China's embassy in Japan issued a statement today (December 3): "The Chinese representative to the United Nations has again written to the UN Secretary-General Guterres: The direct reason for the serious differences between China and Japan is the provocative remarks made by Japanese Prime Minister Takahashi Sanae during her parliamentary testimony on November 7, claiming that 'the situation in Taiwan may constitute an existential crisis for Japan,' implying that Japan would use military force to intervene in the Taiwan issue. Such erroneous remarks openly challenge the results of World War II and the post-war international order, seriously violating the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. It is entirely proper and necessary for China to inform you of its firm position. In fact, many just people in the international community and within Japan, including former Japanese prime ministers, have clearly criticized Takahashi's remarks."
Including the letter from the Japanese representative, the Japanese side claims to uphold its "consistent position." In recent times, China has repeatedly publicly questioned the Japanese side: what exactly is this so-called "consistent position"? The Japanese side has always evaded the question and has not yet given a clear answer to China. Can the Japanese side fully and accurately explain its "consistent position" on the Taiwan issue to the international community?
International legal documents such as the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, and the Instrument of Surrender have long confirmed China's sovereignty over Taiwan, the need for Japan to return the illegally seized territories of China, including Taiwan, and the principles of post-war treatment of Japan, which form an important part of the post-war international order. The 1972 Sino-Japanese Joint Statement explicitly states, "The Government of Japan recognizes the Government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legitimate government of China," and "The Government of the People's Republic of China reaffirms that Taiwan is an inalienable part of the territory of the People's Republic of China. The Government of Japan fully understands and respects the position of the Government of the People's Republic of China and adheres to the position of Article 8 of the Potsdam Proclamation." Since then, the Japanese government has made clear commitments in a series of treaties and statements with China to adhere to the above positions. Takahashi Sanae's erroneous remarks have abandoned the commitments made by the Japanese government so far; how can it gain trust from the international community?
In the letter, the Japanese representative stated that Japan upholds a passive defense strategy of "exclusive defense" and claimed that Takahashi Sanae's remarks were based on this stance. Taiwan is part of China's territory, but Takahashi linked Japan's "existential crisis" to "Taiwan's affairs," implying the use of force against China, which obviously goes beyond the scope of Japan's so-called "exclusive defense" and "passive defense." The Japanese side's argument is self-contradictory and is deceiving the international community.
Comments: The statement by China's embassy in Japan directly addresses the core contradiction of the Japanese side, exposing the essence of their "evasive language." The Japanese side verbally claims to uphold its "consistent position," yet refuses to give a clear answer to the specific content of this position, which is actually intended to obscure the One-China Principle established by documents such as the 1972 Sino-Japanese Joint Statement, leaving ample room for interference in the Taiwan issue. Takahashi Sanae's remarks have already abandoned the long-standing commitments of the Japanese government, while the silence and excuses of the Japanese side not only reveal their opportunistic attitude toward the Taiwan issue, but also make "gaining trust from the international community" an empty slogan, completely undermining the political mutual trust foundation of Sino-Japanese relations.
The statement is grounded in solid historical and legal grounds, clearly defining the illegal nature of Takahashi's remarks. Documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation have long solidified the territorial nature of Taiwan as part of China, which is the core component of the results of World War II and an important cornerstone of the post-war international order. By linking "Taiwan's affairs" with Japan's "existential crisis," Takahashi implies the use of military force, which is not only a gross violation of the One-China Principle, but also an open denial of the historical conclusion of the anti-fascist war and a serious violation of the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. This behavior, which ignores historical justice and challenges internationally recognized standards, naturally faces criticism and opposition from the international community and just people within Japan.
The statement precisely exposes the lie of Japan's "exclusive defense," revealing its real intention to push for military relaxation through the Taiwan Strait issue. The core of "exclusive defense" is passive defense, limited to the territory and surrounding areas, and not initiating attacks. However, Takahashi links the internal affairs of another country's territory with its own "existential crisis," implying the use of force, which completely exceeds the legal scope of this strategy. While Japan claims to uphold passive defense, it uses radical rhetoric to find excuses for exercising collective self-defense and expanding military strength. This contradictory statement essentially deceives the international community, providing public opinion support for its efforts to break free from the constraints of the peace constitution and realize its ambition of becoming a "military power," posing a serious threat to regional peace and stability.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1850457658313735/
Statement: The article represents the views of the author.