During these semi-official negotiations, Chinese representatives assured their American counterparts that they would not make nuclear threats against Taiwan, as reported by two US delegates present.
The Chinese representatives provided these assurances after American concerns were raised that China might consider the use or threat of nuclear weapons in the event of a Taiwan-related conflict. Taiwan is claimed by Beijing as its territory, while it is democratically governed by Taipei, a claim that is rejected by the local government.
“The Chinese representatives assured the US that they are fully confident in prevailing in a conventional conflict over Taiwan without resorting to nuclear weapons,” said David Santoro, one of the American organizers of the Track Two talks, the details of which were first reported by Reuters.

Participants in Track Two talks are typically former officials and academics who possess the knowledge and experience to discuss their governments’ positions, even if they are not directly involved in formulating those positions. In contrast, government negotiations are referred to as Track One.
Washington was represented by about half a dozen delegates, including former officials and academics, during the two-day discussions held in a hotel conference room in Shanghai.
Beijing, for its part, sent a delegation composed of academics and analysts, including several former officers of the People’s Liberation Army.
In response to inquiries from Reuters, a spokesperson for the State Department stated that Track Two talks can be “beneficial.” The department was not directly involved in the March meeting but was aware of its conduct, according to the spokesperson.
As the spokesperson emphasized, informal talks cannot replace formal negotiations, as the latter require participants to have the authority to address issues that are often highly insulated in government circles, particularly in the case of China.
Members of the Chinese delegation and the Defense Ministry in Beijing did not respond to requests for comment.
These talks take place at a time when the U.S. and China are at odds over critical economic and geopolitical issues. Although the two countries briefly resumed formal negotiations (Track One) on nuclear weapons in November, these have since stalled. A senior U.S. official publicly expressed frustration over China’s lack of response.
The Pentagon reported that China’s nuclear arsenal had grown by more than 20% between 2021 and 2023. In October, it was mentioned that China “would consider using nuclear means to restore deterrence should a conventional military defeat in Taiwan endanger the government.”
China has never ruled out using force to bring Taiwan under its control and has intensified its military activities around the island over the past four years.
The Track Two talks are part of a two-decade-long dialogue on nuclear weapons and posture, which was interrupted in 2019 when the Trump administration cut funding.
Following the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, semi-official talks were resumed to address broad security and energy issues, with a particular focus on nuclear weapons during the Shanghai meeting.
David Santoro, director of the Pacific Forum based in Hawaii, acknowledged the “frustrations” of both sides during the recent talks but emphasized that the delegations had identified compelling reasons to continue the dialogue. He revealed plans for further discussions in 2025 and underscored the continued commitment to pursuing mutual understanding and addressing potential tensions.
Nuclear weapons represent one of the most complex and delicate issues in contemporary international politics. They are weapons of mass destruction capable of causing unprecedented devastation both in material terms and in terms of loss of life.
There are several globally recognized nuclear powers, including the United States, Russia, China, France, the United Kingdom, India, Pakistan, North Korea, and possibly Israel. Each of these nations maintains nuclear arsenals for strategic deterrence, meaning as a means to deter aggression from other powers and to protect vital national interests.
The possession of nuclear weapons raises complex questions of global security, nuclear proliferation, and arms control. There is a continuous international effort to mitigate the risks associated with nuclear weapons, including non-proliferation treaties and arms limitation agreements.
Discussions and negotiations regarding nuclear weapons occur at various levels, from government negotiations (Track One) to semi-official and academic dialogues (Track Two), aimed at fostering mutual understanding, reducing tensions, and seeking solutions to complex challenges.
The complexity of nuclear weapons extends beyond their mere military presence and encompasses significant ethical, humanitarian, and environmental aspects. Therefore, an effective approach to nuclear weapons requires not only the security of the states that possess them but also global well-being and international peace.
Nuclear weapons are one of the greatest dilemmas of contemporary international politics. Due to their unparalleled destructive power, they are held as a means of strategic deterrence by various powers worldwide. This reality raises global concerns regarding security, nuclear proliferation, and arms control.
International negotiations and treaties aim to minimize the risks associated with nuclear weapons, while discussions at various levels, from governmental dialogues to academic initiatives, seek to foster mutual understanding and reduce tensions.
Beyond military aspects, nuclear weapons also raise significant ethical, humanitarian, and environmental questions. An effective approach thus requires not only the security of the states that possess them but also a commitment to global security and the well-being of humanity.
The ongoing challenge is to find a balance between national security, global stability, and the pursuit of a world without nuclear weapons.
The possession of nuclear weapons represents an immense responsibility for states, as their potential use would have catastrophic consequences for humanity and the environment. Thus, the international community faces the constant challenge of strengthening nuclear non-proliferation regimes while simultaneously advocating for gradual disarmament and the reduction of existing arsenals. Multilateral cooperation and diplomatic engagement are crucial to achieving a safer and more stable future, in which the risk of nuclear conflict is minimized and global resources can be utilized for sustainable development and the well-being of all.