I so think KMT prefers it to be named "China" than Taiwan. Though they are a bit down on electoral fortune, they may get into power in the future too.

Taiwan is like 30% mainlanders (support the KMT, families came over in 1947) and 70% native taiwanese (came from fujian before and during the Japanese occupation). The way the KMT took over the island in 1947 creates a lot of animosity between the two groups, coupled with the fact that the mainlanders control much more of the economy than the natives.

Even if the KMT wins elections in the future, they still have to cater to that 70% of the population that want very little to do with the mainland.

Aren’t the natives the indigenous people of Taiwan?

It depends on context. There are the original prior to Dutch trade natives (naruan, whatever) and the colonists from the mainland that came in waves over time who are now native in relation to post WWII immigrants from the mainland after Mao defeated the nationalists on the mainland.

It’s not too different from someone who is a German native but isn’t caucasian, for example.

The various Austronesian tribes in the Urheimat, yes.

Still, the distinction between Japan occupation-experiencing Han population and the evacuated Mainlander Han is an important one.

Isn’t that the problem? The Japanese treated Taiwan as a first class province, while Chiang Kai Shek was much more authoritarian with his take over of the island (killing off a lot of the island leaders and educated people to prevent dissent). This has led to a much closer relationship between Taiwan and Japan, and a harsher relationship with the mainland.

Technically ya, but in modern usage it refers to a previous wave of immigration to Taiwan from Fujian.

Taiwanese aborigines are firmly in the KMT/mainlander camp.

There is no such a thing called gradual independence.

You either have it by announcing it and other countries recoginize it or you do not have it.

What I see is politicians play the rent-seeking game between China and the U.S.

>There is no such a thing called gradual independence.

The statement was "gradual changes towards independence". Are you saying it is not possible for a territory to take any steps that might lead towards independence or make it more likely?

Blatantly taking statements out of context and intentionally misrepresenting them is not appreciated.

Please look at the Irish, or Canadian, or Montenegrin, or Philippines examples. There are all kinds of intermediate arrangements between independence and annexation, and places can slide fairly smoothly between them.

For all purposes that matter, Taiwan is already independent.

They don't have to declare it. They just are independent already.

They control their own borders. They tax their own people. They have their own military. That makes them independent in my book, regardless of whether or not they announce it to the world or not.

The "announcement" part of it just doesn't matter that much.

Of course Taiwan is in a independent country, it's called Republic of China, which also includes islands outside Taiwan.

You can go to a no-man island and declare your own independence and nobody will care about it.

However, a country that interact with other countries, their independence is recognized by both parties.

Further, as Taiwan is so close to mainland, whether geo-politically, or economically, made it detaching links to China infeasible.

> However, a country that interact with other countries, their independence is recognized by both parties.

Taiwan's independence is de facto recognized by the US and many (most?) other major powers, it's just not recognized de jure because of the PRC's diplomatic policy. For instance, the US basically has an embassy in Taiwan (they just don't call it one), which is staffed by State Department diplomats (who take a leave of absence to work there so they're not technically diplomats when there). It walks like a duck, it talks like a duck, but many have agreed to pretend it's not a duck for reasons.

This stuff isn't as black and white as you seem to think it is.

This is actually a better argument for independent status than de jure in my mind, because countries essentially "opt-in" and go out of their way to make special rules for dealing with Taiwan. There's no default recognition by virtue of UN admission and having diplomatic relations or some other standard international measure.

I'd say that puts it above many countries that might have wide de jure recognition, but limited, ineffective, or largely chilled diplomatic relations, like North Korea.

> You can go to a no-man island and declare

Declaring isn't the thing that is important.

As I said before, the important part is controlling your own borders, taxing your own people, and having your own military.

That is what makes a country a country. Not things like "declaring" or "recognition".