Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Israel-Hamas
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
    • North Korea
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / China / Kavanagh and Wertheim Respond: Why Taiwan’s Survival Depends on Realistic Defense
China, Asia, Taiwan

April 28, 2025

Kavanagh and Wertheim Respond: Why Taiwan’s Survival Depends on Realistic Defense

By Jennifer Kavanagh and Stephen Wertheim

In his recent commentary published April 21st, Sasha Chhabra takes issue with our Foreign Affairs article, “The Taiwan Fixation.” Unfortunately, he misstates our position and, more important, reveals flawed assumptions that illustrate the need to change course in Taipei and Washington.

Chhabra attacks our supposed “advocacy for strategic clarity” as a “dangerous” proposition that would hand Taiwan to China. We agree that shifting U.S. policy toward strategic clarity — meaning that the United States would announce it would not defend Taiwan if attacked — would be a mistake. That is why our article explicitly counsels the opposite, stating, “Washington should remain ambiguous about whether it would defend Taiwan by force.”

Chhabra appears to confuse private planning with declaratory policy. In private, we argue, the U.S. Department of Defense should develop plans over the next decade to send arms but not troops to Taiwan in case of a Chinese invasion, while Taiwan should build much stronger, “porcupine”-style defenses. At the same time, Washington should stick to its public policy of strategic ambiguity, which helps to deter Beijing from launching an attack (and Taipei from pursuing independence).

One might legitimately worry that our recommendations would weaken America’s ambiguous threat to use force in Taiwan’s defense, but for the foreseeable future, the policy of strategic ambiguity should remain credible. Even if Taiwan strengthens its self-defense capabilities and the United States formulates plans to avoid an all-out war with China over Taiwan, many in Washington would still favor direct U.S. military action to repel a Chinese invasion, and political pressure could push even a reluctant U.S. president to intervene.

Read at Commonwealth Magazine

Authors

Jennifer
Kavanagh

Senior Fellow & Director of Military Analysis

Defense Priorities

Stephen
Wertheim

Senior Fellow, American Statecraft Program

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

More on Asia

op-edChina, Asia, Taiwan

The US must make hard choices on national security

By Lyle Goldstein

May 27, 2025

op-edChina, Asia, Deterrence, Taiwan

Asia is getting shortchanged as the US keeps its focus elsewhere

By Daniel DePetris

May 27, 2025

op-edGrand strategy, China, Europe and Eurasia, Russia

Reverse Kissinger? No, Double Kissinger

By Lyle Goldstein

May 25, 2025

op-edChina, Asia, Grand strategy, Military analysis

Hegseth is taking the Army on another dead end ride to Asia

By Jennifer Kavanagh

May 20, 2025

op-edChina, Asia

It’s Time for Trump and Xi to Meet

By Lyle Goldstein

May 17, 2025

op-edAsia

The Trump administration cools off India-Pakistan conflict — for now

By Daniel DePetris

May 13, 2025

Events on China

See All Events
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Great power competition, Middle East

Virtual: U.S.-China competition and the value of Middle East influence

June 10, 2025
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

Past Virtual Event: China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualAsia, Basing and force posture, Burden sharing, China, Grand strategy

Past Virtual Event: Rethinking U.S. strategy in East Asia: do more bases mean more deterrence?

January 24, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved