Taiwan’s ability to defend itself could be heavily influenced by a record-breaking $14 billion arms package proposed by the United States (U.S.) but it shouldn’t be contingent on what concessions Beijing offers Washington in return. This became very apparent when President Donald J. Trump stated in an interview , “a very good negotiating chip.” When questioned about the progress of the package, Trump said, “I’m holding that in abeyance, and it depends on China.”
This ambiguity by President Trump remains highly significant and concerning. Ryan Hass, a specialist in Taiwan relations from the Brookings Institution, described the package as still being withheld and argued that Trump’s actions are eroding confidence in American leadership. The situation surrounding Taiwan has made allies in the Asia-Pacific region rethink American support. The White House should pursue friendlier ties with Beijing, but not at the expense of security.
Beijing condemns American arm packages to Taiwan, giving Trump reason to open negotiations with Beijing, however this is short-sighted. Trump is looking for increased Chinese purchases of American goods and to involve them in negotiations over the Iran war. However, what remains ambiguous is what Trump is expecting in return for withholding the Taiwan package. The issue with this is how Trump markets his willingness to provide support for Taiwan as negotiable in a time where China is increasing its encroachments of the island.
For deterrence to actually be effective, diplomacy must extend beyond weapons. According to Hass, this concept arises from an adversary’s perception of one’s capabilities and ability to resist and from the threat of consequences. Hass also points out a contradiction: U.S.-Taiwan military cooperation has strengthened not merely through arms sales but also through joint training exercises and coordination, while Trump’s ambiguous messaging has spurred uncertainty about American reliability. Material aid and the presidential agenda can conflict with each other.
Labelling a crucial arms package a “bargaining chip” could embolden Beijing to inquire what type of concessions would influence Washington to limit or even withdraw support. Taipei must also evaluate whether defense decisions reflect its security needs or White House priorities. This doesn’t signal the Trump Administration’s abandonment of Taiwan. A report from the Associated Press stated that official American policy remained unchanged during the Trump-Xi summit in May. Regardless, this doesn’t resolve the uncertainty behind Trump’s statement on vital defense commitments to its allies and how it “depends on China.” His guarantees cannot be separated from his transactional and deal-making approach.
The implications extend beyond Taiwan. Although its relationship with Washington differs from official American allies, Asia-Pacific allies may still wonder whether their interests will be negotiable as well. Trump’s messaging largely risks undermining trust in America’s ability to aid its allies, demonstrating the dangers surrounding Trump’s deal-making diplomacy, as short-term concessions will come at the expense of crucial allies that project American influence.
Proponents of Trump could make the argument that synthesising concessions with defense packages gives the President more flexibility in these areas, but this should be measured in terms of increased stability, not mere agreements. The Taiwanese population should also be able to determine its own future rather than leaving it to depend on the U.S. and Beijing’s negotiations . Real long-lasting diplomacy isn’t small concessions, but rather whether America’s allies can hold the White House to its commitments. Flexibility doesn’t outweigh the risks to deterrence when it eventually could lead to unwanted consequences.
