The White House’s decision not to mention Taiwan in its official summary of talks between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) suggests the US does not see the issue as up for negotiation, analysts said on Thursday.
Trump and Xi held more than two hours of talks in Beijing on Thursday during Trump’s state visit to China, but the two sides’ summary differed sharply on Taiwan.
Brookings Institution China expert Patricia Kim said the differing summaries reflected contrasting messaging strategies.
“Beijing wants to show that it pressed on the Taiwan issue aggressively, whereas Washington wants to keep the focus on economic cooperation,” Kim said.
While China’s state-run Xinhua news agency said Xi described Taiwan as “the most important issue” in US-China relations and warned that mishandling it could lead to “clashes and even conflicts,” the White House summary omitted Taiwan entirely, focusing instead on economic cooperation and Iran.
Kim said that the countries were “managing the optics differently.”
Kim also highlighted what she described as a fundamental “gap in interpretation” regarding the US’ “one China” policy.
While Washington does not support Taiwanese independence, it maintains that helping Taiwan defend itself through arms sales and security cooperation is necessary to prevent Taipei from negotiating with Beijing under pressure, she said.
“The problem is Beijing views these US actions as encouraging Taiwan independence,” Kim said, adding that the differing interpretations would likely continue to fuel tensions.
Thomas Shattuck, senior program manager of the University of Pennsylvania’s Perry World House, said the omission of Taiwan from the White House summary itself carried a message.
“Taiwan is No. 1 for China,” Shattuck said. “The US, by not including Taiwan in the readout, shows that that’s not really something up for negotiation.”
Before the summit, Trump had suggested he would discuss US arms sales to Taiwan with Xi, raising concerns in Taiwan over whether Washington’s policy could shift.
While reports had suggested Trump delayed final approval of a major arms package for Taiwan to help ensure the summit preceded smoothly, Shattuck said Trump was unlikely to block such sales over the long term because of their economic benefits to the US.
“When foreign countries buy arms through the foreign military sales process, that creates US jobs,” Shattuck said. “For someone who is big on the economy and manufacturing, why would you hurt US businesses by preventing Taiwan from buying very expensive stuff?”
Pointing to remarks by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio after the summit reaffirming that US policy toward Taiwan remained unchanged, Kim said: “For now, it looks like the worst outcomes have been avoided.”
“And that should be reassuring for Taiwan,” she added.
In Taipei yesterday, an expert told a forum on the Trump-Xi talks that Taiwan should remain alert to possible subtle shifts in Washington’s approach toward Taipei, despite the absence of stated changes in the US’ Taiwan policy following the summit between Trump and Xi.
Ronan Fu (傅澤民), an assistant research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institute of Political Science, said Taiwan should place greater emphasis on its long-term strategic value and shared interests with the US, rather than relying solely on democratic values, because “Trump is temporary.”
Fu said Chinese and US readouts of Thursday’s summit in Beijing reflected sharply different priorities, with Beijing placing Taiwan at the center of its public messaging while the White House avoided mentioning Taiwan altogether.
Although US media outlets across the political spectrum largely oppose treating Taiwan as a bargaining chip in US-China negotiations, Fu argued that Beijing could seek symbolic concessions from Trump through softer wording or delays in US arms sales to Taiwan in the future.
He cited commentary in Foreign Policy magazine warning that even minor rhetorical adjustments on Taiwan could carry major strategic implications because “small words” in US-China diplomacy can produce “large consequences.”
“Taiwan should pay particular attention to whether strategic space will be gradually narrowed under this kind of ‘unanswered rhetoric,'” Fu said, referring to Beijing’s push for a more stable and manageable relationship with Washington.
Hung Yao-nan (洪耀南), deputy director of Tamkang University’s Institute of China Studies, said Beijing appeared to be using the summit to promote a new framework for “constructive strategic stability” in US-China relations while warning Washington against crossing its red lines on Taiwan.
Underscoring Beijing’s use of the language of “stability” to manage, instead of resolve, strategic rivalry, Hung said China was attempting to frame Taiwan as central to the overall stability of US-China ties.
“Stability never equals peace, and silence never equals commitment,” he said.
Hsu Tsun-tzu (徐遵慈), an associate research fellow and director at the Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research, said trade tensions between Washington and Beijing were likely to persist despite temporary signs of easing following the summit.
Trump’s second-term China policy is now focused not only on reducing trade deficits, but also on limiting China’s technological competitiveness and global influence, she said.
Kuo Yu-jen (郭育仁), vice president of the Institute for National Policy Research, instead emphasized the lack of a major breakthrough at the summit, referring to it as “largely expected” given the structural nature of US-China rivalry.
“The absence of a clear conclusion was itself the conclusion,” he said, adding that both Washington and Beijing currently appeared more focused on preventing tensions from escalating rather than resolving their core disputes.
Sat, May 16, 2026
Staff writer, with CNA
Taipei Times