While President Trump has softened his rhetoric on China since his recent visit to Beijing, he has continued to keep the answer to one question close to his chest: would the United States go to war to defend Taiwan if China attempts to seize the island by force?

Though perhaps a better question is Should we? Tonight, the Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation join ZeroHedge Debates to tackle that question.

Taking the case against military intervention is Cato’s Doug Bandow, who argues that a war with China over Taiwan would impose enormous costs on the United States while serving interests that are ultimately peripheral to American security, and well… there’s the risk of nuclear war.

Advocating intervention is Steve Yates of Heritage, who contends that abandoning Taiwan would shatter U.S. credibility throughout Asia, embolden Beijing, and fundamentally alter the global balance of power in China's favor.

Our returning host David Rand of the Human Reaction podcast will ask whether Taiwan represents a vital American interest or a dangerous strategic tripwire. And, assuming Taiwan is a vital interest, is diplomacy superior to provocative acts (ie arms packages) in the name of “deterrence”?

Despite Trump’s and Xi’s shared kind words, the U.S. approved an $11 billion arms package for Taiwan last December. There was to be another package amounting to an additional $14 billion, which was recently paused amid the Iran war, sending hawks into a frenzy. 

Debaters will also address the once-controversial Pentagon policy paper recommending the U.S. military blow up Taiwanese chip manufacturing plants in the event of a Chinese invasion… something the current #3 at the Pentagon, undersecretary of war for policy Ebridge Colby, called “table stakes”:

Elbridge is the grandson of former CIA Director William Coby.

The debate begins tonight at 7pm ET, here on the ZH homepage, X feed, and YouTube and will also stream on the Human Reaction podcast.