Xi Urges US to Oppose Taiwanese Independence; Taipei Says Its Future Must Be Decided Democratically
Updated: 54 minutes ago
Taipei/Washington, 25 September 2026
Chinese President Xi Jinping asked the United States to adopt a position of opposing Taiwanese independence during his talks with US President Donald Trump. An account issued by China's Foreign Ministry on 25 September said Xi hoped Washington would “adhere to the correct position of opposing ‘Taiwan independence’” and handle the issue cautiously in order to support strategic co-operation between the two countries. Chinese Foreign Ministry; Reuters
Taiwan's Foreign Ministry responded the same day that Beijing's account represented its habitual distortion of facts and unilateral assertion of its position. Taipei reiterated that the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China, Taiwan, are not subordinate to one another, that Taiwan's sovereignty belongs to all its people and that its future can be decided only by the Taiwanese people together through democratic means. Taiwanese Foreign Ministry; Reuters
There was no public evidence by the time of publication that Trump had accepted Xi's requested formulation. When reporters raised Taiwan and other subjects after the meeting, Trump described the talks as “great” but did not explain his Taiwan policy. The White House's briefings and statements page had not listed a formal policy readout of the meeting. Associated Press live coverage; White House briefings and statements; Reuters summit report
The available record therefore confirms a high-level diplomatic demand, not a change in American policy. Reporting Xi's request as a commitment by Trump would go beyond the evidence. Conversely, the absence of a published White House response does not prove that Trump rejected the request in private.
“Opposes” and “does not support” send different signals
The United States has long said publicly that it does not support Taiwanese independence, while maintaining its one-China policy, unofficial relationship with Taiwan and policy of strategic ambiguity. Reuters noted that Beijing's requested language — opposition to Taiwanese independence — is stronger. “Opposes” can be understood as an active rejection of the political position, whereas “does not support” principally withholds American endorsement of that outcome. Reuters; Reuters summit report
That distinction has diplomatic significance, but a phrase does not by itself amend law or policy. The United States recognised the government of the People's Republic of China in 1979 while maintaining unofficial relations with the people of Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act. The statute places the provision of defence articles and services necessary for Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defence capacity within American domestic law. Washington also takes no position on Taiwan's sovereignty under its one-China policy. US Congress: Taiwan Relations Act legislative record; Reuters explainer
Xi had sought a similar change in wording during talks with then President Joe Biden in 2024, but the United States did not accept it. Beijing again signalled before this summit that it wanted Washington to alter the formula. The request delivered on 24 September is consequently part of a continuing diplomatic campaign rather than a wholly new policy appearing on the day. Reuters background report; Reuters, 25 September
Beijing links Taiwan to sovereignty and strategic co-operation
The Chinese Foreign Ministry's account said Beijing's position on “national reunification and territorial integrity” was unequivocal. It connected cautious American handling of Taiwan with strategic co-operation between China and the United States. The readout presented Xi's request as the defence of Chinese sovereignty rather than interference in political choices within Taiwan. Chinese Foreign Ministry
Beijing claims Taiwan as part of China, opposes every form of “Taiwan independence” and has not renounced the use of force. The Chinese government offers “one country, two systems” as a formula for unification, but no major Taiwanese political party supports that arrangement. Beijing regards foreign policy, arms sales and official contacts concerning Taiwan as matters of Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity. Reuters explainer; Reuters summit report
The part of the Chinese account describing Trump's response discussed bilateral relations, trade, artificial intelligence and other areas of co-operation. It did not say that Trump accepted, rejected or made a specific commitment about Xi's Taiwan request. The document is China's official account of closed talks, not a jointly approved verbatim transcript. Chinese Foreign Ministry
Taipei frames the dispute as democratic choice
Taiwan's Foreign Ministry did more than dispute Beijing's sovereignty claim. It framed the issue around the people's ability to choose their political future. Its statement said the Chinese Communist Party had never ruled Taiwan and had no right to represent its people; Taiwan's future could be decided only by its people together through democratic means. “Democratic decision” is the Taiwanese government's political and legal position, not an international-law conclusion accepted by all parties. Taiwanese Foreign Ministry
Taiwan holds regular competitive elections and has its own government, armed forces, currency and passport. It governs itself in practice under the formal name Republic of China, but only a small number of states maintain formal diplomatic relations with it. President Lai Ching-te and his Democratic Progressive Party say Taiwan is already a sovereign and independent country called the Republic of China and therefore has no need to make a separate declaration of independence. The principal opposition Kuomintang also rejects Beijing's one-country, two-systems formula, although it advocates greater dialogue and lower conflict risk. Reuters explainer
A change to Taiwan's formal name through its constitutional process would require an exceptionally high legislative threshold followed by a referendum. Reuters reported that the DPP government has not attempted to initiate that procedure. This context shows that Beijing's category of “Taiwan independence” can encompass a broad range of statements and conduct and should not automatically be treated as synonymous with an active formal-independence referendum. Reuters explainer
Taiwan's Foreign Ministry also said China's expanding military coercion in the Taiwan Strait, East China Sea and South China Sea made Beijing the true disruptor of regional peace and stability. That is Taipei's assessment of the security environment. Beijing describes the relevant military activity as protection of sovereignty and deterrence of Taiwanese independence and outside interference. The two sides fundamentally disagree over responsibility. Taiwanese Foreign Ministry; Reuters
Washington has not publicly accepted or refused
Trump toured the US National Archives after the meeting and publicly praised the summit but did not say whether he would change the Taiwan formula. The Associated Press recorded that, when journalists asked the two leaders about Taiwan, Iran and artificial intelligence, Trump first discussed the building's granite and then said they had held a “great meeting”. Associated Press live coverage; Reuters summit report
At the 25 September filing time, the latest China-related items listed on the White House briefings and statements page concerned cultural events and the state dinner. There was no presidential meeting record explaining the Taiwan policy outcome. The absence of a readout on that page establishes only that the White House had not published a detailed position there; it cannot establish a private acceptance or refusal. White House briefings and statements
Reuters reported that there was no immediate sign Trump planned to acquiesce to Xi's request. It also said the administration had paused consideration of a second Taiwan arms package worth about $14 billion after approving approximately $11 billion in sales last December. Arms decisions may reflect several diplomatic, strategic, approval and negotiating factors. The public record does not prove that the pause was designed to obtain Chinese concessions elsewhere or that it formed part of a bargain over the requested wording. Reuters summit report; Reuters analysis
Senate Democrats criticised Trump for not publicly addressing Chinese military pressure upon Taiwan and called for continued assistance and arms sales. Their intervention is an opposition-party policy demand, not a decision already taken by the administration. Reuters summit report
Significance for political participation and the public interest
This episode is different from a conventional case of transnational repression. The evidence does not show that anybody was detained, monitored, harassed or forced to return as a result of Xi's request. Nor does it show that the United States restricted expression by Taiwanese residents, Taiwanese people in America or others. The more accurate description is that Beijing is using presidential diplomacy to influence how another state officially characterises political choices concerning Taiwan.
The human-rights and public-interest issue lies in the possible consequences of that language. Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognises the right to take part in government and says that governmental authority should be based upon the will of the people. That principle does not determine Taiwan's statehood or prescribe a particular American diplomatic formula. It does explain why the elections, public debate and political participation of Taiwan's residents are relevant when outside powers discuss the island's political future. United Nations: Universal Declaration of Human Rights
If Washington were later to adopt “opposes Taiwan independence”, Beijing could present it as an active American rejection of some Taiwanese political positions, potentially altering diplomatic expectations and placing indirect pressure upon public debate in Taiwan. Jeremy Chan, an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Reuters that stronger language could erode strategic ambiguity and allow Beijing to claim that Washington also opposed the position. This is an analyst's assessment of potential consequences, not an effect already demonstrated. Reuters
If the United States continues to use “does not support” and declines Beijing's request, the exchange may instead serve only as another expression of the long-standing disagreement. Whether language produces a concrete effect upon rights must be assessed through later American documents, contacts with Taiwan, arms decisions and crisis communications, not inferred from one side's summit account alone.
Sources
Comments