← WW3 RISK TRACKER / THEATER: China – Taiwan Tensions
China – Taiwan conflict
▲ STALE FEED — last run failed validation for this theater; showing most recent verified entry.
- Taiwan conducted annual live-fire military exercises simulating responses to potential invasion and blockade scenarios.
- Taiwanese forces intentionally throttled mobile internet services during drills to test communications resilience against cyber disruptions.
- Taiwan's defense budget exceeded NT$1 trillion for the first time, marking a 16 percent increase focused on asymmetric deterrence.
- Defense forces deployed unmanned surface vessels and drone swarms during exercises to evaluate asymmetric coastal defense operational concepts.
- Taiwanese authorities tracked up to 20 Chinese naval vessels and 11 official ships operating in surrounding waters during the drill period.
The cross-Strait security environment remains elevated, characterized by Taiwan’s ongoing large-scale annual military exercises and China's persistent maritime force presence around the island. Taiwanese forces are actively testing defense readiness across physical and digital domains, while strategic messaging from both sides continues to highlight underlying friction.
Operational developments were dominated by Taiwan’s multi-day live-fire war games, which included landing repulsion drills in the Penghu archipelago. In a novel operational test, authorities temporarily throttled mobile internet connectivity to evaluate civil-military communications resilience under simulated blackout or cyberattack conditions. Additionally, defense forces integrated sea drones and unmanned aerial swarms to evaluate asymmetric defense concepts intended to counter potential Chinese amphibious assets.
On the political track, Taiwan announced a historic defense budget milestone exceeding NT$1 trillion, representing a 16 percent year-over-year increase aimed at strengthening long-term deterrence. Concurrently, strategic analysis surrounding Beijing's internal leadership discussions at Beidaihe underscored a continued political focus on opposing Taiwanese independence. Minor diplomatic friction was also noted as Taipei issued a protest regarding its treatment at a memorial event in Japan.
The broader regional context reflects a sustained effort by Taiwan to operationalize asymmetric deterrence strategies designed to impose high costs on any potential invasion force. In response, Beijing continues its gray-zone maritime posture, routinely deploying combinations of naval vessels, official ships, and aerial assets to maintain persistent operational pressure around the island.
While the current exercises represent scheduled readiness activities rather than imminent conflict escalation, the growing operational scale and novel drill scenarios raise the baseline risk of tactical miscalculation. Assessment: Cross-Strait tension is expected to remain elevated within current bounds as Taiwan completes its scheduled exercises and Beijing maintains routine gray-zone patrols.
COMMON QUESTIONS
Are China and Taiwan at war?
No. There is no armed conflict. China claims Taiwan and applies sustained military and economic pressure — air and naval activity around the island, exercises, and coercion short of force — while Taiwan builds its defences. Not an armed conflict under international humanitarian law: none of the 102 conflicts in Geneva Academy's classification involves China and Taiwan. The index tracks the risk, not a war. The index reads 40/100 as of 1 January 1970 (elevated), on a scale where 50 and above is reserved for fighting actually under way.
How dangerous is the China and Taiwan situation right now?
The index reads 40/100 — elevated. The scale is anchored on 22 historical episodes from 1914 to 2005, so the number means the same thing from one theater to the next. It is a measurement of what is reported, not a forecast.
How is the China and Taiwan risk index calculated?
By fixed formula from open-source reporting: events are extracted and graded by how well evidenced they are, scored across weighted factors, and the model never picks the number. How the index works, and what it does not measure, is explained at wwiii.report/methodology.
How often is this updated?
Every day. The report is rebuilt from that day's reporting and the index re-judged from it, and a fall is published only once the evidence confirms it.
Timeline events — hover the chart to read them
Timeline events — hover the chart to read them
Timeline events — hover the chart to read them
This run predates the split into war and war-risk indices; its number was a single tension score and is labelled as what it was then.
Why it moved, under the chart, names what changed in the latest move: the day’s readings — strikes, casualties, talks — and, when the conflict’s stage was re-judged, what was graded differently and the events behind it. Open it for the detail.
Re-judged from open reporting by fixed formula — the model never picks a number — and a fall publishes only once the evidence confirms it. A dot on the line is a day the stage itself moved. How it is made →
Direction — which way the week pushed. Severity — where the index sits. Connections — how much of the rest a shock here reaches. Cascade — that reach combined with how ready this theater is to go off.
The index reads the state of the conflict, not the volume of news. Each run grades the factors listed below against fixed rubrics, and the score follows by formula.
So a dramatic headline moves nothing unless it changes a grade. A theater already graded for recurring incursions absorbs one more without moving — it is priced in.
Open How this was measured for every grade, its movement since the last run, and the events behind it. Full construction →
A different measurement from the score above, from a different source. This line counts how much of the world's news reports conflict between these two states, against their own long-run normal: 100 is normal, 200 is twice the usual level.
It is computed mechanically from the GDELT Project's open event stream every 15 minutes and never touches the assessed index above — when both move together, that agreement is the signal. A day with too few events shows no reading rather than a guess. Click the chart for the full history.
Data: the GDELT Project.