How Trump’s Strike on Iran Might Affect China’s Calculus on Taiwan

New York times ^ | 26th June 2025 | Chris Buckley

[Cronos]

President Trump’s decision to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, after earlier denouncing U.S. embroilment in foreign wars, introduces another complication for China’s leaders trying to fathom how he might handle conflict over Taiwan.

Chinese officials and experts were already trying to game out Mr. Trump’s approach to Taiwan, the island democracy that Beijing claims as its territory. They will now likely be assessing the Iran strikes for new insights into Mr. Trump, who had opposed military action months earlier while he pursued diplomacy, and then rained missiles and bombs on three key nuclear sites on Sunday.

For China, Mr. Trump is a bit of a wild card in scenarios of how the United States would respond to Beijing’s efforts to bring Taiwan to heel, including any attempt to take the island by force. The United States has long helped fend off China’s military pressure and deter a possible attack by selling Taiwan weapons and holding out the option that it could send forces if war erupts.

...

[Cronos]

Good to have a wildcard

[TheWriterTX]

Trump prefers peace, but is not afraid of battle.

He is the warrior in the garden.

Don’t mess with him.

[ifinnegan]

“ Taiwan, the island democracy that Beijing claims as its territory.”

Remember how they will always say “baseless claims” when writing about election fraud or other things they want to lie about.

But a real baseless claim they don’t say it’s baseless.

[nathanbedford]

Without access to the New York Times opinion behind the pay wall, I would venture my own analysis that Beijing is assessing Donald Trump as one more unlikely than likely to defend Taiwan by kinetic means.

In coming to that conclusion they will assess Trump's history of withdrawing from conflict on a general level but to engage in pinpricks. China will look at his lapsing support for Ukraine, his eagerness to withdraw from Syria, his negotiating history in mapping a withdrawal from Afghanistan, and conclude that war against nation states is not to Trump's liking.

When it comes to defending allies, Beijing will of course take note of Trump's behavior toward Ukraine and will also note his lack of firm commitment to his NATO allies.

The capacity to fly a state-of-the-art bomber thousands of miles to deliver a state-of-the-art bunker busting bomb is impressive on a tactical level but without much obvious significance at the strategic level to a massive power with a huge assortment of targets like China, assuming no nuclear war. Chinese were gamers will note that Trump shied away from participation in the overall conflict between Israel and Iran, only entered it on an extremely selective and limited basis, and then only after all risk had been virtually extinguished by Israel's campaign against Iranian air defense system. A war with Taiwan would be an extremely different matter, with the Chinese fully in possession of robust and deep defense capabilities.

A defense of Taiwan would require the commitment of massive naval and air elements and the concomitant risk of loss of life. The potential for widespread general war in the Pacific is undeniable. The outcome is not clear. Although the United States has profound interest in the fate of Taiwan, especially the manufacture of chips as well as the ripple effects on the nearby Pacific rim nations, there is no immediate existential risk to America. History tells us that Trump will shrink from waging war and resort to sanctions to force China to abandon an quarantine or invasion of Taiwan.

Our hope is not that Trump will wage war against China but that he will build a coalition of allies and a regimen of economic sanctions that will deter China.

The odds are Trump will not fight. Beijing may or may not come to that conclusion, yet, even if it concludes that Trump will not fight, Beijing might well conclude that the risk is too high, even if the probability is low.

[linMcHlp]

I expect Red China to occupy British Columbia, Russia to occupy whatever portions of Alaska are its desire, Mexico to continue its occupation of California.

Because: Entitled liberal-think[ers] will welcome the occupiers with open arms. And, enough “Russian speakers” will be planted, enough “Chinese speakers will be planted, and enough “Mexican speakers” planted . . . aforethought.

[redfreedom]

I wonder what one of those bunker busters would do to China’s big dam?

I have a feeling Taiwan is safe as long as Trump is in power.

[Bobbyvotes]

Without any access to any high ranking officials in Trump admin, your guesswork belongs in the round basket.

Trump is totally unpredictable and that is his greatest strength. On top of that he is fearless unlike any other 98% career politicians. No other president since WW-II had the two brass ones to send 7 B-2 bombers fully loaded to attack a hostile country ruled by crazy islamists. Not even close.

[nathanbedford]

No other president since WW-II had the two brass ones to send 7 B-2 bombers fully loaded to attack a hostile country ruled by crazy islamists

Rubbish. Even little Israel had the brass to attack several hostile countries ruled by crazy Islamists. But then Israel's very life was at stake, and as I pointed out, America's existence is not immediately threatened by an invasion of Taiwan.

Trump's history shows affirmatively that he is circumspect but when it comes to waging war against other nations, but he is hardly fearless.

[nathanbedford]

No other president since WW-II had the two brass ones to send 7 B-2 bombers fully loaded to attack a hostile country ruled by crazy islamists

Rubbish. Even little Israel had the brass to attack several hostile countries ruled by crazy Islamists. But then Israel's very life was at stake, and as I pointed out, America's existence is not immediately threatened by an invasion of Taiwan.

Trump's history shows affirmatively that he is circumspect but when it comes to waging war against other nations, but he is hardly fearless.

[VAFreedom]

it doesn’t even need bunker buster to take out. and it would kill a lot of people, which I’d have no problem pushing the button to do.

[EQAndyBuzz]

“Good to have a wildcard”

For Taiwan, having a wildcard is good. Having two fully armed Ohio Class nuclear subs is much better.

[montag813]

Reagan was a similar wildcard, and he cleverly enhanced this aura by staging incidents like “the bombing begins in 5 minutes” clip, so the USSR would think he was a dangerous warmonger.

[yldstrk]

Our hope is not that Trump will wage war against China but that he will build a coalition of allies and a regimen of economic sanctions that will deter China.
**********
I analyze it this way: We need Taiwan to keep our dominance over the Pacific. US will defend Taiwan.

[AndyJackson]

For China, Mr. Trump is a bit of a wild card

He isn't if folks paid attention. It's just he is always playing a different game from everyone. Everyone else is transaction while he is going for a major win. So they stymie themselves.

[daniel1212]

Although the United States has profound interest in the fate of Taiwan, especially the manufacture of chips as well as the ripple effects on the nearby Pacific rim nations, there is no immediate existential risk to America....resort to sanctions to force China to abandon an quarantine or invasion of Taiwan.

No immediate existential risk to America? You mean "immediate" as in one hour? The stock market would disagree, with China controlling the South China sea, and Japan defeated as well, and the whole of Taiwan's economy, and loss of US credibility as a defense of allies, and with China. Who would be the one to sanction the US.

contributors from the US, Japan, South Korea, Australia, India and the EU were asked to analyze two scenarios: China attacks Taiwan and the US doesn’t interfere, and the country falls. The second sees Washington coming to Taipei’s defense, but it still falls to Beijing. They then have to imagine the consequences of China’s successful invasion of Taiwan. Curiously, no Taiwanese experts are represented in the study.

It would be very costly to the US to go to war against China, as it would for them, while it is the latter that has the economic infrastructure system to prevail in any degree of long-term conflict. This is the result of a short term gain, long term loss policy followed by US leadership for decades, beginning with China's fighting the West in N. Korea. Space-based assets is one area the US can prevail for now.

[BroJoeK]

nathanbedford: "Without access to the New York Times opinion behind the pay wall, I would venture my own analysis that Beijing is assessing Donald Trump as one more unlikely than likely to defend Taiwan by kinetic means.
In coming to that conclusion they will assess Trump's history of withdrawing from conflict on a general level but to engage in pinpricks.
China will look at his lapsing support for Ukraine, his eagerness to withdraw from Syria, his negotiating history in mapping a withdrawal from Afghanistan, and conclude that war against nation states is not to Trump's liking."

Of course not, but why is nobody noticing the single most glaring feature of Pres. Trump's foreign policy/national defense posture?
First and foremost, Trump is working to get our allies to pay their fair share of allied defenses against the Russians and Chi-Coms.

1. Well before non-US NATO countries reach 5% of their GDP's (PPP) on national defense, their combined spending will match the US at over $1.2 trillion per year.
   That is already double the most generous estimate of Russia's national defense spending, about $600 billion at PPP (8% of GDP).

2. China's US-friendly neighbors, from Japan to Australia to India, combined match China's GDP and would, when spending 5% of GDPs on national defense, reach $2 trillion in defense spending (at PPP), which is at least three times China's publicly acknowledged defense budget.

3. If China's and Russia's US-friendly-neighbors can, by themselves, overmatch the Axis of Evil militaries, then the US will become, as it should be, the world's reserve force, not first to fight, but last in to clean up the mess.

That's the Trump doctrine which should concern empire-building, aggression-planning authorities in Bejing and Moscow the most.

[central_va]

War with the CCP had a silver lining: it ends “free trade” forever.

[Lurker]

I have to disagree just a bit. Trump doesn’t want to fight over Taiwan and I believe that the ChiComs don’t either. Their economy is teetering on the edge of an abyss thanks to the tariffs.

Their sealift capacity is almost nonexistent. Moving 500,000 men and their machines would be beyond their capabilities and it would be a turkey shoot if they tried.

While they can certainly destroy Taiwan with massive missile strikes, occupation and holding it is another matter entirely.

So my view is that this is bluster intended for internal use.

But if they did get froggy I have no doubt that Trump would drop a very big hammer on the ChiComs. Taiwan ain’t Ukraine or Afghanistan where we have zero strategic interests. Until we get chip factories built and running here we are absolutely dependent on the free flow of those products to support our economy and our military.

Just the way I see it.

L

[Cronos]

We’ll technically both the PRC and the ROC claim each other’s territories

[Savage Beast]

President Reagan won and ended the Cold War through strength, courage, honesty, and bold, decisive action.

President Trump is his successor.