I'm reasonably certain the "de-facto" wording is used as Taiwan isn't actually recognised formally and fully as an independent country internationally. Thats not to say it shouldn't be, but it acknowledges the current truth.
And I'd like to point out that the ROC and the PRC don't even have the same land claims. The PRC claims the mainland and Taiwan. The ROC claims the mainland, Taiwan, and Mongolia. Mongolia claims Mongolia. There are three separate countries making these claims.
The fact that (some of) their claims overlap doesn't magically mean that the ROC and PRC aren't two separate countries. It just means that they are two countries that claim more land than they control.
This is very much outdated and a relic of the times when anti-communist world powers believed they could maybe remove communism from mainland china. It is a believe held today only by a small minority. https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3951560
As of today, the governments in Beijing and Taipei agree that there is only one China and that Taiwan is part of it. That's the "One China" principle.
Taiwan does not assert that there is a sovereign country whose territory consists of the island of Taiwan. Taiwan's government still claims that the Republic of China still exists and that it is the legitimate state in all of China including Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and Xinjiang. This position is accepted by very few countries.
The fact that they are able to act in many respects as though they are the government of a sovereign country whose territory consists of the island of Taiwan is what makes them a de facto country.
... the Taiwan independence movement claims only the island of Taiwan for the Taiwanese nation, and is a core aspect of the Pan Green Coalition, which has 56% of the legislative and the president.
It's true that Taiwan's official position no longer reflects either reality or the desires of its people.
I think it would be ideal of Taiwan could be come de jure independent and sovereign, but that would essentially require some deal between China and the USA which is certainly not forthcoming.
Right. China's position is that a declaration of independence from Taiwan constitutes an act of war against China by what is essentially a US/NATO proxy. So the US/NATO would have to trade something to China for Taiwan and it's not clear to me that they have anything to offer that matters to China.
> China's position is that a declaration of independence from Taiwan constitutes an act of war against China by what is essentially a US/NATO proxy
Right, and one could also say that America's position is that China isn't allowed to invade Taiwan, so I guess if China wanted to do that, it would need to trade something of value to America to let it happen, and I'm not sure China has anything to trade that matters to America. This is the US-Sino agreement -- China isn't allowed to invade, the US isn't allowed to recognize independence. The situation can only be settled with diplomacy. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-China_policy for more information about this agreement -- which both the US and China signed.
So you see, China can't really prevent the US from recognizing an Independent Taiwan, but neither can the US prevent China from attacking Taiwan. Both of these balance. China can sabre rattle, sort go up to but not actually invade, just as the US can go up to but not actually recognize Taiwanese independence. For example China can violate Taiwanese airspace but then leave without shooting at anyone. And the US can open an "office" in Taiwan that isn't quite an embassy but does some consular work. And perhaps an American official might visit that office and shake a few hands.
It's a weird tit-for-tat.
This is the game that is being played. The US is betting that it has time on its side. With each year that passes, the Taiwanese consider themselves more independent in their own consciousness. China is betting on rapidly becoming so rich and such a pleasant place to live that the Taiwanese will want to reunify in order to enjoy the Blessings of Beijing. Everything else is either play-acting or dangerous stupidity. Because I think Xi is a smart guy, I think he is play-acting and for a domestic audience. Whenever there is some problem like electricity blackouts, or some corruption scandal, Xi does some provocation against Taiwan and people fall behind him ready to avenge Chinese honor. But I know there is a non-zero chance that I could be wrong, and perhaps Xi really means it. That would be disastrous for all sides.
So international disputes are not really settled by one side having a position only, there are multiple sides, each needing to compromise on their position. Being rigid often ends up backfiring, particularly for a nation locked into the dollar system and one that isn't food or energy independent.
The ROC (i.e. what people mean when they say "Taiwan") and the PRC are most certainly two separate countries. The fact that they have largely overlapping land claims doesn't change that. The fact that they both historically claim to be the legitimate government of some no longer existent greater China doesn't change that. They are two separate countries. That is the current status quo.
Would you call the Army Council of the Continuity IRA the government of a country? They claim to be the government of the Irish Republic declared in 1916 and claim the entire island of Ireland as the territory of that state. Claims are very cheap.
> Would you call the Army Council of the Continuity IRA the government of a country?
Unlike both the ROC and the PRC, they don't actually govern anything in practice, irrespective of whether it is coextensive with their claims. Upthread post claimed the ROC and PRC are both governments of real and separate countries in practice, independent of their overlapping theoretical claims. Doesn't seem a related thing at all to your question.
> Would you call the Army Council of the Continuity IRA the government of a country? They claim to be the government of the Irish Republic declared in 1916 and claim the entire island of Ireland as the territory of that state. Claims are very cheap.
Exactly claims are cheap. Hence why the PRC's claim that Taiwan is its territory is so worthless given that it has _never_ controlled it. Also why the ROC's claims to the mainland and Mongolia are so worthless given that they haven't controlled any of that for more than 70 years.
The claims are cheap and meaningless. The reality is that China and Taiwan are two separate countries.