Mutually assured destruction isn't assured to happen. Generals have always believed that sub-nuclear conflicts were possible. The current generally accepted the

Mutually assured destruction isn't assured to happen. Generals have always believed that sub-nuclear conflicts were possible. The current generally accepted theory is that MAD would come when one side's survival as a state is in danger, probably as a result of a chain of escalation. In a potential Taiwan conflict, when would either side use nukes? China wouldn't use them unless they believe they can't successfully take Taiwan without them, but who would they use them against? Nuking Taiwan makes their newly-captured territory worthless, while nuking the US will start a chain of nuclear escalation that probably ends in MAD. The US wouldn't use nukes unless they believed that they couldn't defend Taiwan without nukes, but Taiwan and the US have been investing heavily (as evidenced by this new ship) in making Taiwan defensible, and besides that, Taiwan's value (like its cities, chip fabs, etc) are vulnerable enough that they can be destroyed without nukes. Neither side wants a nuclear war.