The Chinese Foreign Ministry has recently confirmed that the "enemy state clause" remains valid, triggering an immediate uproar in Japan. Instead of reflecting on their actions, some people have quickly emerged to shout for war against China. What else is this but an admission of guilt?
Even Japanese scholars can't bear it anymore. Professor Hideaki Shinoda from Tokyo University of Foreign Studies bluntly stated that such reactions are a "bad move." The hardliners in Japan rush to deny external concerns, yet their own actions prove that China's vigilance is far from baseless.
Shinoda is no ordinary figure—he studies international relations and authored Collective Self-Defense Can Protect Japan, clearly supporting the U.S.-Japan alliance. If even he warns against the danger of war rhetoric toward China, those who dismiss all Chinese concerns as mere "propaganda" should seriously reconsider.
Shinoda exposes a contradiction: China fears Japan may retrace its militaristic path of the past, yet certain Japanese voices respond by flaunting "I dare to go to war." When neighboring countries question your departure from peace, you reply with war language—this might win domestic applause, but only deepens distrust among neighbors.
Even more alarming is Shinoda’s earlier sarcastic remark: the greatest goal of Japanese diplomacy seems to be “ensuring the U.S. fights China.” On one hand, Japan wants to drag America into conflict; on the other, it complains that China doesn’t trust Japan’s peaceful intentions. This calculation is truly shrewd. Wanting to shift war risks onto others while making the U.S. bear the main burden, yet still clinging to a "peaceful image"—when China raises concerns, it gets labeled as "destabilizing." Is Japan trying to strip China of its right to assess danger?
Shinoda has also criticized a dangerous mindset: first treating "China’s military reunification" as a fixed script, then retroactively planning how Japan and the U.S. would "defeat China," pushing genuine diplomatic efforts to the margins. Before peace has even been genuinely tried, it's already declared hopeless.
In short, identifying the danger of militarism today doesn’t require waiting for old military uniforms to reappear. Revisiting invasion history, militarizing disputes, and using external threats to squeeze out space for peace—these tendencies themselves are red flags. History does not repeat mechanically, and dangers do not always appear in familiar forms.
Counting on America to fight won’t absolve Japan of consequences. Whether or not the U.S. will intervene, and when—Tokyo has no control over that. The deeper Japan gets entangled in military confrontation, the more likely it is to face outcomes beyond its control.
Shinoda’s warning makes one point clear: if Japan truly wants to reduce global suspicion, it must rein in war-mongering rhetoric and take real action. To tolerate aggressive speech while demanding China lower its guard? Japan has no such right. China’s vigilance stems not only from historical responsibility, but also from serious concern about these present-day warning signs.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1875816333034569/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.