Chinese Consul General in Osaka Xue Jian (薛劍) on Saturday last week shared a news article on social media about Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks on Taiwan, adding that “the dirty neck that sticks itself in must be cut off.” The previous day in the Japanese House of Representatives, Takaichi said that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute “a situation threatening Japan’s survival,” a reference to a legal legal term introduced in 2015 that allows the prime minister to deploy the Japan Self-Defense Forces.
The violent nature of Xue’s comments is notable in that it came from a diplomat, especially one stationed in the country to which he was directing his ire. The Japanese government called it “extremely inappropriate,” while Beijing tried to distance itself by characterizing the post as “personal.” Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) said that Xue’s comments, and similar remarks from Chinese officials, risked stirring up anti-Japanese sentiment among Chinese, and that it “cannot be treated as an isolated incident or just a personal remark.” US Ambassador to Japan George Glass wrote on X: “The mask slips — again.”
All of those statements are true, to one extent or the other.
The imagery of necks being cut is too evocative of the shock-and-awe tactics of the Imperial Japanese Army in Nanjing in 1937-1938 to discount the idea that Xue’s remark was rooted in the persistent national historical trauma in China over the awful legacy of the Nanjing Massacre. The 20th century’s wars in Asia continue to cast a shadow over this region.
The comments are a reminder that the sentiment behind them, while “personal,” exists widely in China, and in the Chinese establishment, exacerbated by nationalist rhetoric commonly stirred up in Chinese state media. They say much about the sensitivity in China over Taiwan, and the lack of confidence that the situation can be resolved if other regional actors become involved. The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) rhetoric of a peaceful rise is, as Glass said, a mask concealing pernicious intent.
The arrival of Takaichi, who has expressed goodwill toward Taiwan and an understanding of the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, as Japan’s new leader is to be welcomed. Unfortunately, there is a sense in which she has — to borrow from Xue’s ugly imagery — stuck out her neck, and left herself, if momentarily, vulnerable.
In an interview posted online by the US think tank the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Ryo Sahashi, a professor at the University of Tokyo’s Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia, talked about how much alarm Takaichi’s comments caused in Japan itself. Sahashi stressed that never before has any Japanese prime minister said out loud in the Diet that the Taiwan situation could be regarded as an existential threat to Japan, and in those conditions Japan has cause to exercise its right to collective self-defense. This was “completely new,” he said.
Sahashi also said that Takaichi should be careful about political enemies at home: Her Liberal Democratic Party is in a weak position after a poor showing in elections earlier this year for the upper and lower houses. At the same time, her Cabinet takes the Taiwan Strait situation seriously, with Minister of Defense Shinjiro Koizumi and Minister of Foreign Affairs Toshimitsu Motegi calling stability in the region extremely important, he said.
Legislators of all parties should take note of the CCP’s true nature, from which Xue’s comments momentarily allowed the mask to slip.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS