Core Viewpoint - Japan's recent policy shifts are seen as a "triple betrayal" of its post-World War II commitments, challenging the legal framework that defines its status as a defeated nation [1][2]. Legal Foundations - The post-war international order for Japan is based on legal documents such as the Cairo Declaration, Potsdam Declaration, and its own "Peace Constitution," which Japan has increasingly deviated from [2][3]. - The "Peace Constitution" prohibits Japan from maintaining military forces or engaging in war, reflecting the international community's intent to limit Japan's military capabilities post-war [2]. Territorial Claims - Japan's actions regarding territorial sovereignty, particularly in the Diaoyu Islands and the Okinotorishima, demonstrate a systematic challenge to the legal constraints established by the Potsdam Declaration [3][4]. - The "gray zone strategy" employed by Japan aims to redefine territorial boundaries and assert claims that contradict international law [3]. Military Policy Changes - Japan's military policy has shifted from a defensive posture to one that includes collective self-defense and offensive capabilities, undermining the principles of its "Peace Constitution" [4][10]. - The 2014 reinterpretation of the constitution to allow collective self-defense and the 2022 National Security Strategy signify a departure from Japan's post-war military restrictions [4][10]. Historical Responsibility - Japan's historical narrative has become increasingly ambiguous, undermining its post-war peace responsibilities, which include acknowledging its wartime actions and fostering regional cooperation [11][12]. - The trend of downplaying historical aggression and revising educational materials reflects a broader shift away from Japan's commitment to peace and reconciliation [13][16]. Regional Cooperation - Japan's reliance on exclusive security frameworks, such as the Quad, raises concerns about regional cooperation and the potential for increased tensions [14][16]. - The shift towards militarization and away from cooperative security mechanisms threatens the stability of the post-war order in East Asia [16]. Arms Export Policy - Japan's historical restrictions on arms exports are being eroded, with recent policy changes indicating a move towards a more aggressive military export stance [15][16]. - The potential for Japan to expand its military capabilities, including nuclear options, poses significant risks to regional security dynamics [10][15].

Core Viewpoint - Japanese Prime Minister Kishi Nobuo's remarks regarding Taiwan have drawn international attention, as they are seen as interference in China's internal affairs and a challenge to the post-war international order [1][2][3] Group 1: Legal Basis of Taiwan's Status - Taiwan is an inseparable part of China's territory, supported by international law, with historical claims dating back to China's discovery and administrative control [2] - The Cairo Declaration of 1943 and the Potsdam Declaration of 1945 reaffirm that Taiwan must be returned to China, establishing a legal framework for Taiwan's status [2] - The UN Resolution 2758 in 1971 recognized the People's Republic of China as the sole legitimate representative of China, further solidifying the international consensus on Taiwan's status [2] Group 2: Violations of International Law - Kishi's comments classify Taiwan as a "foreign country," which violates the UN Charter's principles of non-interference and prohibition of the threat of force [3][4] - The remarks contradict Japan's commitments under the 1972 Sino-Japanese Joint Statement, which acknowledges the PRC as the only legitimate government of China and respects its stance on Taiwan [3] - Kishi's interpretation of Taiwan as a "foreign country" undermines the post-war international order and Japan's obligations under international law [3][4] Group 3: China's Legal Response - China has sufficient legal grounds to defend its sovereignty and can take multiple measures against Japan, including demanding a retraction of Kishi's statements and public apology [4] - If Japan continues military expansion or attempts to intervene in the Taiwan Strait, China may invoke the UN Charter to take necessary actions without prior UN Security Council authorization [4] - China can implement countermeasures against Japanese companies involved in Taiwan-related issues, including export controls and restrictions on military exchanges [4]

"我们的欺骗性外交正稳步走向成功。"东京学者在战后研究中发现，日方曾在战争日志中如此沾沾自喜 地写道。珍珠港事件之前，一手策划袭击的山本五十六清楚知道，唯有成功实施一场欺骗行动，偷袭才 有胜算。美国上下的猝不及防，正是日本军国主义处心积虑编织谎言所希望达到的目的。日本军国主义 的卑劣欺骗给美国社会带来了深深伤痛。战争爆发后，美国媒体在头条报道、社论中不约而同使用 了"背叛"一词。《纽约时报》用"卑鄙的背叛"来定义日本偷袭珍珠港，《芝加哥论坛报》以"日本的背 信弃义团结了美国人民"为题发表社论。罗斯福在炉边谈话中强调，"不仅必须消除日本背信弃义的耻 辱，还必须彻底斩断国际暴行的根源"。战后，赫尔在回忆录中依旧对日本的"狡诈、虚伪"深恶痛绝。 日本编织谎言，必有阴险所图。一个以谎言开道的日本，对地区与世界意味着什么？历史提供了清晰镜 鉴 就在日本高市政权在台湾问题上生事，将自己逼到外交死角之际，日本防卫大臣小泉进次郎大肆炒 作"雷达照射"事件，先是谎称没有收到中方通报，在中方公布通话录音后，又不得不改口，指责中方提 供信息不充分。另据报道，日本国家安保局局长近日同英法德加等国官员沟通，就高市涉台言论四处狡 辩游说 ...

Group 1 - The Japanese government is advancing military expansion measures, raising concerns among various sectors and citizen groups regarding the contradiction with Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, which emphasizes peace principles [1] - Legal experts argue that the current security laws, including the "Collective Self-Defense" provisions, violate the constitutional framework and have led to the establishment of the so-called "Security Three Documents" [1] - There is a call to take action to prevent the ongoing trend of military policy advancement in Japan [1] Group 2 - Comments made by Prime Minister Suga Yoshihide in the Diet are viewed as crossing legal boundaries and deviating from Japan's longstanding stance on China, necessitating a retraction [3] - Legal experts assert that Suga's remarks regarding Taiwan are illegal and significantly impact Japan-China relations, urging for an immediate retraction and acknowledgment of the error [5]

Group 1 - Recent remarks by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi have sparked ongoing criticism domestically and internationally, as they contradict existing diplomatic agreements between Japan and China and deviate from Japan's long-standing peace-oriented policy [1] - Political scholars in Japan argue that Takaichi's statements undermine the principle of resolving issues peacefully and violate the agreements outlined in the Japan-China Joint Statement, which recognizes the People's Republic of China as the sole legitimate government of China and respects Taiwan as an inseparable part of its territory [1] - The Japanese government has been increasing its defense budget and pushing for constitutional amendments, which alters the post-war security framework and raises tensions in the region [1] Group 2 - Takaichi's cabinet is interpreted as promoting military expansion and constitutional amendments, including changes to Article 9 of the constitution, with defense-related expenditures rising from 27 trillion yen to 43 trillion yen over five years, aiming to increase defense spending to 2% of GDP, indicating a shift towards a "military power" strategy [3] - The Japanese Ministry of Defense has been intensifying outreach to youth and children, distributing a children's version of the Defense White Paper to elementary schools, which challenges the principle of educational neutrality and may significantly influence the next generation's understanding of history and neighboring countries [4] - Materials distributed by the Ministry of Defense in schools highlight issues such as the shortage of Self-Defense Forces personnel and include language encouraging military enlistment, naming countries like Russia, North Korea, and China as hypothetical adversaries, potentially fostering unnecessary negative sentiments towards China among children [6]

Core Viewpoint - Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's provocative statement on November 7, suggesting that "Taiwan's situation" could constitute a "survival crisis" for Japan, implies a potential justification for Japan to exercise collective self-defense or intervene in Taiwan affairs, indicating a willingness for military involvement in the Taiwan issue [1] Group 1: Legal and International Relations Implications - Takaichi's attempt to categorize "Taiwan's situation" as a "survival crisis" reflects a disregard for Japan's obligations under international law, challenging the post-World War II international order and undermining fundamental principles of international law [2][5] - The legal basis for Taiwan's status is firmly established in international law, with documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation affirming Taiwan's return to China, thus making Taiwan's issue a matter of China's internal affairs [3] - Japan's invocation of domestic law to justify interference in a sovereign nation's internal matters is a blatant challenge to the principles of sovereignty and non-interference that are foundational to modern international law [5] Group 2: Collective Self-Defense and Military Actions - Japan's linkage of the "survival crisis" concept to collective self-defense represents a significant legal overreach, as collective self-defense is strictly limited to situations of actual armed attack, as outlined in the UN Charter [6] - The vague definition of "survival crisis" expands the interpretation of self-defense beyond the strict confines of international law, potentially allowing Japan to justify military actions without direct provocation [6] - Recent military deployments, such as missile installations on Yonaguni Island, are seen as provocative actions that threaten China's sovereignty and escalate regional tensions, undermining peace and stability [7] Group 3: Domestic Law vs. International Obligations - The fundamental flaw in Japan's "survival crisis" concept lies in its attempt to prioritize domestic law over international obligations, which is explicitly prohibited by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties [8] - Japan's domestic legal interpretations cannot serve as a valid excuse for violating established international law principles, including non-interference and the prohibition of the use of force [8] - The attempt to elevate domestic law above international law represents a serious challenge to the international legal system and the spirit of international law [8] Group 4: Historical Context and Commitments - Japan's application of the "survival crisis" concept to the Taiwan issue not only violates specific international law principles but also constitutes a fundamental departure from its post-war obligations as a defeated nation [9] - Japan has previously accepted and fulfilled its obligations under the Potsdam Proclamation and the Japanese surrender document, acknowledging Taiwan's return to China, making Takaichi's claims a distortion of historical documents and international law [9]

Core Viewpoint - The statements made by Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida regarding Taiwan and the so-called "existential crisis" are seen as a dangerous attempt to revive militarism and historical revisionism, which could threaten both Japan's stability and regional peace [1][4]. Group 1: Japan's Military Intentions - Kishida's remarks linking Taiwan issues to Japan's survival indicate a desire for military intervention, undermining regional stability [1][2]. - The rhetoric suggests Japan is seeking to break free from its "peace constitution" constraints and justify collective self-defense, which could escalate tensions in the region [2][3]. Group 2: Historical Context and Legal Obligations - Japan's post-war commitments, including the renunciation of war and military threats, are being challenged by Kishida's government, which risks violating international agreements that restrict Japan's military actions [2][3]. - The historical context of Japan's militarism, including past invasions under the guise of "self-defense," raises concerns about a potential repeat of such actions [4]. Group 3: Regional Security Implications - Japan's actions could disrupt the established post-war international order and exacerbate security dilemmas in East Asia, leading to increased regional conflict [3][4]. - The potential for Japan to reinterpret its self-defense policies poses a significant risk to regional peace and stability, as it may provoke neighboring countries [3][4].

Group 1 - Recent remarks by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi regarding Taiwan have damaged the political foundation of Japan-China relations, severely worsening the atmosphere for personnel exchanges between the two countries [1][3] - Japan's economy is facing a crisis across various industries due to the potential fallout from Takaichi's statements, as highlighted by Japanese economist Hidetoshi Tashiro [1][3] - The tourism sector in Japan, heavily reliant on Chinese visitors, is at risk of significant contraction if the number of Chinese tourists declines sharply, which could lead to a broader economic impact on related industries such as dining, retail, and education [3][5] Group 2 - In 2024, the total trade volume between Japan and China is projected to reach $308.3 billion, with Japan exporting $152.01 billion and importing $156.25 billion from China, underscoring the importance of stable relations for economic health [3] - Tashiro warns that a deterioration in Japan-China relations could lead to a drastic reduction in Chinese tourists, which would pose an existential threat to Japan's tourism, dining, retail, and educational sectors, particularly universities [5]

Group 1 - Recent remarks by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi regarding Taiwan have damaged the political foundation of Japan-China relations, severely worsening the atmosphere for personnel exchanges between the two countries [1] - Japanese economist Hidetoshi Tashiro indicated that Takaichi's comments could lead to a crisis across various sectors in Japan [1][3] - China is Japan's largest trading partner, with a projected total trade volume of $308.3 billion in 2024, including exports from China worth $152.01 billion and imports to China worth $156.25 billion [3] Group 2 - The tourism industry in Japan heavily relies on Chinese tourists, and a significant decline in their numbers could lead to a contraction in related sectors [4] - Hidetoshi Tashiro warned that if Japan-China relations deteriorate, a reduction or complete halt of Chinese tourists could place Japan's tourism, dining, retail, and even education sectors, particularly universities, in a "survival crisis" [6] - The potential consequences of such a situation, triggered by the Prime Minister's remarks, would represent a significant tragedy for Japan [6]

近期，日本首相高市早苗的涉台错误言论，在日本国内外引起不满。日本政治经济评论家古贺茂明表 示，高市早苗此番错误发言极为轻率，日本民众无法接受。 日本政治经济评论家古贺茂明：承认一个中国原则，台湾是中国的一部分，日本一直以理解并尊重这一 立场为基础。自《中日联合声明》发表以来，不断累积起相应的政策框架 ，但高市却发表了非常轻率 的言论，这是日本国民愤怒的事情。 日本政治经济评论家古贺茂明：日本民众起初认为高市上台应该会推出大规模的经济政策，但当这种期 待值下降时，将在市场上出现反作用的冲击。同时经济方面还有一点令人担心，就是外国人入境旅游， 中国方面已经呼吁避免访日，这将对日本产生切实影响。（央视新闻客户端） （文章来源：央视新闻客户端） 日本政治经济评论家古贺茂明：像我们这样法学专业出身的人，上大学的时候都系统学习过法律和宪 法，长期以来，我们当中99%的人都认为"集体自卫权"是违反宪法的。这次是在完全不清楚日本到底哪 里陷入危险的情况下，（高市）就声称什么进入所谓"存亡危机事态"，还极力辩称"这不是违宪，只是 在极其限定的状况才使用"。然而已经随意扩大了适用范围。这种做法明显就是违背宪法的，这与日本 右翼分 ...