The most recent direct discussion between U.S. President Joseph Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping was dominated by the Taiwan issue—which has become increasingly volatile and has returned to a central point of tension in the relationship. The telephone conversation allowed each president to restate their respective positions. Hopefully such an exchange will contribute to restraint, non-provocations, and stability between Beijing and Washington (although Taipei has its own agency and can cause instability).

The recent conversation offered an opportunity to manage bilateral relations from a strategic height. But because of domestic political strife in the U.S, there will likely be no letup in attempts to amplify “China threat” rhetoric.

The United States often uses the term “international waters,” but no such thing is defined in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. When the false claim is made that China is in violation of the rules, it needs to clarify its jurisdiction.

In the midst of the Cold War, US policymakers became convinced that détente with China would best serve America’s strategic interests. It was only made possible after the question of Taiwan was handled with diplomatic dexterity. The magic formulation clinched after painstaking negotiation was US acknowledgement of the Chinese position that “there is one China, and Taiwan is a part of China”.

At the recent meeting in Luxembourg between China and the United States, the PRC emphasized two bedrock interests — Taiwan and the broader Asia-Pacific. America has been shifting its approach on both fronts. If it does not dial back its confrontational attitude, prosperity and peace in the region will not be attained.

If the United States and China went into armed conflict, it would be ruinous for both nations. The two governments must work together to find common ground, address arising issues, including tensions with Taiwan, and prevent war.

There was nothing new revealed in the U.S. president’s visit, other than launching Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. Roping in Japan and South Korea and declaring that the U.S. would “intervene” in a Taiwan conflict, all amounted to old news.

The U.S. secretary of state restated and reinforced the Biden administration’s approach, proposing an “invest, align, compete” strategy for success over China. The speech revealed significant clues about the features of America’s basic strategic game ahead.

The phrase “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow” has been heard frequently in Taiwan since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. But separatists on the island are not sure the United States would come to their rescue if Beijing moved toward reunification.

The crisis in Ukraine quickly led China-observers to draw comparisons to the similar provocations that exist in the Taiwan Strait regarding Taiwanese sovereignty and Beijing’s desire to take control of the island. The way Russia’s offensive is unfolding can lead to sobering takeaways for all sides party to Taiwan and China’s standoff.