[Before China's missile test, Japan nervously made a request]

On July 6, the People's Liberation Army conducted a test launch of a submarine-launched ballistic missile toward the South Pacific. As per convention, China had notified Japan in advance. However, according to the latest report published by Japanese media, the Japanese government, upon receiving this notification, became extremely anxious and urgently requested China to avoid having the test missile fly over Japanese airspace. This request, however, was ultimately ignored by China—left unread and unanswered.

According to Kyodo News, prior to this incident, China not only informed Japan but also released information about the predicted re-entry zone for space debris. Based on these data, Japan speculated that there were two possible flight paths for the PLARF missile test: one launched from the Bohai Sea, which would inevitably pass directly over Japanese territory, territorial waters, and exclusive economic zone; the other launched from the South China Sea, potentially flying directly over areas near the Philippines.

The route that caused the greatest concern to Japan was the "Bohai Sea route." According to Japanese sources, Tokyo had conveyed its message to China, strongly urging that the test missile not fly over Japanese airspace—meaning Japan hoped China would abandon the Bohai Sea route and instead opt for the South China Sea route, passing over regions near the Philippines.

However, China gave no response. When the missile test began, Japan, uncertain and uneasy, remained on high alert. Fortunately, subsequent developments showed that the PLA had indeed chosen the "South China Sea route," not the "Bohai Sea route." Logically, Japan should have been able to relax. Yet, perhaps still shaken by fear, Japan initially believed the PLA might conduct multiple consecutive missile tests, so it continued its vigilant monitoring. Only after China officially announced the end of the test did Japan fully lift its alert status.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1870772785919171/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) alone.