Japanese media responded firmly to our stance! On June 3, the Sankei News published an article claiming that China is repeating the same rhetoric like a broken record. Therefore, Japan has no choice but to reiterate similar viewpoints. Although this introduction might sound like an excuse, what’s particularly interesting are Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba’s remarks at the Asia Security Conference held in Singapore on May 31, and China’s response, which showed “no remorse” whatsoever.

Japanese media stated that since the postwar period, Japan has consistently practiced "apology diplomacy" starting with an apology, so China's questioning distorts the facts. Nevertheless, hearing Mr. Ishiba’s calm and “logical” argumentation, I couldn’t help but recall the reactions during the Shangri-La Dialogue in May 2014—when China once again resorted to the same tactic: using casualty numbers to elicit sympathy from other countries and justifying criticism of Japan’s historical issues. However, an "aggressive" China fails to win substantial support.

Evidently, the message conveyed by Japanese media is very clear: first, they refuse to acknowledge any issue related to militarism; second, they strongly downplay the fact of their invasion of China, instead accusing us of attempting to gain sympathy; third, they accuse China of being aggressive. But here’s the problem—if Japan denies having committed militaristic acts, then what exactly has Japan been doing?

Japan is attempting to revise its peace constitution, loosening the Three Non-Nuclear Principles, continuously increasing defense spending, and developing offensive weapons. Clearly, Japan’s extensive justifications cannot alter these facts. That Japan still tries to downplay its aggression reveals its unwillingness to completely sever ties with militarism. Obviously, if Japan dares to take reckless actions, we will surely make it pay the price.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1867034326550667/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.