It was supposed to be a triumphant foreign visit for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who is, on the national level, the best current hope for the American left. Since Zohran Mamdani is foreign born and therefore barred from being president, Ocasio-Cortez is the brightest star to conceivably make a White House run in 2028. Her appearance at the Munich Security Conference — one of the world’s premier foreign-policy events — seemed to be a step in the direction of higher office. If she doesn’t run for president, she could be a formidable primary challenger to Senator Chuck Schumer. It’s not hard to imagine AOC, in 2029, becoming the junior senator from New York.
Though she acquitted herself well in a majority of the interviews and panels in Munich, one stumble stood out — demonstrating she hasn’t yet fully conceived a foreign-policy vision. It’s also a warning for progressives: It’s vital to approach certain foreign-policy and national-security issues, including China’s potential invasion of Taiwan, in a more sophisticated manner.
Questioned directly about whether the U.S. should send troops to defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion, Ocasio-Cortez stalled for about 20 seconds. “I think that, uh, this is such a, a — you know, I think that — this is a, um — this is of course, a, uh, a very long-standing, um, policy of the United States,” the congresswoman said. “What we are hoping for is that we want to make sure we never get to that point and we want to make sure that we are moving in all of our economic, research, and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation and for that question to even arise.”
The second half of the answer, at least, was better than the first. It will be incumbent on the American government, in concert with allies like South Korea and Japan, to ensure through a blend of diplomacy and deterrence that a point is never reached where Chinese troops are marching into Taiwan, which enjoys independence but is under constant threat from Beijing. Keeping Taiwan autonomous has long been a fundamental strategic goal of the West. Taiwan is one of the great export powers in the world, and the semiconductor market — the manufacturing side of the AI revolution — would be radically altered if China ever took control of the island’s chip fabs.
For starters, Ocasio-Cortez needs an actual answer. Since progressives and leftists have been, understandably, focused on domestic policy over the past decade, there have not been many attempts to formulate a coherent approach to foreign affairs, beyond select conflicts like Israel’s war in Gaza. In this case, either it’s “Yes, defend Taiwan at all costs” or “No, it’d be very hard to deploy American forces there.” The latter response, whether progressive or not — it depends how you define the term in the context of foreign policy — is the most realistic. A leading politician should not be afraid to say it out loud.
On Taiwan, Ocasio-Cortez could have paired the second part of her answer — it’s good to argue we must do everything we can to avoid military conflict — with a straightforward reckoning with the question that was actually posed. It would have been acceptable for AOC to state, flat out, that deploying American troops against a global superpower is a last resort. Any armed conflict between the U.S. and China could precipitate a third world war — even a nuclear war.
Beyond the catastrophe of Americans and Chinese killing each other in large numbers, there are the political realities back home to confront. Do Americans want to authorize sending their young men and women to die in Taiwan? Post-Iraq, the appetite for foreign conflicts has diminished tremendously. It’s been more than two decades since a majority of Americans willingly wanted to ship troops overseas to fight. China may be a threat, but it has not attacked the U.S. For Congress to authorize a war — it would be on a scope far beyond what we’ve seen in Venezuela — public opinion would have to shift dramatically. Making arguments about sovereignty or imperialism or semiconductor chips won’t be enough.
If Ocasio-Cortez wants to become more fluent on foreign policy, she’ll have to think harder about these sorts of questions — as will the rest of the Democratic Party, which still must make a case for itself in 2028 and beyond. Right now, there are few genuinely sophisticated voices on the left when it comes to global affairs. It’s not clear many other potential 2028 candidates would have delivered better answers than AOC, even if they may not have paused for so long. Are Gavin Newsom, Josh Shapiro, and Gretchen Whitmer ready to tell the American public that their neighbors, friends, and loved ones should die to keep Taiwan free? The same goes for Donald Trump, who has vacillated between rank imperialism and isolationism throughout his years in power. No one, really, has leveled with the nation. Ocasio-Cortez, maybe, could be ready to do so soon.
