Scholars have argued that “divided nations” (i.e., countries that have split into separate political entities) have distinct characteristics in the international system, and this model has been applied to China–Taiwan relations. Yet, despite ethnic, cultural, linguistic, and historical ties, the current state of cross-Strait relations does not resemble classic cases of the “divided nation” model such as East and West Germany, North and South Vietnam, or North and South Korea, not least because power asymmetry is a major feature of the relationship. China’s largely one-sided demands for “reunification” with Taiwan share more similarities with Germany’s approach to Austria in the 1930s. Both are cases of an aggressor state seeking to annex the territory of a smaller, sovereign neighbor based on a revanchist ideology that stems from perceived notions of “national humiliation” by outside powers and ethno-nationalist ideas of a shared blood community. Germany’s annexation of Austria in 1938 was the result of overwhelming German military power and political decision-making in the dictatorship of the Third Reich rather than ethnic, cultural, or historical ties. Germany’s invasion and occupation of Austria and the transformations of German and Austrian national identity after 1945 show that the “divided nation” model is contingent on historical and ideological subjectivities and not objective, scholarly analysis. Scholars of cross-Strait relations should approach the subject without reference to this model and instead focus on the political struggle between Chinese authoritarianism and Taiwanese democracy on the question of Taiwanese sovereignty in addition to Taiwan’s pivotal role in the great power conflict between the United States and China.