Notes from Central Taiwan: The Emerging Argument to Sell Out Taiwan

Pro-Beijing Writers Push Narrative to Weaken U.S. Taiwan Policy Ahead of Trump-Xi Meeting

A coordinated wave of pro-China commentary has flooded U.S. and international publications in recent weeks, seemingly timed to influence American policy positions before President Trump’s weekend meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

The campaign appears to have begun with Jennifer Kavanagh’s September piece in the New York Times, followed by a recent article in the Lowy Interpreter. In her writing, Kavanagh places blame on the United States for China’s escalating aggression in the Philippines and Taiwan, suggesting that U.S. military activities provoked Beijing’s responses.

“As the United States placed military trainers on Taiwan and increased its defense cooperation with the island, Beijing intensified the military and economic pressure it directs daily across the Taiwan Strait,” wrote Kavanagh, who is affiliated with Defense Priorities and previously worked with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Critics point out that this narrative reverses the actual chronology of events, presenting an ahistorical view that attributes China’s expansionism to American actions rather than Beijing’s long-established regional ambitions.

The RAND Corporation, a historically respected American think tank, released a report titled “Stabilizing the U.S.-China Rivalry” with recommendations that analysts describe as notably pro-Beijing. According to security analyst Kaori Fujisawa, the report’s contributors included scholars with direct ties to Chinese institutions and United Front organizations. The project was funded by Peter Richards, who has connections to the Quincy Institute, an organization frequently criticized for pro-China positions.

Time magazine published a piece by Lyle Goldstein, another Defense Priorities affiliate, characterizing Taiwan’s President William Lai as “reckless” and suggesting American leaders should “rein in” Taiwan’s democratically elected leadership. This rhetoric mirrors Beijing’s talking points and establishes a moral framework that could justify U.S. disengagement from Taiwan.

The same publication also provided space for a former Chinese military officer’s perspective, while the UK’s Telegraph published an opinion from China’s ambassador to Britain.

Stephen Wertheim, affiliated with the Carnegie Endowment, wrote in Foreign Policy that Washington should explicitly state it “will not support Taiwan’s independence,” a position critics say would fundamentally undermine America’s longstanding policy of strategic ambiguity and Taiwan’s status under international law.

Taiwan has never been governed as part of the People’s Republic of China. Current U.S. policy acknowledges Taiwan’s unresolved status, avoiding definitive statements about the island’s sovereignty while maintaining unofficial relations with its democratic government.

“What the Wertheim piece is actually doing is searching for language that will render the U.S. position on Taiwan incoherent without appearing to do so,” notes Taiwan observer Michael Turton. “The obvious next step is then to argue that since the U.S. position now makes no sense, the U.S. should abandon Taiwan.”

Critics of these pro-Beijing narratives point out several consistent patterns: they invariably call for weakening the U.S. commitment to Taiwan; they rarely acknowledge Taiwan’s democratic will or agency; they ignore regional security implications for U.S. treaty allies like Japan and the Philippines; and they never demand meaningful concessions from Beijing.

Notably absent from these analyses is any serious discussion of China’s own provocative actions, including its extensive “gray zone” warfare tactics, cyberattacks against Taiwan, diplomatic suppression of Taiwan’s international participation, and massive military buildups targeting the island democracy.

The flood of coordinated messaging appears designed to influence U.S. policy discussions at a critical moment in U.S.-China relations, potentially reshaping regional security dynamics with profound implications for Taiwan’s 23 million citizens and America’s broader alliance network in the Indo-Pacific.