Tides of Tension: Assessing Risks of a U.S.-China Clash in Asia

By IndraStra Global Editorial Team

The Pacific Ocean, vast and restless, has long been a stage for global ambition. Today, its waters stir with a new kind of unrest—one driven not by storms but by intensifying economic and geopolitical tensions. The US-China trade war, now in its seventh year (since the first tariffs of 2018, marked by cycles of escalation, détente, and renewed friction), with the US imposing the highest tariffs ever recorded and China responding with its own, hangs over the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea, raising a critical question: could this clash of tariffs and sanctions spiral into a limited military conflict? The stakes are immense, with the US’s island chain strategy in the balance and the risk of new conflicts, such as those along the India-China border, ever-present. The currents of history and recent developments point to a fragile moment where miscalculation might tilt the scales toward confrontation or, equally plausibly, toward uneasy restraint.
The trade war, reignited with ferocity in early 2025, has roots in a deeper struggle for supremacy. Since 2018, when the first salvos of tariffs were fired, the US and China have locked horns over issues ranging from intellectual property theft to market access. Under the current US administration, the rhetoric has sharpened. President Donald Trump’s re-imposition of steep tariffs—145% on Chinese goods, layered atop earlier levies—has gutted bilateral trade, pushing both nations toward economic decoupling. China, grappling with a faltering real estate sector and deflationary pressures, initially retaliated with an 84% tariff on US imports, later escalating it to 125%, signaling its determination to endure the economic conflict. The fallout is global: supply chains are fracturing, and allies from Japan to the European Union are scrambling to adapt. Yet, beneath this economic maelstrom lies a more volatile undercurrent—security tensions that threaten to boil over in Asia’s contested waters.
The Taiwan Strait, a narrow ribbon of sea separating mainland China from the democratic island of Taiwan, is the most likely flashpoint. Taiwan is not just a geopolitical prize; it’s an economic linchpin, home to the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, which produces over half the world’s microchips. For China, Taiwan represents an unfulfilled claim to national unity, a goal President Xi Jinping has tied to his legacy, with whispers of a 2027 deadline for “reunification.” For the US, Taiwan is a vital partner in the Indo-Pacific, its defense underpinned by a policy of strategic ambiguity—neither explicitly promising nor ruling out military intervention. Recent US moves, like deepening economic ties with Taipei and deploying B-2 bombers to Diego Garcia, signal a hardening stance. China, in response, has flexed its military muscle, conducting its largest-ever exercises in the Strait in April 2025, dubbed “Strait Thunder – 2025A.” Thirty-seven warplanes crossed the median line, a symbolic boundary, while long-range bombers brandished new KD-21 ballistic missiles capable of striking US bases as far as Japan.
The South China Sea, meanwhile, is a cauldron of competing claims. China’s assertion of sovereignty over 90% of this resource-rich expanse—marked by militarized artificial islands bristling with anti-ship missiles—has antagonized neighbors like the Philippines and Vietnam. The US, under the banner of “freedom of navigation,” routinely sails warships through these waters, each transit a calculated provocation. In 2024, Chinese Coast Guard vessels escalated tactics against Philippine resupply missions to the Second Thomas Shoal, firing water cannons and, in one instance, a military-grade laser. The US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty looms large here, obligating Washington to respond if Manila’s forces are attacked. A single collision, intentional or not, could ignite a crisis, drawing in allies like Japan and Australia, who have tightened security ties with the US through frameworks like the Quad.
Could these tensions erupt into a limited military clash? The ingredients are there: overlapping interests, eroded trust, and arsenals primed for action. A blockade of Taiwan by China—less a full invasion than a coercive quarantine—remains a plausible scenario. Such a move would aim to choke Taiwan’s economy without firing a shot, testing the US's resolve. Alternatively, a skirmish in the South China Sea, perhaps sparked by a ramming incident between Chinese and Philippine vessels as seen in August 2024, could escalate if US warships intervene. Both scenarios carry risks of spiraling beyond control, yet both sides have reasons to pull back. For China, a conflict would devastate its export-driven economy, which is already reeling from tariffs. For the US, a clash would strain its military, stretched across commitments in Ukraine and the Middle East. The Biden-Xi summit of November 2023, which restored some military communication channels, suggests a mutual desire to avoid catastrophe, but those channels frayed again after the tariff escalations of 2025.
If a clash were to occur, the US’s island chain strategy would face its ultimate test. Conceived during the Cold War, this approach leverages a string of allied territories—Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, and beyond—to contain China’s naval ambitions. The “first island chain” forms a natural barrier, bottling up China’s fleet within its near seas. The US has bolstered this strategy with the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, funneling billions into bases from Guam to Okinawa. Japan’s pivot to a more assertive defense posture, including a doubled military budget, strengthens the chain, as does the Philippines’ growing alignment with Washington. Yet, cracks exist. China’s anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) capabilities—missiles, submarines, and cyberwarfare—threaten to neutralize US carriers and airfields in a conflict’s opening hours. A 2016 RAND study warned that a year-long conventional war could slash China’s GDP by 25-35% but also cost the US 5-10%, with Taiwan’s economy left in ruins. The strategy’s effectiveness hinges on allied unity, but nations like Indonesia and Malaysia, wary of antagonizing Beijing, might waver.
China’s own calculations add complexity. Its navy, now the world’s largest by ship count, is formidable but untested in high-intensity combat. A limited clash might expose weaknesses, undermining the Communist Party’s domestic legitimacy. Xi’s emphasis on “strategic deterrence” at the 2022 Party Congress suggests a preference for posturing over fighting. Yet, nationalism runs high, and any perceived US provocation—say, a high-profile arms sale to Taiwan—could force Beijing’s hand. The US, too, faces domestic pressures. Trump’s “America First” rhetoric, echoed by Vice President J.D. Vance, prioritizes economic wins over foreign entanglements, but abandoning Taiwan risks alienating allies and ceding regional influence.
Amid this high-stakes chess game, what are the odds that China refrains from stirring new trouble elsewhere, particularly along its border with India? The 2020 Galwan Valley clash, which killed 20 Indian and at least 30-45 Chinese soldiers (per Western intelligence estimates), revealed the volatility of India and China’s 2,100-mile frontier.. Since then, both sides have disengaged at key friction points like Pangong Lake, but tens of thousands of troops remain deployed, backed by tanks and artillery. Recent developments offer mixed signals. In October 2024, India and China reached a patrolling agreement along the Line of Actual Control, easing tensions. Yet, China’s economic woes and domestic unrest could tempt Xi to rally national pride through border bravado. India, bolstered by US defense pacts and its own nuclear arsenal, is no pushover, making escalation risky. A 2024 Lowy Institute report noted China’s focus on maritime disputes over land-based ones, suggesting Beijing might prioritize the South China Sea and Taiwan over a new Himalayan flare-up. Still, India’s growing ties with the Quad could provoke China, especially if New Delhi hosts more US military assets.
The likelihood of China avoiding fresh border disputes with India seems moderately high—perhaps 70%—given its stretched resources and strategic focus on maritime theaters. But this hinges on no major provocations, like India openly siding with the US in a Taiwan crisis. China’s history of “salami-slicing”—incremental territorial gains—means small-scale incursions can’t be ruled out, though these are unlikely to escalate while Beijing juggles trade war fallout and domestic challenges.
As the Pacific’s tides swell, the world holds its breath. A limited US-China clash is not inevitable, but the risk is higher than at any point in decades. The island chain strategy, while potent, is no silver bullet; its success depends on deterrence holding firm. The cautious balance between China and India holds promise for stability, but only if both nations skillfully manage their rivalry with prudence. Diplomacy, battered but not dead, remains the best anchor. The Biden-Xi guardrails, however tenuous, must be rebuilt, perhaps through backchannels at APEC or G20 summits. Economic pain could yet force both powers to the table, trading tariff relief for de-escalation. For now, the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea are a tinderbox, and the smallest spark—a misjudged patrol, a nationalist outburst—could set them ablaze. The Pacific, for all its beauty, has never felt so perilous.

IndraStra Global is now available on
Apple News, Google News, Feedly, Flipboard, and  WhatsApp Channel

COPYRIGHT: This article is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

REPUBLISH: Republish our articles online or in print for free if you follow these guidelines. https://www.indrastra.com/p/republish-us.html