Cross-Strait relations were turbulent but broadly manageable during 2025. As 2026 approaches, however, uncertainty is rising. There is intensified great-power competition, renewed shocks from Taiwan separatists and growing volatility in regional security. Preventing miscalculation will require cool heads, strategic steadiness and cooperation that lowers the risk of crisis. The Taiwan Strait should not become a global powder keg. It should be an anchor of stability, shaping not only the future of both sides, but also the wider Asia-Pacific order.

Geopolitical risks have heightened due to external military posturing. Some foreign forces are adjusting "strategic ambiguity" in a more "precise" direction — treating Taiwan less as a question to be managed and more as a forward position in a broader attempt to contain China. This proxy logic does not enhance security, but hardens confrontation, interferes in China's internal affairs and multiplies points of friction. Japan's attempt to insert itself into the Taiwan question, alongside a revival of militarist tendencies, is a troubling signal. Each arms sale, each joint exercise and each provocative move adds tinder to an already sensitive situation.

China has consistently upheld the basic policy of peaceful reunification, but repeated breaches of the red line and constant support for separatist forces have tested its patience and magnified the danger. If this trajectory continues, the odds of a localized conflict — and the resulting shock to regional stability and global supply chains — will rise.

Separatist forces on the island are amplifying fear through "cognitive warfare" narratives and war talk, placing peace under severe strain. Echoing external strategic interference, pro-independence forces in Taiwan have become more radical and more reckless, stoking social anxiety and manufacturing a sense of imminent war. From hyping the so-called"2027 mainland invasion" claim, to amplifying narratives pushed by certain think tanks in the United States about a "three-phase operational plan" and rolling out slogans and programs such as "whole-of-society defense" and "cognitive operations", the goal is to normalize tension and institutionalize a war mentality.

That atmosphere is then used to justify higher defense budgets and greater political control. During the second half of 2025, the Democratic Progressive Party authorities intensified "enemy" framing across the Strait and used "national security" as a pretext to pressure opposition parties, silence dissent and tighten control over the media. This kind of quasi-martial governance under the banner of "democracy" weakens the DPP's political foundations, fuels social anxiety and heightens the risk that a minor incident spirals into a major crisis.

Peace across the Strait depends on the recognition that both sides belong to one China and on functioning channels of communication. Yet the Lai Ching-te authorities refuse to recognize the 1992 Consensus that there is only one China and have deliberately eroded institutional links, pushing the Taiwan question to the edge of military conflicts. When communication mechanisms are hollowed out, the most dangerous variable becomes misperception: an accident can be misread, a signal can be distorted, and escalation can take on its own momentum.

Despite facing separatist provocation and external interference, the Chinese authorities have shown remarkable restraint as well as resolve. Keeping peaceful reunification as the overarching goal, it has advanced integrated development and people-to-people exchanges, and strengthened social ties across the Strait. At the same time, it has acted in accordance with the law against diehard separatists and has drawn clear lines that cannot be crossed. This balance of flexibility and firmness reflects responsible statecraft.

The Chinese authorities will maintain strategic composure, but the international community should also act to prevent a crisis and protect stability. The Taiwan Strait is not only a core interest of China, but also matters to regional security. All parties should recognize that stoking tension ultimately harms everyone. Major countries, especially the US, should contribute to stability by encouraging dialogue rather than bloc confrontation. Any attempt to "use the Taiwan question to contain China" should be rejected. The Taiwan question should be pulled back onto the track of peaceful development and steady cross-Strait relations.

History shows that spikes in tension are often linked to external meddling and separatist provocation, while de-escalation ultimately depends on rationality and negotiation. In a world of mounting uncertainty, the Taiwan Strait should not be turned into a source of tension. Instead, it should become a model of crisis management and peaceful problem-solving.

The year 2026 will bring both challenges and opportunities. If China maintains strategic confidence and advances national reunification with patience and resolve, and if the international community upholds the one-China principle and works together to safeguard peace, the region can weather the storms.

The goal is simple. Peaceful development across the Strait, deeper cross-Strait integration, and ultimately peaceful national reunification remain a future that all Chinese people will strive for — and resolutely defend.

The author is a professor at the Institute of Taiwan Studies, Beijing Union University.

The views don't necessarily represent those of China Daily.