China Power | Diplomacy | East Asia

Three Characteristics of China’s Criticism of the Takaichi Administration

Beijing’s campaign against Tokyo is unlike anything seen before.

China’s criticism of Japan is intensifying rapidly. Within the context of China-Japan relations, the current campaign is unprecedented by any historical measure. It has three distinct characteristics.

First, following Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s remarks about Taiwan on November 7, 2025, critics in China doubled down on existing issues, including the problem of treated water from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and the theory of the San Francisco Peace Treaty’s invalidity, expanding them into a narrative of “new militarism.” More recently, the scope of the rhetoric has widened further, to include the 80th anniversary of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East along with the Treaty of Shimonoseki, signed on April 17, 1895. When a Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) vessel transited the Taiwan Strait on April 17, 2026, Chinese critics were quick to note that the date coincided with the anniversary of the Treaty of Shimonoseki, suggesting it had been deliberately chosen. From a Japanese government perspective, while officials may recall the year of the treaty, it is extremely rare to remember the exact date; this particular line of criticism likely came as a complete surprise. Beijing has thus assembled a remarkably diverse arsenal of grievances, ranging from the Treaty of Shimonoseki to the San Francisco Peace Treaty, and from Fukushima to “new militarism.” The sheer breadth of the campaign is one of its defining features.

Second, the criticism has been accompanied by concrete action. Punitive measures, including a suspension of seafood imports, restrictions on rare earth exports, the application of security provisions, and restrictions on travel to Japan, are gradually expanding. The verbal and the material are thus working in tandem. Moreover, the discourse criticizing Japan is deeply intertwined with China’s broader Western Pacific policy: the theory of the San Francisco Peace Treaty’s invalidity feeds the argument that Taiwan’s undetermined status is not recognized, and that Okinawa’s status is similarly unresolved. Within China, the government has firmly defined Taiwan’s status and expressed strong doubts about any undetermined-status theory derived from the San Francisco Peace Treaty. As for Okinawa, however, it is only “scholars” who are advancing the undetermined-status argument; the government has made no explicit statements on the matter. The rhetoric surrounding Taiwan and Okinawa, and the criticism of Japan, is thus linked to China’s military push beyond the First Island Chain to the Second Island Chain, and above all to its policy of unifying Taiwan with the mainland.

Third, there is the........

© The Diplomat