This comment breaks two of the site guidelines: the one against commenting about voting on comments, and the one against insinuations of astroturfing. Would you mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and not taking threads in those directions in the future? They lead to uninteresting places.
Well I don’t think they should be down voted, but it is wrong.
Taiwan is de-jure a part of China. China just happens to be in the curious state of having two competing entities claiming to be the legitimate government.
Both ROC and Beijing agree Taiwan is China. The “C” in ROC is China!
Taiwanese people I know don’t believe this, and my impression is that the Taiwanese government’s continuing claim over China is mostly a matter of historical inertia and symbolism rather than a serious practical goal.
But many mainland Chinese do, and the government spends considerable effort cajoling/bullying the rest of the world to not recognize Taiwanese sovereignty. From what I can tell there is a real threat China might sometime attempt military conquest.
Anyway it’s complicated. Some in ROC want independence. Some don’t. Some would like to join Beijing (many investors from ROC). Most probably want the whole thing to be on the low and the ROC ignored lest the dragon is awakened.
But regardless what civilians want, being part of China affects the actions of Taipei more than any other issue.
I am not sure even de jure the situation is clear. I think the following is the case (but I'm not a legal scholar, so please correct me if I'm wrong!)
When Japan lost the war, Taiwan was governed by the Allied Powers, who appointed Chen Yi from the Kuomintang (KMT) as chief executive and garrison commander of what was called "Taiwan Province". The Peace Treaty with Japan (Treaty of San Francisco) and the Sino-Japanese Peace Treaty (Treaty of Taipei) both did not specify that Taiwan was a part of mainland China. I think formally/legally Taiwan was Japanese until 1952 but Japan was under allied control at the time. The question of Taiwan's legal status was left open in the aforementioned peace treaties. This is the legal/technical root cause for the problems with Taiwan's legal status even today.
So, as far as I can see: de facto Taiwan is an independent nation. And de jure it's ... unclear.
Finally, let's bear in mind that in a very real sense there is no such thing as "international law", much of what is called international law is really just voluntary consent of states.
Taiwan only holds on to the historical claim to ruling China because a change in status is feared to trigger the China's anti-secession laws, which in turn would lead to an invasion on Taiwan by China. Better not to "rock the boat" at this point.
(Taiwan probably also sees this as a bargaining chip, to be given up at an opportune moment (like the Kinmen Islands), in exchange for something else, e.g. China accepting Taiwan's independence. I suspect this would have been possible at some point when China was weak but seems unlikely now.)
Well the Republic of China (a.k.a. Taiwan) and the People's Republic of China (the big communist one) would both disagree with this (in principle). Of course in reality Taiwan is at this point a separate nation that some people go to great lengths to conspicuously ignore, but this isn't the "party line" on either side. The revolution in China is still within living memory and there's more than just Xi Jin-pingbots who don't see the status quo as valid, de jure.
Occam’s Razor.