This is how wikipedia propagandizes ignorant Western audiences. This is a map about China's civil war between the KMT (Republic of China) and the CPC (communists, who later found the People's Republic of China, but not yet in 1947). Note that in 1945 Japan had signed it's unconditional surrender. The surrender explicitly contains a line, which says Japan accepts the terms of the Potsdam Declaration. In that Potsdam Declaration, there is an explicit line that reaffirms the Cairo Declaration of 1943, in which - again in writing - the later victorious allies said: "Japan shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China." Based on this legal chain of declarations, and in agreement of both the allies and the surrendering Japanese, the Republic of China under Chiang Kaishek took control over Taiwan in 1945. Hence, in 1947 Taiwan was firmly, de facto and de jure a part of the Republic in China - here shown in white, and therefore shouldn't be yellow. Why it matters: after 1949, when the communists won the civil war and declared the founding of the People's Republic of China, the defeated KMT troops around Chiang Kaishek retreated to their last stronghold, the province of Taiwan. Nobody at the time called it an "invasion" because it was universally accepted, that since 1945 Taiwan had been returned to China. However, the US who backed Chiang against the communists, were sore losers. So in 1951 they staged another "peace agreement" signing ceremony in San Francisco, even though Japan had surrendered and been at peace for 6 years already. In that new agreement, they deliberately didn't say, to who Taiwan was to be returned. It totally doesn't matter, because neither the Republic of China, nor the People's Republic of China, nor the USSR, nor any country outside of the US' orbit of influence participated in signing that new document. Furthermore, as de facto and de jure control of Taiwan had already been returned to China in 1945, Taiwan was neither for Japan nor for the US to give in 1951. Nonetheless in the current phase of historic revisionism you will hear US voices talk about the San Francisco treaty, as though it had any meaning to Taiwan's situation today. Remember, Taiwan was part of China when the UN was formed, and China is a founding member of the UN. This map in Wikipedia reinforces such historic revisionism by pretending Taiwan wasn't part of the ROC in 1947. There's one clause, about military occupation after a ceasefire which doesn't constitute formal handover of a territory. That's a completely different scenario, such as if Russia and Ukraine would sign a ceasefire today, the question which Ukrainian territory should in future belong to Russia, wouldn't be decided by the mere fact of Russian de facto military presence. But notice: 1. A peace treaty isn't an unconditional surrender 2. Taiwan wasn't "militarily occupied" by the ROC in 1945, it was formally and peacefully handed over to ROC authorities, based on the conditions outlined in the surrender agreement 3. So it's neither military occupation, nor a ceasefire, so the above clause is completely irrelevant. Hope this helps