Chinese envoy Xiao Qian blasts Japanese PM Sanae Takaichi over Taiwan call
Beijing’s top diplomat in Australia has cast Japan as an aggressive power after the country’s Prime Minister warned a Chinese invasion of Taiwan could trigger a Japanese military response.
Beijing’s top diplomat in Australia has sought to drive a wedge between Canberra and Tokyo, casting Japan as an aggressive power after the country’s Prime Minister, Sanae Takaichi, warned a Chinese invasion of Taiwan could trigger a Japanese military response.
In an opinion piece for The Australian, China’s ambassador to Australia, Xiao Qian, accuses Ms Takaichi of refusing to accept Japan’s defeat in World War II and of seeking to revive Japanese “militarism”.
Mr Xiao also claims Taiwan “is an inalienable part of Chinese territory”, without acknowledging the island has never been ruled by the Chinese Communist Party, and that neither Japan nor Australia accepts Beijing’s position that Taiwan should come under mainland rule.
The article follows an opinion piece by former Japanese ambassador to Australia, Shingo Yamagami, who challenged the Albanese government to publicly stand up for Ms Takaichi in the face of a vicious Chinese campaign directed at the Japanese leader.
It comes just days after Defence Minister Richard Marles declared in Tokyo that Australia and Japan had “never been more strategically aligned” and condemned the actions of a Chinese fighter jet that locked its fire-control radar on Japanese aircraft in international airspace.
Ms Takaichi declared last month under questioning in Japan’s parliament that a conflict over Taiwan could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” under the country’s constitution, prompting mobilisation of the Japanese Self-Defence Forces in support of the self-governed territory. The comment prompted a furious backlash from Beijing. “If you stick that filthy neck where it doesn’t belong, it’s going to get sliced off,” Xue Jian, China’s consul-general in Osaka, declared.
Mr Xiao adds his voice to the torrent of Chinese criticism, declaring: “Takaichi’s remarks blatantly break Japan’s fundamental commitment to a path of peace and seek to exploit populism to revive militarism. The Taiwan question is merely the lever that has been chosen to advance this dangerous agenda.
“People who cherish peace across all nations must draw lessons from history, understand and support China’s just position, remain highly alert to any resurgence of Japanese militarism, and resolutely oppose any attempt to whitewash the history of colonial aggression.”
The ambassador claims the phrase “survival-threatening situation” has “historically been a prelude to Japan’s foreign aggression”, arguing Tokyo used the same pretext to attack Pearl Harbor, “inflicting profound suffering on peoples across the Pacific”.
Australian Institute of International Affairs chief executive Bryce Wakefield said Japan had used false pretexts to justify its historic aggression, but the term “survival-threatening situation” was a legal term created in 2015.
“It is a modern legal concept, tied to an interpretation of when military action, strictly curtailed under Japan’s constitution, can be justified – and this is crucial – only for the purposes of maintaining Japanese security,” Dr Wakefield told The Australian.
Mr Xiao invokes Japan’s WWII legacy, arguing its “brutal war of aggression” caused “tens of millions” of innocent deaths, including those of “more than 900” Australians in the bombing of Darwin.
According to the Australian War Memorial, 252 allied service personnel and civilians were killed in the Japanese attack on the city.
Mr Xiao says Japan never apologised for its actions in WWII – a claim Dr Wakefield lashed as “outright nonsense”, citing multiple statements of contrition in the 1990s and 2010s.
The ambassador also argues that Ms Takaichi’s rhetoric “exposes Japan’s refusal to accept defeat in World War II and its ambition to subvert the post-war international order”, saying the post-WWII Potsdam Proclamation “explicitly prohibited Japan from rearming”.
Dr Wakefield said the Potsdam Proclamation and other international statements at the close of the war were “not binding treaty law” and were made in consultation with Chinese Nationalist leader Chiang Kai-shek, not the CCP. He said a claim that Japan was reviving militarism was also a tired trope.
“Japan doesn’t have armed forces marching around its streets or major military parades in its capital. The population is coming around to the notion that a competent defence force is necessary in a dangerous neighbourhood, but it is hardly embracing militarism as that term is usually understood,” Dr Wakefield said.
Mr Yamagami argued in The Australian last week that Japan took a strong public stand against China’s Covid-era coercion of Australia but Canberra has failed to reciprocate in light of Beijing’s attacks on Ms Takaichi.
“Is it too much to expect the same from our Aussie mates in times of need?” he said.
Mr Marles did not specifically mention China’s attack on the Japanese leader, but called out the actions of the People’s Liberation Army air force in targeting Japanese jets, and expressed Australia’s solidarity with Tokyo.
“We understand that there will be interactions between our respective defence forces and indeed the defence forces of China, but our absolute expectation is that those interactions are safe and are professional,” he said. “We will continue to stand with Japan in working with Japan to assert the rules‑based order in this region, and we will do it resolutely.”
Mr Xiao’s arguments follow this year’s edition of the authoritative Lowy Institute Poll, in which a record 90 per cent of respondents expressed their trust in Japan to act responsibly in the world. The same poll suggested just 20 per cent of Australians trusted China to act responsibly.
Outgoing Australian spy chief Andrew Shearer declared last week that China and Russia were “ruthless” and well-resourced, “but they are not 10 feet tall”.
The Office of National Intelligence director-general, who will soon become ambassador to Japan, said Australia’s strategic competitors faced an array of problems while Western democracies had “fundamental strengths”.
To join the conversation, please log in. Don't have an account? Register
Join the conversation, you are commenting as Logout