Beijing Pressures Washington Over Taiwan Arms Deal Ahead of Trump-Xi Summit

News analysis

On Sept. 24, U.S. President Donald Trump is expected to meet Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leader Xi Jinping in Washington for their second summit this year, following their first meeting in Beijing in May. But the planned meeting is already buckling under pressure, with Beijing warning that it could be jeopardized if the United States approves a roughly $14 billion arms package for Taiwan.

Taiwan is expected to be one of the most sensitive issues on the agenda. Beijing has long described the self-ruling island as a core interest and has repeatedly warned Washington against deepening military ties with Taipei. Despite Beijing’s concerns about possible U.S. involvement in a conflict over Taiwan, Washington has never formally committed itself to automatically defending the island.

The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, which remains a cornerstone of U.S. policy toward Taiwan, states that the United States will provide Taiwan with defensive arms and maintain the capacity to resist force or coercion that could threaten the island’s security or social and economic system. It does not, however, explicitly require the United States to intervene militarily in the event of an attack.

RELATED: Beijing Taps Veteran Diplomats to Gauge Trump’s Stance Ahead of the Midterms

Arms deal looms over summit

For the best of our weekly content！

You are now signed up for our newsletter

Check your email to complete sign up

That ambiguity has long been deliberate. Under Washington’s longstanding policy of “strategic ambiguity,” the United States has avoided making clear in advance exactly how it would respond to a Chinese attack on Taiwan. Though it recognizes the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legal government of China and acknowledges Beijing’s position that Taiwan is part of China, it stops short of endorsing that claim. U.S. policy also calls for cross-Strait differences to be resolved peacefully.

The uncertainty has historically been intended to discourage both a Chinese attack and unilateral moves by Taiwan that could trigger a conflict. That balance is now coming under more pressure as Beijing pushes Washington for greater clarity ahead of the summit.

Trump has at times expressed reluctance about the prospect of the United States fighting a war over Taiwan, while his administration has also continued approving major arms sales to Taipei. The pending $14 billion arms package has become one of the clearest points of friction between the two leaders.

Trade and critical minerals add leverage

Beijing has strongly opposed U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan, while Washington maintains that such sales are consistent with its obligations under the Taiwan Relations Act to help the island preserve a sufficient self-defense capability. Taiwan is also competing for attention with a much broader U.S.-China agenda. Trump and Xi are expected to discuss trade, rare-earth supplies, artificial intelligence, Iran, fentanyl precursors, and potential Chinese purchases of U.S. goods.

Meanwhile, Trump has increasingly used anti-communist rhetoric at home. During remarks at Mount Rushmore ahead of the nation’s 250th anniversary, he described communism as a major threat to American liberty and compared its danger with some of the gravest conflicts and attacks in U.S. history.

That rhetoric does not by itself establish a shift in Taiwan policy, but it adds another layer to an already complicated relationship with Beijing. For China, the larger concern is whether Washington will continue operating within the familiar boundaries of strategic ambiguity or move toward a clearer position on Taiwan.

Maintaining the status quo?

Trump has so far appeared dismissive of Beijing’s threats to cancel the summit, saying he was not worried about the possibility. At the same time, China retains substantial economic leverage through rare-earth supply chains and trade, while the United States is seeking greater access to critical minerals and additional Chinese purchases of American goods. That leaves Taiwan caught in the middle of a much larger negotiation.

The upcoming summit may not produce a formal change in U.S. policy, but even a subtle shift in language on Taiwan would be closely watched in Taipei, Beijing, and across the region. The larger question is whether Beijing’s combination of trade incentives, diplomatic pressure, and leverage over critical supply chains can push Washington away from its longstanding policy of strategic ambiguity, and, if so, what might replace it.