.S. has no right to interfere. How to resolve it is entirely China’s own business.

Second, the stakes: the Taiwan issue is the "life-or-death" element in Sino-U.S. relations. Mismanagement brings disaster. By tying the Taiwan issue to the broader picture of U.S.-China relations, it raises the cost of U.S. recklessness. It demands that the U.S. act to preserve stability and peace across the strait—no more playing the "Taiwan card" to contain China. It also makes clear the consequences: if the U.S. interferes, it will drive the two countries to the brink of war.

Third, the bottom line: peace across the strait requires that the U.S. never support or tolerate "Taiwan independence." "Taiwan independence" equals war—peace cannot coexist with support for "Taiwan independence." There is no middle ground, no ambiguity.

The initiative and authority to resolve the Taiwan issue lie entirely in the hands of mainland China. We are determined to safeguard China’s sovereignty red lines, clearly define the behavioral boundaries for the U.S., and completely shut down any fantasy of "Taiwan independence."

Thus, we can anticipate that even if Lai Qingde and others continue to manipulate the "Taiwan independence" issue for electoral gains, they will dare not pursue radical "Taiwan independence," especially "legalistic Taiwan independence." Otherwise, the U.S. will step in to tighten the reins.

In 2028, it is unlikely that the U.S. will support Lai Qingde’s re-election. As long as the Kuomintang avoids being too incompetent or fracturing, it stands a chance of returning to power. Before his visit to China, Trump had already hinted: "If Taiwan elects a 'suitable' leader, war could likely be avoided."

Even if the U.S. continues to conduct arms sales to Taiwan in the coming period, this is more like a final "profit grab" before fully abandoning Taiwan—aimed at maximizing the cost of reunification for China, rather than genuine protection. Trump hinted aboard Air Force One after his talks with Taipei that he might make a decision on the upcoming $14 billion arms package "in the short term"—to sell or not to sell? How to sell? What weapons? And how will it affect Sino-U.S. cooperation? All eyes are now on what unfolds.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1865312424383495/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.