Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s recent remarks on the Taiwan issue have drawn numerous criticisms and opposition from a wide variety of circles in Japan and outside Japan. Then how to understand her wording on this matter from a foreign policy ground as well as from the perspective of Japan’s evolving domestic political environment?

Since Japanese Prime Minister (PM) Sanae Takaichi in early November in a congressional event claimed Japan’s possible involvement in the Taiwan issue through force, if the actions taken by China to achieve unification between the Chinese mainland and Taiwan are judged by Japan as posing a threat to Japan’s existence, China-Japan bilateral relations has been quickly down to a very low point.

The Chinese authority strongly opposed Japanese PM’s wording in linking the fate of Taiwan with that of Japan and accused her of interfering in China’s domestic affairs, given that the Taiwan issue has always been taken by the Chinese authority as an internal affair of China, so that resorting to which means to achieve unification between the Chinese mainland and Taiwan should be decided by the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, and it has nothing to do with Japan.

Meanwhile, the Chinese side also warned the danger of the resurgence of Japan’s militarism, as in history, Japan had ever taken the similar wording as an excuse to launch invasions against other countries, as well as urged Japan to abide by the official political documents and preconditions for the establishment of China-Japan diplomatic relations.

Japanese citizens participate in an anti-war protest in Tokyo's Shinjuku District, Japan, on 29 November 2025. (CMG/CCTV)

Japanese People attend a protest in front of the Japanese prime minister’s official residence in Tokyo, Japan, on 28 November 2025. (Jia Haocheng/Xinhua)

In Japan, criticisms to Japanese PM’s remarks on Japan’s possible interference in the Taiwan issue have been coming up from both the political figures and the Japanese public. Since mid-November, some Japanese locals have gathered from occasion to occasion in front of the Japanese leader’s official residence to protest against her “easy and careless remarks”, without thinking of the repercussions of her wording, and urged her to resign.

Besides that, Japanese PM’s claims have also been opposed by a wide range of circles in Taiwan including the former KMT party leaders as well as thirty-four Taiwan local groups and networks, urging Japan to stay away from the Taiwan issue.

While on the Japanese side, initially, the Japanese PM had attempted to defend her wording in linking Taiwan with Japan’s survival, claiming that it is a usual position held by the Japanese government, so that the PM sees no need to take back her remarks. Later on, with the growing pressure from a variety of fields, both domestically and internationally, it appears that the Japanese PM had tended to downplay the seriousness and consequences of her previous remarks by focusing on giving more explanation about the possible situation or circumstance to be judged by Japan as posing a threat to Japan’s survival, instead of linking the Taiwan issue with a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan, while insisting that Japan’s position on the Taiwan issue remains unchanged.

Then, according to the latest media report on 3 December, the Japanese PM newly stated that, “in line with the China-Japan Joint Statement made in 1972, the Japanese government is well aware of China’s claim that Taiwan is an inseparable part of the People’s Republic of China, the Japanese authority understands and respects that, and Japan’s position on this matter has been consistent”.

So, apparently, the content of the Japanese PM’s remarks have been evolving.

Then, how to understand the Japanese PM’s initial wording on the Taiwan issue made in early November? What motivated the Japanese PM to link the Taiwan issue with a “survival-threatening” situation for Japan? To further extent, how to understand Japan’s foreign policy direction?

It is assumed that, the Japanese PM’s initial wording on the Taiwan issue in early November, for a significant part, reflected her attempt to consolidate Japan’s alliance relationship with the United States and to bind Japan’s interests with that of the U.S. together. So, her remarks were intended to express Japan’s commitment to the U.S.-Japan alliance relationship. However, in the meantime, her claims somehow also revealed some Japanese politicians’ fear of being abandoned by the United States.

On the Taiwan issue, the U.S. has long been adopting a policy of strategic ambiguity, which, from the U.S. perspective, could well serve the U.S. interests, and it would likely manage to maintain its strategic ambiguity as long as it can.

So, by linking the Taiwan issue with a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan in this special occasion, it is not difficult to understand that the Japanese PM expected to please the U.S. and to accommodate the U.S. policy on the Taiwan issue and beyond, in turn, to get the U.S. to stay committed to safeguarding Japan’s interests, even though it is not sure whether or not the Japanese PM’s remarks on the Taiwan issue could really please the U.S. and meet the U.S. interests, from the U.S. perspective, under the current circumstance, given that, on the foreign policy front, the U.S. has already been facing a lot of trouble in managing the conflicting situation in Europe and the Middle East, and that meanwhile, as guided by the “America first” policy, the U.S. has been taking steps to shift some burden on to its allies. So, against the current situation, making trouble on the Taiwan issue and increasing more burden on the U.S. wouldn’t likely meet the U.S. interests.

Apart from serving Japan’s foreign policy purpose, Japanese PM’s wording on the Taiwan issue also reflected the dynamics of Japan’s domestic politics. For some in Japan, it is still difficult to admit the fact of Japan being defeated in WWII. Refusing to acknowledge Japan’s failure can also be one of the most important reasons that some still tend to glorify the Japanese war criminals, while in the meantime ignore the infliction led by Japan’s unjust war ambition on other countries during WWII.

For these groups of people, Japan was destined to be a great country with much bigger influence on the global stage. However, after WWII, due to a cap set in Japan’s defence capacity, from the Japanese perspective, Japan’s status as a “normal state” has been deprived; and since then, Japan must have to rely on and cooperate with the United States to help realize and achieve some of the country’s important goals in security and defence.

The current Japanese PM’s wording on the Taiwan issue is not a coincidence. It is assumed that, some hardliners within the Japanese political and military circles as well as some within the Japanese society are still committed to reviving Japan’s military strength, that Japan had ever  exercised for a certain period of time in the Japanese history.

In the meantime, there is also a need to see that, as a result of WWII, the Japanese society has been dramatically transformed. So, it is believed that a significant majority of the Japanese are peace-loving people. Against this backdrop, if the current Japanese government continues to push for a hardline approach in managing Japan’s relations with China, the Japanese PM’s tenure wouldn’t likely be easy, and she would likely face huge pressure from the key figures in the political field as well as from the Japanese public.

Since mid-November, China in response has already issued a series of measures in opposing Japanese PM’s claims on the Taiwan issue. As already mentioned in the previous part of this piece, the Japanese PM has been adjusting the content of her wording on the Taiwan issue. Her latest remarks on 3 December showed that the Japanese side appeared to have taken a little further step to cool down its tension with China, though it is not sure how likely this matter will further develop.

To get the China-Japan bilateral ties and cooperation to go back to normal, it is very crucial at the moment to prevent the tension from further upgrading. So, apart from taking steps to adjust the diplomatic posture, given that the Japanese side initiated the frictions, Japan needs to take substantial actions first to cool down the tense situation, including stopping the Japanese military activities at the moment in the Diaoyu islands.

Note:  An updated version of this article has been published by ISSUE 5 of the Strategic Thinking magazine.