That is both an incentive to invade and an incentive for others to defend?
A similarity to the Falklands war?
Falklands were uninhabited when discovered by Europeans, and 'colonized' by Britain, France, Spain.
Argentina insisted it had a claim on the island due to past connections with Spain.
The Falklands were of insignificant economic interest to the British.
Except due to the aspect of the inhabitants identifying as being British subjects, and Argentina's unilateral attempt to alter the government of the island by invasion, as diplomatic talks were underway but stalling at times, to transfer them to Argentinian rule.
Both countries used National Pride as the rationalization for their responses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do the Taiwanese inhabitants identify as Chinese, or something else separate from mainland China?
Would they themselves be able to accept rule under the CCP with a China today that resembles more of a Chiang Kai-shek China of social democracy rather than Mao's one of complete centralist control?
The cold war definitely played into Taiwan's favour under Chaing's rule -->> communism bad. For quite some time Taiwan was recognized by the UN as the voice of China in some respects even having a seat with a veto until 1971.
The mentality perpetuated nowadays is still somewhat akin to a continuation of the cold war with China, and protect Taiwan in the name of democracy. As seen by the 'the right of passage' in open waters argument, there may be some truth to that style of diplomacy? But is it put forward masking economic interests from both sides of the issue, interests being that of the Chinese ( who suffered under Japanese imperialism and civil strife during the early 1900's ) and that of western nations led by the USA.