China just bought American soybeans, and Trump signed a Taiwan-related bill! A statement from the U.S. Treasury Secretary ignited public opinion. After China just procured American soybeans, the U.S. quickly signed a Taiwan-related bill. Following a stern warning from China, the U.S. Treasury Secretary urgently tried to 'put out the fire' but ended up igniting public opinion with a single statement. If the U.S. insists on probing China's red lines, what consequences will follow, and will it lead to another rupture in Sino-U.S. economic and trade cooperation? According to the latest shipping data, at least six bulk carriers are set to load soybeans at Gulf Coast ports for shipment to China before mid-December, marking China's seventh large-scale purchase of American soybeans. U.S. Treasury Secretary Becerra publicly confirmed on December 3 that China is strictly adhering to the trade agreement reached at the end of October, with an expected procurement of 12 million tons of soybeans to be completed by the end of February 2026. However, the cooperative atmosphere in trade did not last long before a political flip occurred. Recently, Trump officially signed the 'Taiwan Assurance Act.' The contents of this bill directly touch the most sensitive core of Sino-U.S. relations: lifting restrictions on official exchanges between the U.S. and Taiwan, spreading the so-called 'Taiwan status undecided theory,' and promoting the normalization of high-level interactions between the U.S. and Taiwan. Ironically, just a few days before, Trump publicly stated that he understood the importance of the Taiwan issue to China. Trump's choice to sign the Taiwan-related bill at this moment is no coincidence. From the perspective of domestic politics, this clearly reflects a consideration to shift contradictions, consolidating domestic support by creating external tensions. Secondly, the U.S. is testing China's bottom line, attempting to gradually change the status quo in the Taiwan Strait using a 'salami-slicing' approach. It is important to note that this bill essentially removes the 'tightening spell' on U.S.-Taiwan collusion, providing a legal basis for U.S. senior officials to visit Taiwan. An even more significant reason is that the U.S. intends to create a situation of 'proxy wars' around China. Japan's recent shift in policy towards China is a signal, with Kishi Matsumoto breaking the previous government's 'ambiguity' strategy by adopting a more aggressive provocative posture, directly declaring intentions to intervene militarily in the Taiwan Strait. This layout evokes memories of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, as the U.S. attempts to incite regional conflicts to exhaust its strategic opponents. However, historical lessons are also glaring; the Russia-Ukraine conflict has lasted nearly four years, and has not developed according to the U.S.'s script, instead dragging both Europe and the U.S. into it. The U.S. has found it difficult to control the situation even with relatively familiar Russia, and facing a China with greater comprehensive national strength, the risks of such a strategy will only increase. Looking back at the chain reactions triggered by Pelosi's visit to Taiwan in 2022, the PLA conducted large-scale 'surround Taiwan military exercises,' and military exchanges between China and the U.S. were almost completely interrupted and have not yet fully resumed. If Trump follows suit, the countermeasures will only be more intense. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Taiwan Affairs Office almost simultaneously issued stern statements, directly pointing out the U.S. actions as 'blatant interference in China's internal affairs,' emphasizing that the Taiwan issue is 'the first red line that cannot be touched in Sino-U.S. relations!' They urged the U.S. to handle the Taiwan issue with utmost caution and to stop official exchanges with Taiwan! Perhaps realizing they might have 'gone too far,' U.S. Treasury Secretary Becerra hastily came out to 'put out the fire' the next day. At a forum hosted by The New York Times, when asked whether the Trump administration would change its policy of 'strategic ambiguity' towards Taiwan, Becerra made a stunning remark, claiming 'the U.S. is an ally of China, and the relationship between the two countries remains unchanged.' This remark caused an uproar in the audience. After all, no one expected that a country's treasury secretary would use terminology with strong military alliance connotations to describe Sino-U.S. relations. The host provocatively followed up: 'Are you not referring to Taiwan when you say 'ally'?' Becerra surprisingly added that America's 'allies' also include Taiwan, and reiterated that 'the relationship has not changed.' However, when asked whether the U.S. would assist Taiwan in the event of a conflict in the Taiwan Strait, Becerra could no longer speak freely and could only refuse to answer on the grounds of 'hypothetical questions.' In fact, Becerra's comments were made partly to echo Trump's recent statements, as Trump has repeatedly publicly stated that 'China and the U.S. are friends,' to create an illusion of 'despite differences, we are still partners.' This indicates that Trump is also very concerned that the Taiwan-related bill he signed will anger China and thus affect the Sino-U.S. trade agreement that has just gotten back on track. Secondly, it is also to exert pressure on America's traditional allies by sensationalizing 'Sino-U.S. relations.' Thirdly, it is to leave room for subsequent policy adjustments. Knowing that the U.S. government is a makeshift crew, one would not expect it to be so thoroughly makeshift. They want to appease China while unwilling to give up ambiguous statements regarding Taiwan, which is a perfect illustration of political opportunism. In fact, as Sino-U.S. relations have reached today, both sides are already well aware of each other's bottom lines. The U.S. does not need to put on airs; having taken full advantage in dealings with China, it should not seek to gain even more. China's planned procurement of soybeans is based on the sincerity of fulfilling commitments in the economic and trade fields, but if the U.S. insists on touching China's red line on the Taiwan issue, it will only damage the political mutual trust between China and the U.S., ultimately backfiring on the U.S. itself. The Taiwan issue involves core interests, leaving no room for compromise or ambiguity. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs' stern statement and the PLA's normalized actions around the Taiwan Strait have already formed a complete signaling system. China is willing to cooperate in economic and trade matters, but if U.S. senior officials really set foot on Taiwanese soil, the reaction will not be limited to diplomatic protests. It is advisable for the U.S. to refrain from playing with fire, as continuing to play with fire on the Taiwan issue will only trap itself in a strategic predicament. By then, not only will Sino-U.S. economic and trade cooperation suffer a major blow, but the entire security landscape of the Asia-Pacific region may also be reshaped. The U.S. will lose both economic benefits and fall into a security crisis.