OPINION: The world's most dangerous places are getting even more dangerous

Editor's note: Hosted by Fareed Zakaria Fareed Zakaria GPS, airs Sundays at 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. ET on CNN..Follow Farid In X, Read news, analysis and insights from Farid and his team. Daily CNN Newsletter Farid's Global Briefing. The views expressed in this commentary are his own.read more CNN opinion.

It will air tonight at 8pm ET/PT on CNN. Farid's latest special report “Taiwan: Unfinished Business” Examines the complex history and current dangers surrounding Taiwan.

CNN
—

A few years ago, The Economist magazine declared on its cover that Taiwan, a small island with a population of 24 million people, was “the most dangerous place on Earth.”

The reasons that led to that conclusion remain valid. In fact, they have only recently become stronger.

Needless to say, the backdrop to the tensions surrounding Taiwan is the growing geopolitical conflict between China and the United States. Since the rise of first Chinese leader Xi Jinping and then former US President Donald Trump, both countries have shifted their attitudes toward the other from friendly to wary to hostile. It has changed fundamentally.

Perhaps the realities of China's extraordinary and rapid growth and America's dominant position made this inevitable. Rising powers are confronting established powers, creating a situation where they may be, in the words of author and Harvard international security scholar Graham Allison, “doomed to war.”

But are we destined for war? The United States and China are unusual in that, while their geopolitical rivalry has strengthened, they are also deeply tied economically.

As an example, during the Cold War, at the peak of U.S.-Soviet trade, the two countries exchanged $5 billion in goods with each other in a single year. China and the US trade $5 billion every few days. And even as tariffs, bans and trade restrictions have expanded in recent years, that number hasn't decreased much.

Moreover, China does not appear to be a revolutionary state seeking to overthrow the international system and present an alternative ideology to the United States to the world. The ideological conflicts that were at the heart of the Cold War are largely absent today.

But what does exist is nuclear deterrence. Both China and the United States have large arsenals that should be as effective in deterring all-out war as they have been in other countries, from the United States and the Soviet Union to Pakistan and India. .

Still… Still: The issue of Taiwan is at the heart of U.S.-China relations.

China has never acknowledged that Taiwan can become an independent state. This is not Xi Jinping's innovation. It is set out in the Constitution of the People's Republic of China. All Chinese leaders, including Mao Zedong, have affirmed the goal of unifying the two countries, but Communist China once believed that time would be on its side and that it could wait. Eventually, the mainland, with its huge economy and population of over 1 billion people, will pull the small island of 24 million people into its orbit.

That was the idea. But that premise is proving to be untrue.

Taiwan has developed as a vibrant democracy with a political culture defined by a political system in stark contrast to China. Over the past several decades, Taiwan has become increasingly determined not to reunify with China. Therefore, looking at this situation, Mr. Xi must feel that time is not on his side. It's probably better to act sooner rather than later.

For the United States and many of its allies in Asia, a Chinese invasion to retake Taiwan would be unacceptable. The U.S. government has been willing to accept China's claims to Taiwan as long as it does not use coercion to achieve them.

Taiwan policy, on all sides, is one of tolerating fantasies about the future as long as there are no substantive changes in the present. Most Taiwanese want to maintain the status quo and stay the way it is. The recent elections in Taiwan saw a party closely associated with the idea of ​​an independent Taiwan win a third term in power, but the party won only 40% of the vote, with the remaining 60% coming from two voters. What was given to the candidates is noteworthy. They are in a position with low independence aspirations.

What does this mean? This problem needs to be managed, not solved, and both Beijing and Washington need to manage it very carefully. This is one place on earth where there should be little room for macho rhetoric or provocative behavior. The three parties should continue discussions to avoid misunderstandings and miscalculations.

None of these are morally satisfactory. But the stakes are so high that one thing is clear. If these tensions are mismanaged and this conflict escalates into war, it will be a lose-lose-lose for all three parties. In fact, the whole world will suffer devastating consequences. Let's just kick this can down the can for as long as possible and hope it doesn't explode.