China fails to create US and Taiwanese skepticism despite best efforts | Taiwan News | Sep. 30, 2026 20:50

The recent summit in Washington between US President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping concluded with a heavily publicized trade truce that saw Beijing walk away with a reprieve on electric vehicle tariffs, while Washington secured expanded purchase agreements for US coal.

Yet, beneath the veneer of transactional diplomacy, the summit exposed a sophisticated, multi-layered arena of geopolitical posturing, psychological warfare and state-sponsored disinformation centered entirely on the future of Taiwan.

A primary point of public friction leading up to the summit was the temporary hold on a NT$450 billion (US$14 billion) arms sale package to Taipei, which includes critical air-defense assets and anti-drone systems. While immediate commentary characterized the delay as a symptom of a transactional foreign policy, seasoned analysts recognized it as standard Washington posturing.

Historically, modern US administrations — including those of George W Bush, Barack Obama and Joe Biden — have paused or delayed arms packages to Taiwan at least four times to evaluate domestic defense supply chains, balance regional allocations and maximize diplomatic leverage during high-level bilateral encounters.

Trump’s historical record supports this strategic interpretation. During his first administration, he authorized the largest cumulative arms sales for Taiwan in history, greenlighting paradigm-shifting capabilities such as F-16V fighter jets, M1A2 tanks and critical technology for Taiwan’s domestic submarine program.

This trajectory continued into his second term with a NT$350 billion single-year defense package in December 2025. Once the pending NT$450 billion package is signed, Trump’s aggregate arms approvals will approach NT$1.28 trillion, effectively doubling the totals approved during the entire eight years of the Obama administration.

By withholding final approval until after the summit, Washington effectively retained a major geopolitical counterweight, keeping Beijing off-balance. This strategic hesitation successfully neutralized behind-the-doors lobbying by the Chinese delegation.

Xi reportedly pressed Trump to shift traditional US terminology from “does not support” Taiwan independence to an explicit commitment to “oppose” it. The White House successfully resisted this rhetorical upgrade, scrubbing all mentions of Taiwan from the official readout to preserve long-standing strategic ambiguity.

When questioned, Trump deflected, noting only that “Xi understands very much how I feel,” leaving Beijing to calculate the exact boundaries of US resolve.

Failing to secure concrete policy concessions in the meeting rooms, the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) propaganda apparatus and the United Front Work Department launched a coordinated cognitive warfare campaign. This information operation relied on manufacturing domestic panic and manipulating public skepticism on both sides of the Pacific.

The campaign received an artificial boost just days before the summit when an article by analyst Jennifer Kavanagh went viral. Published by Defense Priorities, a Washington think tank funded significantly by the Charles Koch foundation, the piece advocated for the complete retrenchment of US forces in Asia to the Second Island Chain, effectively suggesting the abandonment of Taiwan, Japan and the Philippines in favor of a consolidated footprint in Guam.

While the article represented a fringe academic viewpoint within Washington, CCP state media and covert influence networks weaponized it instantly. In the US, United Front-linked accounts signal-boosted the piece to exploit isolationist, “America First” skepticism, framing security support for a fellow democracy as an unnecessary economic and military liability.

Concurrently, in Taipei, the same text was used to validate the narrative of “US skepticism.” Coordinated online networks circulated rumors that the White House was actively preparing a retreat strategy, trying to break Taiwanese public morale by painting Washington as an unreliable ally ready to discard its partners for commercial concessions.

The US countered this psychological pressure with explicit displays of military capability and symbolic pageantry. As Xi arrived at Joint Base Andrews, the conclusion of the US National Anthem was synchronized with a low-altitude flyover of two nuclear-capable B-1B Lancer supersonic bombers. The display served as an unambiguous, physical reminder of the US military-industrial complex.

Furthermore, Taiwan’s modern “silicon shield” — the global economy’s absolute reliance on TSMC’s advanced semiconductor fabrication — ensures that any contemporary attempt by Beijing to establish a blockade or force cross-strait aggression would instantly collapse global markets, including China’s own economy. It remains a high-tech economic tripwire that makes unilateral aggression a self-defeating trap, reinforcing why the strategic alliance remains bulletproof despite Beijing’s digital rumor mill.

Despite the choreographed optics, the post-summit fallout exposed significant rhetorical friction. The most glaring gaffe emerged when US Ambassador to China David Perdue revealed on Fox News on Sunday that Trump had casually asked Xi if China would like to purchase US weapons.

Though the State Department and a visibly defensive Trump scrambled to walk back the comments by claiming Perdue had likely confused “China with Taiwan,” the leak exposed a hilarious subversion of expectations. Xi spent years demanding an end to US arms sales, only to enter Washington and receive an impromptu sales pitch for American military hardware.

Simultaneously, a battle over historical memory erupted. During a state dinner toast, Xi lauded how the US and China “fought side by side as allies to win World War II.” The White House subsequently repeated this framing in its official fact sheet.

Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council immediately issued a sharp rebuke, noting that the current ruling regime in Beijing did not exist during World War II, having only seized power in 1949. The heroic ally that fought alongside the US against militarism was the Republic of China — modern-day Taiwan. Taiwan’s officials directly called out Beijing for attempting to plagiarize Taiwan’s military history to gain favor in Washington.

The summit’s peak of diplomatic theater occurred during that very same White House state dinner. As US and Chinese dignitaries entered the dining room, a harpist performed “The Moon Represents My Heart,” a classic timed to honor the Mid-Autumn Festival.

While Western observers viewed it as a polite nod to Chinese culture, the track choice operated as a biting, high-level diplomatic subtweet. The song was popularized globally by the late, legendary Taiwanese singer Teresa Teng (鄧麗君).

Teng was an unyielding cultural icon of democratic resistance who famously refused to ever perform in China while it remained under CCP rule. At the height of the Cold War, her broadcast concerts were played through massive military loudspeakers across the Taiwan Strait to counter communist programming.

By utilizing Teng’s signature melody to welcome the Chinese delegation, the event served as a subtle but unmistakable assertion of Taiwanese cultural primacy and democratic endurance, directly undercutting Beijing’s attempts to erase Taiwan’s identity from the international stage.

Ultimately, the summit demonstrated that while great powers continue to negotiate over raw commodities like coal and electric vehicles, the strategic autonomy of Taiwan remains protected by a robust blend of US defense commitments, historical military resilience, deep global economic integration and a cultural legacy that continues to outmaneuver Beijing’s finest propaganda efforts.