Home | News | Trump’s Claim on Xi’s Taiwan Assurance Raises Questions About Its Commitment

Trump’s Claim on Xi’s Taiwan Assurance Raises Questions About Its Commitment

U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (Photo: @StockSavvyShay)

By Mark Wang

August 18, 2025
3:21 pm
Los Angeles, CA

In a high-profile interview with Fox News, former U.S. President Donald Trump claimed that Chinese President Xi Jinping personally assured him that China would not invade Taiwan while Trump remained in office. This statement, made ahead of Trump’s scheduled talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin, has sparked widespread discussion among international observers, Taiwan’s leaders, and security analysts. Trump framed the comment as a product of his direct personal diplomacy, saying Xi had told him, “I will never do it as long as you’re president.” While Trump presented this as a sign of stability and mutual understanding, the remark has raised concerns about over reliance on informal agreements and the deeper strategic intentions of China regarding Taiwan. China has long viewed Taiwan as a breakaway province that must eventually be

China has long viewed Taiwan as a breakaway province that must eventually be reunited with the mainland, by force if necessary. Although it functions as a fully self-governing democracy, Taiwan is not formally recognized by most countries, including the United States, due to Washington’s adherence to the “One China” policy. Despite this, the U.S. remains Taiwan’s most significant international supporter and arms supplier. Trump’s account of Xi’s private pledge is therefore both politically sensitive and diplomatically complex. If true, it suggests that Beijing was, at least at one point, willing to provide verbal assurances to avoid escalating tensions with the U.S. However, many experts warn that such comments may be more tactical than sincere, serving to placate the U.S. while China continues to build its military capacity.

Reactions in Taiwan reflect a mix of cautious appreciation and strategic skepticism. Wang Ting-yu, a senior lawmaker in Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party, acknowledged the value of American support but insisted that national security cannot rely on promises made by adversaries or even allies. “Security cannot rely on the enemy’s promise, nor can it rely solely on the help from friends. Strengthening our own defense capability is fundamental,” Wang said. This perspective aligns with growing calls within Taiwan to boost its own defense forces and military readiness, particularly in light of increased Chinese military activity near the island in recent years. Analysts in Taipei further downplayed Trump’s remarks, calling them likely performative or exaggerated for political effect, rather than reflective of any meaningful policy breakthrough.

Indeed, Taiwanese security scholars such as Shen Ming-shih argue that even if Xi made such a remark, it likely lacked any formal commitment and should not be interpreted as a guarantee. Shen noted that China has a track record of making political statements that are later disregarded when strategic interests shift. Similarly, Song Cheng-en of the Prospect Foundation interpreted Xi’s use of the word “patience” as a warning rather than a reassurance. According to Song, China may not be rushing to invade Taiwan now, but it remains fully committed to the goal of reunification and is strategically positioning itself for potential future action. “This is a dangerous signal,” Song noted, “as it reveals that China is no longer concealing its ambitions, and that Washington is fully aware of this trajectory.”

From a broader perspective, Trump’s remarks raise important questions about how major powers communicate on issues of war and peace, and how much trust can—or should—be placed in verbal diplomacy between leaders with competing agendas. The Chinese Embassy in Washington reiterated its firm position, labeling Taiwan the “most important and sensitive issue” in U.S.-China relations, and urging the U.S. to strictly follow the “One China” principle. As Washington continues its policy of strategic ambiguity—supporting Taiwan militarily while avoiding an explicit defense guarantee—the risk of miscalculation remains high. Trump’s claim, whether a reflection of genuine private dialogue or a calculated political message, underscores the fragile balance that defines cross-strait relations and the broader U.S.-China rivalry. In this tense environment, Taiwan’s best safeguard lies not in verbal assurances, but in a robust, credible deterrent and deepened global partnerships built on shared values—not personalities.