US President Donald Trump’s characterization of China as an American ally during World War II has sparked debate in Taiwan, highlighting ongoing tensions over historical narratives between Taipei, Beijing, and Washington. The remarks, made during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to the United States last month, praised wartime cooperation, including the role of the Flying Tigers, a group of American pilots who aided China against Japanese forces. Both leaders recalled the US and China fighting “side by side” to defeat Japan, a description later summarized in a White House fact sheet.

This acknowledgment has created a sensitive situation for Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which has long sought to emphasize a distinct Taiwanese identity separate from mainland China’s historical legacy. The reference to China’s wartime alliance with the US, represented by the Republic of China (ROC) government prior to 1949, has allowed Beijing to bolster its claims as the rightful heir to that legacy.

Following the summit, Taipei protested the wartime reference, with Deputy Foreign Minister Wu Chih-chung accusing Beijing of attempting to supplant the ROC’s role in WWII through what he described as “narrative diplomacy.” The controversy exposes a dilemma for the DPP, which now finds itself invoking the ROC’s wartime history internationally, after years of distancing Taiwan’s modern identity from that era.

Taiwan’s main opposition party, the Kuomintang (KMT), which governed the ROC during the war and retreated to Taiwan after losing the Chinese civil war in 1949, criticized the ruling party’s inconsistent use of the ROC legacy. KMT communications director Chen I-hsin accused the DPP-led government of highlighting certain historical terms for political convenience while downplaying others tied to the pre-1949 government’s history.

In response, DPP legislative caucus leader Chuang Jui-hsiung acknowledged that the “China” which fought alongside the US was indeed the ROC, but cautioned that diplomatic language between major powers is often intentionally ambiguous and should not be overly interpreted.

Scholars in Taipei view the episode as part of a broader contest over historical identity between Taiwan and Beijing. Wang Hsin-hsien, director of National Chengchi University’s Institute of International Relations, noted that while Beijing has long asserted its wartime narrative, the difference this time lies in the US alongside China being broadly referenced without distinction. Wang suggested that President Trump’s focus was on short-term diplomatic gains, whereas President Xi aimed to solidify a long-term historical narrative that ties Taiwan’s postwar status to mainland China.

Wang further explained that Beijing’s portrayal of Taiwan’s post-1945 “restoration” to China and its insistence on the People’s Republic of China’s continuity from the wartime Chinese state are forming a legal and historical framework. If the US accepts this framing, it could result in Taiwan losing its claims to the ROC’s wartime legacy.

Yen Chen-sheng, another researcher at National Chengchi University, warned that the DPP’s effort to distance Taiwan from its ROC history may forfeit an important historical connection with the United States. The relationship encompasses not only WWII cooperation but also the ROC’s founding membership in the United Nations and decades of political ties between Taipei and Washington after 1949.

Chinese authorities have dismissed Taiwan’s objections, with the Taiwan Affairs Office asserting that victory in WWII belongs to “the entire Chinese nation.” Beijing recognizes that communist and KMT forces fought on separate fronts but maintains that the establishment of the PRC in 1949 was a governmental change rather than a change in China’s legal identity, underpinning its claim as the successor state to the wartime Chinese government.