> Taiwan was formed when a bunch of Chinese aristocrats fled the mainland.
This sounds like something out of Chinese Communist Party propaganda - aristocrats? The last Emperor was deposed almost 40 years before, and the Nationalists had nothing to do with them.
The history:
Taiwan, a large island the size of ~Maryland off the SE China coast, had been a somewhat primitive frontier of China for much of its history. Sometimes the Chinese government controlled it, sometimes not. It was a refuge for fugitives at times. Japan controlled it from 1895 until (IIRC) they lost it in WWII.
Before and after WWII there was a civil war for control of China between the right-wing Nationalists, led by Chiang Kai-chek, and the left-wing Communists, led by Mao Tse-tung. Both were brutal authoritarian dictators; there were no white knights here. Not surprisingly, the U.S. favored Chiang, the Soviets favored Mao.
In 1949 the Communists won. The Nationalists fled to Taiwan and the Communists lacked the capacity to attack them there, so they remained. Both parties claimed to be the legitimate government of China and I'm pretty sure the Nationalists even retained China's UN seat.
In 1972, a falling out between the Communists and Soviet Union created an opportunity that the U.S. exploited. Nixon famously went to mainland China, normalized relations, and the U.S. backed away from Taiwan. The Communists got the UN seat, and all three parties agreed that Taiwan was part of China, not a separate nation, but temporarily with a separate government. Also, the issue would not be resolved by force and the U.S. has an agreement with Taiwan to defend it if necessary.
That arrangement persists until today. Defending Taiwan wasn't a big deal through the 1990s, when China's military was so weak. Now it is a much more serious risk to the U.S.
> Also, the issue would not be resolved by force and the U.S. has an agreement with Taiwan to defend it if necessary.
To further clarify, the Taiwan Relations Act requires the US to give Taiwan the ability to defend itself; whether this would bind the US to directly intervene in a conflict on Taiwan's behalf is somewhat unclear, and that ambiguity is a not-insignificant part of the truce.
This sounds like something out of Chinese Communist Party propaganda - aristocrats? The last Emperor was deposed almost 40 years before, and the Nationalists had nothing to do with them.
The history:
Taiwan, a large island the size of ~Maryland off the SE China coast, had been a somewhat primitive frontier of China for much of its history. Sometimes the Chinese government controlled it, sometimes not. It was a refuge for fugitives at times. Japan controlled it from 1895 until (IIRC) they lost it in WWII.
Before and after WWII there was a civil war for control of China between the right-wing Nationalists, led by Chiang Kai-chek, and the left-wing Communists, led by Mao Tse-tung. Both were brutal authoritarian dictators; there were no white knights here. Not surprisingly, the U.S. favored Chiang, the Soviets favored Mao.
In 1949 the Communists won. The Nationalists fled to Taiwan and the Communists lacked the capacity to attack them there, so they remained. Both parties claimed to be the legitimate government of China and I'm pretty sure the Nationalists even retained China's UN seat.
In 1972, a falling out between the Communists and Soviet Union created an opportunity that the U.S. exploited. Nixon famously went to mainland China, normalized relations, and the U.S. backed away from Taiwan. The Communists got the UN seat, and all three parties agreed that Taiwan was part of China, not a separate nation, but temporarily with a separate government. Also, the issue would not be resolved by force and the U.S. has an agreement with Taiwan to defend it if necessary.
That arrangement persists until today. Defending Taiwan wasn't a big deal through the 1990s, when China's military was so weak. Now it is a much more serious risk to the U.S.