China on Warpath over Takaichi's Path to War

And Americans' silence is deafening

On Nov. 18, at the UN General Assembly’s plenary meeting on Security Council reform, China’s Permanent Representative Fu Cong came out swinging against Japan:

“Is Japan going to repeat its past mistakes of militarism?... How can the international community trust Japan’s professed commitment to peaceful development? How can we trust Japan to uphold fairness and justice? How can we trust Japan to shoulder the responsibility of maintaining international peace and security?” He asked, concluding Japan is “totally unqualified to seek a permanent seat on the Security Council.”

Stripped of sugarcoating and diplomatic cushioning, this may well be Beijing’s sharpest statement in the past decade against Japan’s bid for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. Fu’s remarks at the UN were not an isolated signal of China’s mounting frustration over Japan recently.

On Nov. 13, Chinese Vice Foreign Minister summoned, reportedly “upon instruction,” the Japanese Ambassador to China to lodge solemn representations over Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s erroneous remarks concerning China.

This move was highly unusual. The last time Beijing summoned the Japanese ambassador was still more than two years ago, in August 2023, over Japan’s decision to release Fukushima wastewater into the ocean. What makes this episode even more noteworthy is the rare use of the phrase “summoned upon instruction” in the Foreign Ministry’s statement. This indicates that the demarche was not a routine diplomatic protest, but reportedly, an action directly authorized by China’s top leadership, showing that the issue has escalated into a major diplomatic concern in Beijing.

The spark that ignited the latest controversy came from Takaichi’s remarks during a Diet meeting on Nov. 7. A Taiwan emergency involving the use of military force could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan under the country’s security legislation, she said.

A law pushed through the Diet ten years ago, amid massive public protests, stipulates that once such a “survival-threatening situation” is determined to exist, Japan may exercise the right of collective self-defense even if it is not directly attacked. Takaichi’s comments were therefore quickly and widely interpreted as hinting at Japan’s military intervention in a Taiwan conflict scenario, triggering strong questioning and opposition.

This was not the first time in recent weeks that the veteran lawmaker, a 30-year Diet member who has been prime minister for less than a month and is known for her hawkish stance toward the Chinese mainland, has crossed Beijing’s red lines on Taiwan. On October 31, while attending the APEC meetings, she posted a photo on X saying: “Before the APEC summit, I greeted and spoke with Lin Hsin-yi, ‘Senior Adviser to Taiwan’s Office of the President’.”

Earlier that same day, during her meeting with the Chinese President, she had reaffirmed that “Japan will adhere to the position stated in the 1972 Japan-China Joint Communique regarding the Taiwan question.” The contrast between her two sets of remarks was striking.

Takaichi’s tweet immediately prompted a stern protest from China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, slamming her for seriously violating the one-China principle and sending a gravely wrong signal to “Taiwan independence” separatist forces. Yet no one expected that just a week later, she would once again make a startling statement on Taiwan, unleashing one of the most intense waves of Chinese official and public criticism toward Japan seen in recent years.

Let us take a look at what has been said:

Wu Jianghao, Chinese Ambassador to Japan (Nov. 14):

“Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi made an openly provocative statement on Taiwan during her Diet meeting, flagrantly violating basic common sense, crossing China’s red line, issuing military threats, and even making warlike remarks. She has refused to acknowledge her mistake, refused to retract her comments, and refused to undo their harmful impact. This reflects a complete misreading of the situation and an utter overestimation of herself.

“…By clamoring for military intervention in Taiwan-related affairs, the Japanese authorities are blatantly challenging China’s core interests. They are voluntarily tying themselves to the chariot of Taiwan separatism and steering themselves onto a path of no return.

“…We sternly warn the Japanese side: today’s China is no longer the China of the past. Should Japan dare to intervene militarily in the Taiwan Strait, such action would constitute aggression, and China will surely deliver a head-on blow. China strongly urges Japan to seriously reflect on its history, retract its egregious remarks, and stop its provocations and red-line crossing. Otherwise, all consequences will be borne by the Japanese side.”

Jiang Bin, Chinese Defense Ministry Spokesperson (Nov. 14)

“The erroneous remarks on Taiwan made by the Japanese leader constitute a gross interference in China’s internal affairs, and a serious violation of the one-China principle, the spirit of the four political documents between China and Japan, and the basic norms governing international relations. The remarks have challenged the post-war international order, and sent very wrong signals to the “Taiwan independence” separatist forces. Such words are egregious in nature and have caused very negative impact. They are extremely irresponsible and dangerous.

“…Should the Japanese side fail to draw lessons from history and dare to take a risk, or even use force to interfere in the Taiwan question, it will only suffer a complete failure before the steel-willed PLA and pay a heavy price.”

Chen Binhua, the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office Spokesperson (Nov. 14)

“As for the means to be employed, that is entirely a matter for the Chinese people themselves and brooks no interference from any external forces. Japan and its current leaders have absolutely no standing to make irresponsible remarks, let alone issue veiled threats or attempt to obstruct China’s reunification.

“…On the 80th anniversary of the victory of the War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression and the restoration of Taiwan, instead of reflecting on its criminal history and drawing painful lessons, the Japanese side, through Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, has made blatant and malicious statements on Taiwan, seeking to meddle in the Taiwan Strait, negate the outcomes of the victory over fascism, and challenge the postwar international order. The Chinese government and the Chinese people will absolutely not accept, tolerate, or condone this. Should Japan dare to intervene militarily in the Taiwan question, we will deliver a head-on blow and resolutely crush any such attempt.”

Sun Weidong, Vice Foreign Minister (Nov. 13)

“80 years ago, the courageous Chinese people fought a bloody struggle for fourteen years and defeated Japanese aggression. 80 years later, anyone who dares to interfere in China’s cause of reunification in any form will be met with a head-on blow from China.”

Lin Jian, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson (Nov. 13)

“What is the true intention behind Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi once again raising the so-called ‘survival-threatening situation’ today? Is Japan seeking to repeat the mistakes of militarism? To once again set itself against the Chinese and other Asian peoples? To attempt to overturn the postwar international order?

“…If the Japanese side dares to intervene militarily in the Taiwan Strait, such an act would constitute aggression, and China will surely deliver a head-on blow. We will firmly exercise the right of self-defense granted by the UN Charter and international law, and resolutely safeguard our national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

“…Do not play with fire on the Taiwan question. Those who play with fire will inevitably get burned.”

Lin Jian, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson (Nov. 10)

“The attempt by the Japanese authorities to interfere in Taiwan-related affairs is a trampling on international justice, a provocation against the postwar international order, and a grave undermining of China-Japan relations.

“…The Chinese people possess firm will, full confidence, and sufficient capability to resolutely crush any attempt to meddle in or obstruct China’s cause of national reunification.”

It is notable that in the responses issued by various Chinese government departments on November 13-14, all but the Ministry of National Defense used the phrase “a head-on blow (迎头痛击)”. This expression is rare in China’s official discourse too, especially in the context of China-Japan relations, and thus carries significant weight. The wording not only characterizes Takaichi’s remarks as an aggressive provocation, but also conveys clearly that should Japan resort to military interference in China’s internal affairs, Beijing would not hesitate to take all necessary measures in resolute counteraction. It is both a stern political warning and an explicit security and military signal.

China has not only responded forcefully at the official level, but has also mobilized its entire publicity apparatus. Takaichi, widely called out by name by Chinese media outlets, has surely enjoyed treatment that even some American politicians may not have received at the height of the China-U.S. trade war. This underscores the level of Beijing’s outrage over her remarks.

For instance:

Xinhua: “Takaichi’s backward turn in history is a path destined for failure”

“Takachi’s actions are not incidents of individual behavior. Rather, they reflect a broader right-wing undercurrent within Japan that seeks to revive militarism and completely break free from the constraints of the post-war system.”

CCTV’s “Yuyuan Tantian”: “China is ready to unleash countermeasures against Japan”

“The egregious nature of Takaichi’s remarks lies not only in their blatant challenge to the political foundation of China-Japan relations but also in her lack of remorse afterward and her outright refusal to retract the erroneous statements.”

PLA Daily: “Saber-rattling about intervening militarily in the Taiwan Strait will only steer Japan onto a path of no return”

“After all, once you start playing with fire, the way in which the flames spread is no longer something the fire-starter can control.”

Taiwan was seized and colonized by Japan for half a century after Japan launched a war of aggression against China in 1894-1895. During WWII, China fought side by side with the Allied powers, including the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union, making tremendous sacrifices to halt the expansion of fascist forces, Japan among them, and ultimately securing victory. The postwar international order, which was established with the participation of China as a major Allied nation, was clearly articulated in the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation: the territories Japan had stolen from China, including Taiwan, had to be restored to China.

After Taiwan’s restoration to China in 1945, the cross-Strait situation entered a prolonged and atypical state of political standoff, due to the continuation of China’s civil war and interference from external powers. But China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity have never been divided, nor will China ever permit the division.

For these reasons, the Taiwan question carries deep emotional weight among the Chinese public. When Japan, a country that once committed aggression, war crimes, and colonial rule in China, makes statements on Taiwan that trigger historical memories, the impact extends well beyond present-day sovereignty or strategic concerns. It touches a particularly sensitive dimension of China’s collective historical memory, underscored by the country’s recent commemoration of the 80th anniversary of Taiwan’s restoration just this October. Beijing’s reaction reflects this sensitivity.

In addition, although figures such as Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso and former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe have made similarly explicit remarks in the past, Takaichi’s remarks carry fundamentally different significance. Since Japan’s defeat in 1945, this is the first time that a sitting Japanese head of government has, in an official setting, promoted the notion that “a Taiwan contingency is a Japanese contingency,” explicitly linking it to the exercise of collective self-defense. It is also the first time that a Japanese leader has expressed an ambition to intervene militarily in the Taiwan question, and the first time Japan has issued a direct threat of force toward China since 1945.

Historically, Japan has repeatedly invoked its own “security” and “national survival” as justifications for launching preemptive wars abroad. Before its 1931 invasion of northeast China, the opening skirmish of the prelude to WWII, Tokyo spread narratives of existential crisis. Prior to its 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, Japan likewise circulated rhetoric of “imminent national peril.”

Given Takaichi’s longstanding identity as a right-wing politician seeking to break free from the postwar system, it is not difficult for informed observers to draw connections, or feel alarmed, about the intentions behind her latest remarks.

For years, she has championed the idea of Japan’s so-called “normalization” as a member of the Diet. Her latest improper remarks on Taiwan may contain an element of off-the-cuff bluntness, but they nonetheless reflect her consistent core belief: overturning the pacifist constitution as part of her vision for transforming Japan into a country capable of waging wars.

Japan’s postwar constitution explicitly renounces war as a sovereign right. Yet in 2015, under then Prime Minister Abe, Japan breached this constraint through the new security legislation, which lifted the ban on collective self-defense and introduced the category of “survival-threatening situation.”

A close protégé of Abe, and widely seen as the inheritor of his political legacy, Takaichi is now deliberately stretching the scope of what constitutes a “survival-threatening situation,” attempting to fold China’s internal affairs, the Taiwan question, which bears no direct relevance to Japan’s own security, into that category. This is clearly an abuse of the innately controversial concept, aimed at inflaming tensions in the Taiwan Strait as a means to break free from the historical constraints imposed on Japan as a defeated nation.

What is equally dangerous is that her rhetoric directly implicates the United States, seeking to bind Washington to Tokyo’s strategic assertions. For the U.S., this would not only mean being dragged into a potential conflict that does not align with its core interests, but would also heighten the chances of serious miscalculation in East Asia.

In other words, such statements were intended to sell the United States an uninvited, uncontrollable, and entirely unnecessary high-risk strategic gamble.

To understand the implications more clearly, it is useful to look at how Takaichi framed her argument on the 7th. She stated:

“An attack on U.S. warships sent to break any Chinese blockade on Taiwan could require Tokyo to intervene militarily to defend itself and its ally.”

The United States, for its part, appears not to have taken the bait. From AP and the New York Times to the Wall Street Journal, CNN, and the Washington Post, coverage over the past week has largely focused on the historical tensions between China and Japan, Takaichi’s remarks, and Beijing’s reactions, while signaling a notably cautious distance. These outlets offered almost virtually no endorsement of Takaichi’s comments, nor did they frame the China-Japan dispute as a security issue that the U.S. must follow Japan into.

Only NBC News, in discussing China’s reaction, offered a keen observation:

“None of this may matter all that much to Takaichi, who was expected to clash with Beijing on Taiwan and other issues.”

This restrained media posture is broadly consistent with the tone adopted by official Washington.

On the 12th, the spokesperson for the U.S. State Department commented:

“We emphasized the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and opposed any unilateral attempts to change the status quo, particularly by force or coercion. We encouraged the peaceful resolution of cross-Strait issues through constructive dialogue.”

On Nov. 10, during an interview with Fox News host Laura Ingraham, Trump was asked about Takaichi’s remarks regarding a “survival-threatening situation” and the response from a Chinese diplomat. Ingraham pressed him with the question: “These are not our friends, sir, are they, in China?”

To this, Trump replied:

“Well, a lot of our allies aren’t our friends, either, Laura. Our allies took advantage of us on trade more than China did, and China took a big advantage.”

As Takaichi chooses to amplify a “crisis” narrative, Washington’s caution and deliberate downplaying of the issue reveal an increasingly visible divergence in tempo between the U.S. and Japan. When it comes to security issues in the West Pacific, the United States prefers to manage risks at its own pace rather than be swayed by the domestic political fluctuations of an ally. Taking the cue from Trump, a treaty alliance is no guarantee of true camaraderie.

In fact, Takaichi’s calculations have not escaped the attention of American think-tank analysts either.

Mike Mochizuki, a non-resident fellow at the Quincy Institute, said if Takaichi were to enhance Tokyo’s security engagement with Taiwan, as well as encourage Washington to buttress military deterrence and bolster its defense ties with Taiwan, “Beijing is likely to escalate its coercive actions around Taiwan as well as accelerate its military buildup.” He added:

“This negative action-reaction spiral could eventually drive the Chinese leadership into a corner and lead them to conclude that the possibility of peaceful unification has disappeared and that the use of military force is the only viable option. The conflict could rapidly escalate and endanger the lives and livelihood of Japanese civilians.”

Even without its chief ally’s unequivocal backing, Japan seemed to shrug off China’s initial response. According to NHK, when asked on Nov. 14 about Beijing summoning Japan’s ambassador to China, Japan’s Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi said that the ambassador had again explained to the Chinese side the meaning of Takaichi’s remarks and had clearly objected to China’s protest. Motegi also stated that the comments did not violate international law and therefore did not need to be withdrawn.

Japan’s Vice Foreign Minister also summoned the Chinese ambassador to Japan on the same day to lodge a strong protest. Japan’s response undeniably pushed the situation in a more negative direction.

On Nov. 14, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Chinese embassies and consulates in Japan issued a reminder, advising Chinese citizens to avoid traveling to Japan in the near future, citing “the continued deterioration of the security environment for Chinese nationals there.”

On Nov. 15, Air China, China Southern Airlines, China Eastern Airlines, and other carriers released notices stating that, in accordance with the Ministry’s travel advisory, tickets for flights involving routes to and from Japan, issued before December 31, may be changed or refunded free of charge. As of Nov. 19, over 543,000 tickets have been canceled. Nearly 7.5 million Chinese tourists visited Japan from January to September this year, making Japan the most visited country or region for Chinese tourists during that period.

Tourism accounts for about 7.5% of Japan’s GDP, and Chinese visitors make up nearly one-fifth of all foreign tourists to the country. Moreover, Chinese travelers, who spend almost half of their total travel expenditures on shopping in Japan, constitute a high-value segment for the industry. A downturn in Chinese travelers’ interest in visiting Japan is therefore expected to have a tangible negative impact on Japan’s economy.

On Nov. 17, a spokesperson for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that Chinese premier had no plans to meet with the Japanese leader during the upcoming G20 Summit.

That same day, Chinese media reported that several Japanese films would postpone their release in China.

On Nov. 19, China informed Japan that it would halt imports of Japanese seafood. China had previously imposed a full ban on Japanese seafood imports in 2023, citing the release of wastewater from the Fukushima nuclear plant. In June 2025, it had only reinstated imports from 37 prefectures, with Fukushima and nine other affected regions remaining excluded.

In addition to concerns over the safety of its own citizens, China sees little justification for allowing Japan to continue profiting from the Chinese market while freely commenting on China’s core interests or even hinting at the use of force.

Yet for a brief moment, the situation seemed to be shifting in a more constructive direction. LDP Acting Policy Research Council Chair said on Nov. 16 that Takaichi had reflected on her failure to fully explain the context of her comments and would likely refrain from making similar statements in the future.

On Nov. 17, the Director-General of the Asian and Oceanian Affairs Bureau of the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs arrived in Beijing to consult with the Chinese side regarding Takaichi’s remarks on a potential Taiwan contingency, though he refused to retract them. The issue is likely to keep China–Japan relations in a protracted stalemate, potentially for years.

The latest controversy reveals a strengthening political trend in Japan to break away from the postwar framework and challenge the existing international order. It also underscores once again the extreme sensitivity and strategic weight of the Taiwan question in China–Japan relations. Whether the bilateral relationship can return to a relatively stable state will largely depend on whether Japan can genuinely return to the political consensus outlined in documents such as the China–Japan Joint Statement.

It is worth noting that China responded swiftly and in a clearly tiered manner: from the foreign ministry’s formal representations, to the issuance of travel advisories, to a series of coordinated responses from other government bodies and media. Together, these formed a comprehensive multidimensional countermeasure covering diplomacy, security, and public opinion. The message China intends to send is unambiguous: it will not create exceptions for Japan, or any other country, on the Taiwan question, nor will it allow certain political forces in Japan to link the Taiwan question to Japan’s security, create room for future policy loosening, or externalize the risks of their own strategic adventurism onto the United States, thereby pushing Washington into a high-stakes confrontation.

---

Zhai Xiang works as a research fellow with the Xinhua Institute on China-U.S. relations.

Wang Xiaopeng is an observer with academic training in the United States and frontline reporting in Japan and across Africa.

Xu Zeyu, founder of Sinical China, is a journalist with Xinhua News Agency.

---

For more background stories: