View: Why did China ignore the U.S. hotline?

Mounting U.S.-China tensions are heightening concerns about miscalculation, with political distrust increasingly shaping how both sides respond to emerging crises.

Senior U.S. and Chinese defence officials have resumed direct talks in Washington after months of limited contact, with both sides saying the priority is reducing risk, avoiding miscalculation, and preventing incidents from spiralling out of control.

Speaking to AnewZ, Qinduo Xu, senior fellow at the Pangoal Institution, said the danger of escalation between U.S. and Chinese forces is driven less by proximity at sea or in the air and more by deep political mistrust.

Xu argued that the current risk environment is shaped by the U.S. military’s forward presence, saying American forces operate close to China’s neighbourhood rather than Chinese forces operating near U.S. borders. He said this imbalance often frames how Beijing assesses incidents and intentions.

He pointed to Taiwan and the South China Sea as the most sensitive flashpoints. On Taiwan, Xu said the central issue is whether Washington genuinely adheres to its stated "one China" policy. He argued that U.S. arms sales and political backing risk encouraging Taiwan’s ruling party to take steps Beijing would interpret as crossing a red line, increasing the chance of confrontation.

On the South China Sea, Xu rejected the idea of a simple China-versus-region narrative. He said disputes involve multiple regional claimants and argued that competition among Southeast Asian states themselves is often overlooked in Western coverage. Tensions between China and the Philippines, he said, have drawn the most attention, particularly as U.S. military backing for Manila and an expanded American presence reinforce Beijing’s view that Washington is militarising the region, while the U.S. accuses China of doing the same.

Xu also addressed why military communication channels were allowed to fall silent for months. He said hotlines tend to break down when Beijing believes Washington supports actions that trigger a crisis and then seeks contact only after tensions escalate. From China’s perspective, he said, communication should be used to prevent crises rather than manage them once they erupt, adding that Beijing resists engagement when it feels blame is being shifted after the fact.

He added that both capitals already have extensive data, experienced diplomats, and crisis-management tools at their disposal, but argued the decisive factor is political will. Xu said the core question is whether Washington’s long-term strategy is aimed at peaceful coexistence or containment, warning that a containment mindset makes crises more likely.

On deterrence, Xu said the logic cuts both ways. If Washington believes military strength deters challenges, he said Beijing can apply the same logic in defence of what it considers its red lines, particularly on Taiwan and maritime sovereignty. He also claimed the U.S. underestimates the pace of China’s military modernisation, saying new capabilities are emerging rapidly and are focused on what Beijing defines as territorial integrity rather than global power projection.

• White House: Trump can maintain good relations with both Japan and China

Despite renewed dialogue, Xu warned that without clearer political intent on both sides, communication alone will not be enough to prevent future crises.

Copied