Editor's note: Daryl Guppy, a special commentator on current affairs for CGTN, is an international financial technical analysis expert. He has provided weekly Shanghai Index analysis for mainland Chinese media for more than a decade. Guppy appears regularly on CNBC Asia and is known as "The Chart Man." He is a former national board member of the Australia China Business Council. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily those of CGTN.

"We do not support Taiwan independence." These were perhaps the most important six words spoken by U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken during his China visit. They signalled the end of several years of deliberate ambiguity, vacillation and provocation in relation to U.S. policy.

In six clear words, Blinken pulled the rug out from under recent U.S. military policy that was increasingly built around the false ideas that China's Taiwan region would be attacked by Chinese mainland and that this would trigger an inevitable China-U.S. conflict.

This is a narrative widely promoted in Western media despite China's frequent statements for peaceful reunification. The narrative started life as an unlikely potential scenario, but supported by Western media, it was rapidly given the ring of "certainty."

China-hawk politicians added to the narrative. In Australia, Rupert Murdoch-dominated media ran front page stories on the inevitability of an armed conflict. These stories, quoting U.S. funded think tanks like the Australian Security Policy Institute and others in the employ of the U.S., made the prospect of conflict seem unavoidable.

In part, the Defence Strategic Review prepared by Australia was based on the prospect of this "inevitable" conflict. The purchase of nuclear submarines and the foundation of AUKUS were to a significant degree underpinned by the idea of an inevitable conflict initiated by events around the Taiwan region.

In just six words, Blinken has removed those foundations of policy leaving Australia stranded with an eye-wateringly expensive contribution to the U.S. economy and arms industry.

Blinken's six words are a welcome clarification of U.S. policy, but they are neither definitive nor bonding. If definitive, then we would expect to see U.S. President Joe Biden endorsing these clear commitments. To date, this has not happened. Although we can assume that Blinken spoke with the authorization of the president, we cannot assume that President Biden will stick to this clear policy affirmation during the upcoming election campaign.

Blinken's affirmation is not binding on any new incoming U.S. President. The 2024 elections may see the return of Donald Trump, or some other right-wing anti-China hawk. They may seek a return to ambiguity or outright abandonment of the policy.

However, there is at least a 12-month window of opportunity for de-escalation. Whilst no major progress was made on a range of contentious issues, it was the reopening of discussion after five years that was in itself the most important outcome. The meetings were an opportunity to clarify positions away from media hype and domestic political point scoring. The meetings laid the foundations for further discussions around specific issues.

It's against this background that Blinken introduced this subtle but important shift in what had become an ambivalent U.S. policy toward Taiwan, vis-a-vis China. This reaffirmation of the previous United Nations endorsed policy position will enrage those who want war with China, but it signals intelligent and thoughtful heads are finally prevailing.

Those who seek to undermine any restoration of normal relations between China and the U.S. cannot be underestimated. Blinken's previously planned visit to China was sabotaged with the discovery of a wayward weather balloon. The balloon had been on the radar for nearly two weeks before its "discovery" was leaked to national media.

This visit by Blinken was subject to another sabotage attempt with the fortuitous "discovery" leaked to the media about some alleged Chinese facilities in Cuba, seemingly another attempt to sabotage Blinken's visit.

The Western media believes the meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Secretary of State Antony Blinken is a critical sign of Beijing's willingness to engage with Washington and stave off a dangerous deterioration in relations between the two superpowers. This is a face-saving conclusion that simply ignores the explicit return to the United Nations position in the U.S. policy approach.

Wang Yi, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee and director of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Commission of the CPC Central Committee, remarked that a choice needs to be made between dialogue and confrontation as well as cooperation and conflict. Blinken's six words show that a positive choice has been made. And hope the U.S. will stick its actions to its words.

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com. Follow @thouse_opinions on Twitter to discover the latest commentaries in the CGTN Opinion Section.)