Western discourse has fixated on Taiwan ahead of Nancy Pelosi’s rumored trip to the country in August. I am not a Taiwan expert by any means, but I am steeped in Western discourse on Taiwan, have visited and traveled throughout the country, have published in the Taiwanese press, and have close Taiwanese friends in the US and in Taiwan. Through the culmination of these experiences I encounter several recurring misunderstandings and errors on this topic from Western commenters. Taiwan will undoubtedly be a source of geopolitical import given its history and location, and in the context of Nancy Pelosi’s probable upcoming trip, it seems prudent to head-off these misunderstandings now. God willing, this short article will spare us some of the grief from the same contrarians who just a few months ago were crafting hot takes on the “Azov Battalion” and “Ukraine biolabs.”

The biggest pitfall in Western Taiwan discourse is to completely neglect the perspective of the Taiwanese people. Commenters in the West will speak of Taiwan as a mere chess piece in the great power conflict between the United States in China without any curiosity about what the Taiwanese themselves actually want with their country. This is manifest in comments such as “Why doesn’t the USA just give Taiwan to China in exchange for [X concession] from the Chinese?” Missing in this argument is that a single-digit percentage of Taiwanese want unification with China. The vast majority (more than 80%) want some form of their status-quo de facto independence.

Speaking of unification, it is commonplace for Western observers to adopt the Communist Party’s framing of such as a “re-unification.” The fact is, Taiwan has never been ruled by the People’s Republic of China or the Chinese Communist Party. The island was a Dutch colony in the 17th century before being annexed by the Qing dynasty in 1683 and then ceded to Japan in 1895. The Republic of China (ROC; today’s government in Taiwan) overthrew the Qing dynasty in China and later took control of Taiwan from the Japanese after their defeat in World War II. The subsequent Chinese civil war led to the rise of the Communists and the founding of the Peoples’ Republic of China (PRC) while the ROC maintained authority over Taiwan and 168 smaller islands. In the 1990s, Taiwanese fought to end one-party rule in their country and now have a vibrant multi-party democracy with its own currency, passport, military, indigenous peoples, and colonial history. However, never in this colonial history was Taiwan ever ruled by or part of the PRC. In fact, the current ROC government in Taiwan predates the PRC by several decades. This is all a long way of explaining that the correct term for a hypothetical merger of Taiwan and China is “unification,” not “re-unification.”

Precise terminology is fraught with peril (and often deliberately ambiguous) in Taiwan discourse, and this fact is often abused to create misunderstandings. Another example is equating China’s “One China Principle” with the United State’s “One China Policy.” While they sound similar and are often erroneously spoken of as such by Western writers, these positions are distinct. Of course, China’s Principle is that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China and that the PRC is the only legitimate government of that China. However, the USA’s Policy critically does not make any determination to the status of Taiwan. Instead, it acknowledges that the PRC’s position is that Taiwan is part of China. The USA’s position that has been reaffirmed consistently in each new administration is that this issue is unsettled and that the two sides should peacefully agree to a resolution. The USA’s commitment to Taiwan was subsequently strengthened in the Taiwan Relations Act and the Six Assurances, which are beyond the scope of this article.

Given the complexities of Taiwan’s history and current political status (of which we have only scratched the surface), some observers in the West try to sidestep actually learning this history and just refer to Taiwan as an “island” (rather than a country). For example, they will report on “Taiwan Tensions: how Nancy Pelosi’s upcoming trip to the island could upset frail US-China relations.” Of course, the country these crafty commenters are referring to includes more than a hundred individual islands, all under the jurisdiction of the ROC government. What’s the word for a territory under the rule of a single government? Well, a short visit to Taiwan makes its status as a country vividly clear: it has its own military, currency, passport, judicial system, and borders distinct from China’s. Taiwan is undeniably an independent country, but whether it is recognized as such is another matter—it is true that only 13 countries have formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan and Taiwan is excluded from many international bodies like the United Nations.

A final pitfall to highlight is an eagerness to draw parallels between Taiwan and other countries/territories. When China cracked down on Hong Kong’s democracy movement through their draconian National Security Law, Western commentators were quick to assert: Taiwan is next. When the US withdrew from Afghanistan, Balaji Srinivasan was quick to assert that Taiwan was likely next, the only “question is whether it happens with or without a fight.” Of course, he didn’t foresee the rallying of Western nations to subsequently support Ukraine while isolating Russia (like many contrarians, he focused instead on Ukraine biolabs). Taiwan isn’t interchangeable with Ukraine, Afghanistan, or Hong Kong. Sure, there are important lessons for Taiwan from each of those places. However to jump from one to the next without mentioning, for example, that Taiwan has its own military (vs Hong Kong) or that Taiwan isn’t occupied by a foreign military (vs Afghanistan) betrays a naive gamification of geopolitics.

I understand that this “pre-emptive strike” against bad takes on Taiwan is likely to fail (“doomed to fail,” as China’s foreign minister likes to say), but perhaps it will help you spot these errors in the wild. More than anything, I hope that they encourage you to stay engaged and well informed on Taiwan, to be curious and visit Taiwan, to connect with Taiwanese people, and to see Taiwan for more than just a pawn in a game of geopolitics.