Why China Has Turned on Japan’s New Leader: Takaichi, Taiwan and Rising Regional Tensions

Within weeks of taking office, Japan’s new prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, has run headlong into one of Beijing’s most sensitive red lines: public discussion of a possible military response if China were to try to seize Taiwan by force. Her comments prompted an assertive reaction from Beijing that combined economic pressure with a state-amplified wave of nationalist criticism aimed at Tokyo’s leadership.

What Takaichi said and why it mattered

Takaichi suggested that Japan could respond militarily if China attempted to take Taiwan by force. For previous Japanese administrations, Taiwan was rarely framed in direct military terms; most leaders avoided suggesting Tokyo would intervene using force. Takaichi’s blunt language — combined with early signals that she plans to deepen security ties with the United States and accelerate Japan’s defense buildup — marked a notable shift.

Beijing’s calibrated response

Beijing answered with a familiar playbook: warnings to Chinese citizens about travel and study in Japan, threats to restrict imports such as seafood, and a relentless stream of nationalist messaging via state media and social platforms. The aim appears twofold: deter Tokyo (and other regional capitals) from taking positions at odds with Beijing on Taiwan, and telegraph Beijing’s sensitivity to any shift in regional military postures.

“For the first time, a Japanese leader has expressed ambitions for armed intervention in Taiwan and issued a military threat against China,” wrote a commentary in the Communist Party paper People’s Daily, adding that this reflects right‑wing attempts to move beyond the constraints of Japan’s pacifist constitution.

Historical wounds and political symbolism

Japan’s 20th-century invasions and occupation of parts of China — including wartime atrocities such as the Nanjing Massacre — remain potent elements of China’s national narrative. Those memories inform Beijing’s approach to Tokyo today and help explain why Japanese moves toward rearmament are treated with alarm in China. This year’s commemorations of World War II’s end have amplified those sentiments.

Japan’s evolving security posture

In recent years Tokyo has shifted away from the strict post‑war pacifist posture embedded in its constitution, increasing defense spending and pursuing new strike and counterstrike capabilities. The United States has actively pushed allies to shoulder more of the regional defense burden, and concerns within Japan — especially among right‑wing factions — about the consequences of a Chinese attack on Taiwan have helped drive debates over military modernization and constitutional revision.

Why Beijing is worried

For Beijing, Taiwan is central to its stated goal of national reunification and “national rejuvenation.” A stronger, more militarized Japan would complicate any attempt by China to change the status quo by force. From Beijing’s perspective, Takaichi’s comments are evidence that elements in Tokyo may be drifting toward a more interventionist posture — a development China finds destabilizing.

Diplomacy, symbolism and the public spectacle

Tokyo sent an envoy to Beijing to defuse the dispute, but Beijing has maintained pressure and publicly demanded a retraction — a demand that is politically awkward for Tokyo and offers no obvious diplomatic off‑ramp. The episode has also seen carefully staged symbolic moments: a viral photo of a meeting between Japanese envoy Masaaki Kanai and his Chinese counterpart Liu Jinsong, and a short People’s Liberation Army video titled “Don’t be too cocky,” which mixes martial messaging with popular culture elements such as a rap verse meant to signal military readiness.

What happens next

In the near term, Beijing looks set to sustain pressure as a warning to Tokyo and other regional governments. In Tokyo, the episode may strengthen voices that support accelerating defense investments and deeper alliance cooperation with the United States. The standoff highlights a tense reality in East Asia: historical grievances, shifting strategic balances and domestic politics are converging to make diplomacy more fraught and the margin for miscalculation narrower.

Contributor: Hanako Montgomery