Last month, two well-known US scholars, Kenneth Lieberthal and David Lampton, published an important article entitled Heading off the Next War in The Washing-ton Post. This article says that a cross-strait confrontation must be avoided and advocates a mid-term framework similar to the past cross-strait framework.
If recent statements by US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia James Kelly and US Defense Ministry officials are also considered, the level of cross-strait tension becomes clear.
The US has repeatedly said that independence will bring disaster for Taiwan -- that it will destroy Taiwan, harm China and affect the US. Washington has even made it clear for the first time that the US will not tolerate either side changing the status quo as defined by the US.
It seems the US feels a crisis nearing, and wants to use a more aggressive approach and a clearer stance to prevent a confrontation.
The US sees the cross-strait and the US-Taiwan-China relationships as part of a dynamic status quo. A future misstep by any of the parties might bring it out of control.
Taiwan consciousness and Chinese collective frustration are increasing. Unreasonable statements and actions are increasing on both sides. Unless diplomatic preventive measures are adopted quickly, there is a risk that the situation will become uncontrollable. In order to head off a confrontation, many people lean towards establishing a mechanism that will limit the scope of current cross-strait and US-Taiwan-China relationships.
The Post article advocates the establishment of an improved framework. A major point in the framework proposed long ago by Harry Harding and Stanley Roth was that China should not use military force and Taiwan should not declare independence.
Although this has remained unchanged for several decades, it implies the vision of a final development toward unification.
The framework advocated by these two US scholars still specifies that China should not use armed force and Taiwan should not declare independence, and advocates establishment of a mechanism built on mutual trust.
An important new point is that Beijing can continue to assert that there is only one China and that Taiwan is a part of it, but it must give up its threat to use military force to change Taiwan's status.
Similarly, this perspective allows that Taiwan can continue to assert that it is an indepen-dent, sovereign country -- ie, beyond China's control -- but that it must give up its pursuit to turn this into a juridical fact.
In other words, the two sides can continue to maintain their different viewpoints.
Furthermore, this improved framework does not imply a future unification. It also requires that the international community assist Taiwan's return to participation in international organizations. These are all positive propositions.
Beijing has never ruled out the concept of a mid-term framework, although it may not have given it thorough consideration. The US has once again put this suggestion forward.
If both Taipei and Beijing are willing to take this opportunity and consider or accept this framework, and if they -- agreeing not to declare independence or use military force -- quickly stabilize the cross-strait relationship under US supervision, allow Taiwan more international space, and establish a mechanism built on mutual trust, this might be the ideal result.
Both Taiwan and China should make good use of the creative thinking particular to the Chinese people and utilize this window of opportunity.
George Tsai is a research fellow of the Institute of International Relations at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
The US Senate’s passage of the 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which urges Taiwan’s inclusion in the Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercise and allocates US$1 billion in military aid, marks yet another milestone in Washington’s growing support for Taipei. On paper, it reflects the steadiness of US commitment, but beneath this show of solidarity lies contradiction. While the US Congress builds a stable, bipartisan architecture of deterrence, US President Donald Trump repeatedly undercuts it through erratic decisions and transactional diplomacy. This dissonance not only weakens the US’ credibility abroad — it also fractures public trust within Taiwan. For decades,
In 1976, the Gang of Four was ousted. The Gang of Four was a leftist political group comprising Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members: Jiang Qing (江青), its leading figure and Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) last wife; Zhang Chunqiao (張春橋); Yao Wenyuan (姚文元); and Wang Hongwen (王洪文). The four wielded supreme power during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), but when Mao died, they were overthrown and charged with crimes against China in what was in essence a political coup of the right against the left. The same type of thing might be happening again as the CCP has expelled nine top generals. Rather than a
The ceasefire in the Middle East is a rare cause for celebration in that war-torn region. Hamas has released all of the living hostages it captured on Oct. 7, 2023, regular combat operations have ceased, and Israel has drawn closer to its Arab neighbors. Israel, with crucial support from the United States, has achieved all of this despite concerted efforts from the forces of darkness to prevent it. Hamas, of course, is a longtime client of Iran, which in turn is a client of China. Two years ago, when Hamas invaded Israel — killing 1,200, kidnapping 251, and brutalizing countless others
A Reuters report published this week highlighted the struggles of migrant mothers in Taiwan through the story of Marian Duhapa, a Filipina forced to leave her infant behind to work in Taiwan and support her family. After becoming pregnant in Taiwan last year, Duhapa lost her job and lived in a shelter before giving birth and taking her daughter back to the Philippines. She then returned to Taiwan for a second time on her own to find work. Duhapa’s sacrifice is one of countless examples among the hundreds of thousands of migrant workers who sustain many of Taiwan’s households and factories,
RSS