I wonder how downplaying my figure makes my points less valid.

I wonder how I just pointed out the lack of education on relevant topic domains, and not downplayed your "figure".

You really have to check again what “de jure” and what “de facto” means. Taiwan pretty much enters in the category of a “de jure” state, since it doesn’t force it’s citizens to recognize the Taiwanese law by authoritarian means. Furthermore elections are a given and so far there are no fraud concerns.

Is Taiwan a UN member? No. Did Taiwan declare its independence? No. How many countries recognise Taiwan as a country? 15/195. That makes Taiwan a de facto state, not a de jure sovereignty. Taiwan having its own currency or constitution does not make it a country, but a de facto state.

Kindly learn about de jure and de facto, and what qualifiers make a state a country or not.

This is so close to be a compelling argument to use against the existence of Palestina as an estate, it’s funny how inconsistent some people can get just to justify Chinese expansionist policy over Taiwan.

More countries recognise Palestine as a country, than Taiwan.

Any more questions?