I assessed whether a war in the Asia-Pacific region was inevitable or impossible last week. Biden's trip to Asia, what he said about Taiwan, and what happened after the QUAD summit all made for a raging storm week in the headlines.

While relations between the United States and China, which have been tense over Taiwan for a long time, changing on a geostrategic level, the risk of an unexpected conflict grows with each passing day.

China's meteoric rise to economic power is perhaps one of the most significant developments of the twenty-first century. While this rise altered global balances, it also shifted the momentum of the global hegemony struggle.

The reaction of the United States, which is the patron of the current international liberal order, to China's rise is now posing a national security risk.

In the early 2010s, the two countries' burgeoning rivalry reached a critical juncture, especially with Trump's election as US President.

With Biden's election as US President, the case remained unchanged, and US-China relations took on a more militarised tone.

The response of US President Biden, who recently met with Japanese Prime Minister Kishida, to a question about Taiwan not only strained US-Chinese relations, but also triggered a regional security crisis.

Biden's statement that the United States would respond militarily if China intervened on the island of Taiwan broke with the strategic ambiguity approach that has been used in the past and has sparked an intense debate, particularly among experts who closely follow the issue.

Although the US Department of Defense attempted to explain that "Taiwan policy has not changed" Biden's rhetoric caused controversy.

A day later, Biden stated that the US's strategic policy toward Taiwan had not changed. Despite Biden's statement, it is uncertain whether the comment in question was a mistake or deliberate.

Biden had previously made statements on a range of topics, and the White House subsequently corrected him.

Biden most likely interpreted the United States-Taiwan Relations Act in a different way. Under the Taiwan Relations Act, the United States has accept that it supports Taiwan's self-defense and opposes any unilateral change to the status quo.The US is also committed to the 'One China' commitment, which is constantly emphasized by China.

What Biden said is in violation of the Taiwan Relations Act. It is possible to evaluate the article to oppose unilateral changes to the status quo, but this would be too forced.

No President of the United States has ever interpreted the Taiwan Relations Act in this manner. For a long time, the United States has consciously performed strategic ambiguity.

Kurt Campbell, who is in charge of the United States' regional policies, believes that acting within the framework of "strategic clarity" is pointless.

Although Biden says he does not expect China to intervene on the island, the region has become a military flashpoint.

While the circumstance is becoming tense, China tend to maintain strategic patience until the very last moment, but during the QUAD summit in Japan, joint patrols of Russia and China with nuclear bombers over the Sea of Japan increased tensions.

With the changing of the circumstances, China has two options about Taiwan. The first is to exercise strategic patience and choose choose to preserve the status quo. The second option is to use a rapid amphibious operation to Taiwan to 'reunite the island with the mainland.' Both alternatives have drawbacks.

If he chooses to wait strategically, he will witness the US fortifying itself with regional allies and Taiwan arming itself. Given the presence of AUKUS and QUAD, it will be under blockade.

It is an unstable and unsustainable situation.

If he chooses the second option, a serious regional war will erupt. Here, he must act quickly to prevent the alliance working against him from responding. Time is currently working against China.

A war between the United States and China over Taiwan may be difficult, but it appears to be becoming more likely. Russia's problems in Ukraine, in particular, have put significant pressure on the Chinese Army to be ready for any change in status quo about Taiwan.

While this pressure has created a fearful atmosphere, it has also prompted China to mobilise in order to accelerate military exercises and complete modernization.

On the other hand, given that the US military presence in the Indo-Pacific region accounts for more than 60% of its total, predicting what the US will do about Taiwan may be difficult.

It is highly likely that US senior officials are assessing the possibility of war and a shift in strategy.

Could Biden's widely repeated words "we would respond militarily" be a reflection of these assessments?

However, the US appears more likely to try to put China in a difficult position by imposing a total blockade rather than making a military move.

Russia's situation in the Ukraine issue, as well as its constant wear and tear, may have prompted to be predicted that similar things could happen to China.

In this context, the United States would not react negatively to China's intervention in Taiwan at this time. Because such an intervention would allow the US to rapidly consolidate its ally network toward China.

Yet, it is certain that the US's failure to respond to such a move would set off a chain of events, too.

So, could China, which has modernised its military capabilities, think that a suitable global conjuncture has emerged for Taiwan's inclusion in the mainland?

It is difficult to provide a definitive answer to this question. Because of the Ukraine issue, there is pressure in this direction, but there is also evidence that China is not yet ready to completely take over the island.

According to Pentagon simulations, China will have achieved the military capability to seize the island of Taiwan by 2027.

The Chinese Army's deficiencies in amphibic operations and lack of combat experience have raised some concerns.

Taiwan is also known to be developing an asymmetric defence strategy.

However, in this asymmetrical situation, it is still possible to argue that China is more advantageous about Taiwan. Chinese President Xi Jinping has previously stated that a "military option" for Taiwan has been on the table since 2019.

As a result of Biden's words, the tense situation has devolved into a security dilemma. It's such a dilemma that both sides are on the verge of strategic confusion rather than strategic ambiguity.

While China is under pressure as a result of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, NATO-like structures such as AUKUS and QUAD take on a character that surrounds China, testing its strategic patience.

In the case of a possible intervention in Taiwan, the United States, on the other hand, weighs the pros and cons of "responding" and "not responding." If he responds, a likely regional defeat would severely erode his global position. Not to mention the possibility of a regional conflict spreading.

If he does not respond, it will be assumed that the US is attempting to appease China.

To postpone these possibilities, the United States has used a strategy known as strategic uncertainty. But he's now under pressure to make it absolutely clear.

It is fair to argue that what Biden said reflects these efforts.

It appears that China's strategic patience and the United States' strategic ambiguity will be decisive in the possibility of war.

But one thing is certain: a change in the status quo will force both sides to pay high prices and enter a much more uncertain process.

Dr.Hüseyin Korkmaz. The author is a researcher focusing on China and geopolitics in the Asia, primarily related to the US-China relations.