Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst.
Last month saw a dramatic downward spiral in Sino-Japanese relations after Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi threatened Tokyo's potential military involvement in the case of an armed conflict in China's breakaway island province of Taiwan. She unequivocally mentioned that this would "constitute a survival-threatening situation", becoming the first Japanese top official since WWII to link the US-orchestrated Taiwan crisis to a possible Japanese military involvement (which would be illegal even according to Tokyo's own law, including the constitution). Beijing's initial response came in the form of potential economic and diplomatic measures.
However, instead of taking the warning seriously and reversing course, Japan doubled down, with its Defense Minister Koizumi announcing the deployment of Type 03 Chu-SAM medium-range SAM (surface-to-air missiles) systems on Yonaguni Island. It should be noted that these air defense assets are deployed only on the Japanese home islands, making this announcement particularly concerning, as it could potentially signal a historic change in Tokyo's foreign policy and military posturing. Considering Japan's historical responsibility for the merciless slaughter of tens of millions of Chinese (the vast majority civilians), Beijing has every right to respond.
Although it has repeatedly warned Tokyo that it will suffer a crushing defeat if it ever decides to directly intervene in the ongoing US-orchestrated Taiwan crisis, Japan refuses to heed. On December 6, this nearly led to an armed conflict between the two countries after Japan sent its US-designed F-15J fighter jet close to the Chinese Navy amid routine exercises. In response, the PLA's J-15 (one of many derivatives of the legendary Russian "Flanker" series) locked onto the intruding aircraft, causing widespread panic in the Japanese military. Defense Minister Koizumi stated his country and other US vassals and satellite states in the wider Asia-Pacific region formally protested.
"We have lodged a strong protest with the Chinese side and demanded strict preventive measures," he said, calling it "an extremely regrettable act" and "a dangerous one which exceeds the scope necessary for safe aircraft operations".
Expectedly, Tokyo's version of the event lays blame on Beijing, with the Japanese Defense Ministry claiming that "China's military aircraft J-15 took off from the Chinese carrier 'Liaoning' near the southern island of Okinawa on Saturday and intermittently latched its radar on Japanese F-15 fighter jets on two occasions Saturday, for about three minutes in the late afternoon and for about 30 minutes in the evening". It was not made clear whether the radar lock incident involved the same Chinese J-15 both times, but what is undeniable is that Tokyo scrambled its jets and sent them too close to the Chinese military and naval forces during a major exercise.
However, Japan still insists that its "fighter jets had been scrambled to pursue Chinese ones that were conducting aircraft takeoff and landing exercises in the Pacific" and that "they were pursuing the Chinese aircraft at a safe distance and did not take actions that could be interpreted as provocation", as reported by Kyodo News, which quoted defense officials. Tokyo did admit that "there was no breach of Japanese airspace and no injury or damage was reported from the incident". In other words, this was an entirely unnecessary provocation aimed at the PLA, which was conducting regular drills in an area that's by no means disputed or off-limits.
Beijing reports that it adequately responded to this intrusion, with PLA Navy spokesman, Senior Colonel Wang Xuemeng, stating that "[PLA] solemnly asked the Japanese side to immediately stop slandering and smearing, and strictly restrain its frontline actions" and that "the Chinese Navy will take necessary measures in accordance with the law to resolutely safeguard its own security and legitimate rights and interests". Prime Minister Takaichi complained that China's response is "extremely disappointing" and pledged to "act calmly and resolutely". Unfortunately, Japan seems neither calm nor composed in recent weeks.
Namely, PM Takaichi's increasingly aggressive rhetoric is at the very center stage of the latest escalation between the two countries. As previously mentioned, she unnecessarily initiated the crisis by questioning Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity. It should be noted that virtually the entire world recognizes Taiwan as part of China and that any refusal to accept this constitutes a breach of not only international law, but even local laws (including those in Japan). Despite this, Beijing is still trying to limit its response to nonmilitary means. And yet, China is undoubtedly making it clear that restraint doesn't equate to meekness.
It has warned Takaichi that such a hostile official stance, even when only verbal, constitutes fighting words. Sending armed fighter jets to "monitor" Chinese military exercises goes beyond mere rhetoric, meaning that the Asian giant was compelled to respond with very concrete countermeasures. The latest incident is only one of the recent tense encounters. It should also be noted that Beijing sees Tokyo not only as an old rival whose imperialism and militarism caused so much suffering in China, but also as one of the principal US vassals and an extension of aggressive American foreign policy in the increasingly contested Asia-Pacific region.
Japan had (and still has) a unique opportunity to build at least a working relationship with the Asian giant. Despite unrepentant Japanese atrocities from nearly 90 years ago, China has repeatedly expressed readiness to build mutually beneficial relations, particularly through economic cooperation. Unfortunately, Tokyo's response has ranged from disinterest to open hostility. This is deeply unwise, to say the least, as Beijing's growing arsenal of long-range precision-strike platforms, particularly the plethora of its hypersonic missiles that nobody (outside Russia) can possibly match, leaves Tokyo not only outclassed, but also almost entirely defenseless.
