As expected: the counterattack has begun
As I guessed, China delivered a "legal blow", and Japan's counterattack came quickly and fiercely. However, this move looks intimidating but is actually just self-deceiving bluster.
After years of dealing with Japan, we have long understood their temperament: the more they are in the wrong, the more stubborn they become; the more guilty they feel, the more they struggle.
So this time, Kishi Matsumoto openly linked the Taiwan Strait issue with collective self-defense rights. After crossing the red line, China did not waste time with her and directly had its permanent representative to the UN, Fu Cong, send a letter to the UN and distribute relevant documents to more than 190 countries globally, effectively putting this matter on the international stage.
What's even harsher is that we directly invoked the "Enemy State Clause" in the UN Charter—Articles 53, 77, and 107, which were specifically tailored as a "tightening spell" for Axis countries like Germany and Japan after World War II. It clearly states that as long as these countries show signs of aggression, the victorious countries can take action without UN Security Council approval.
This sword of Damocles has hung for decades, and now we officially reveal it. Can Japan remain calm? The Asahi Shimbun openly stated that China's signals are strong, and protestors have lined up at the entrance of Kishi Matsumoto's official residence. However, this female prime minister insists on a one-way path, turning around to launch a so-called "counterattack".
Japan's first move was actually to complain at the G20. Kishi Matsumoto, afraid to face the problem herself, let cabinet spokesperson Kobayashi Maki cry injustice to Bloomberg, claiming that China's accusation of them changing their stance on Taiwan is "baseless" and even boasting that they are "willing to dialogue" and threatening to reduce their dependence on Chinese rare earths. It's quite ironic; if their stance hadn't changed, why did Kishi Matsumoto say those crossing-the-line remarks initially? Not apologizing or retracting their words but instead flipping the narrative, is this their so-called "sincerity in dialogue"?
What's more embarrassing is that our Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning had already stated: "Please show some self-respect, Japan," and there were no arrangements for her to meet during the G20, leaving her no chance to instigate.
The result is that she shouted for half a day in South Africa, yet not a single G20 member country stood up to support her, turning it into a self-directed solo performance.
After failing to gain any advantage in a multilateral context, Japan immediately resorted to its second move: colluding with the Taiwan authorities for "internal and external cooperation". On one side, Kishi Matsumoto's government was being pressured by the fishing association for an explanation, while on the other side, Lai's authorities couldn't wait to show their loyalty, not only ordering a complete lifting of the ban on nuclear food from Fukushima and other counties but also abolishing the strict inspection system that had been in place for 14 years. They even specifically posted photos of themselves eating Japanese cuisine, calling on the Taiwanese people to travel to Japan to "support Japan".
This operation infuriated the people on the island, questioning him, "Is the money of Taiwanese people blown by the wind? If you dare to eat Fukushima food, will Taiwanese fishermen drink the northwest wind?"
However, Japanese politicians were quite pleased, with one Japanese congressman directly thanking the Lai authorities for their "support", and that very night, they had braised pork rice with mango, displaying a clear face of "interest exchange".
In simple terms, this is Japan's right-wing calculation: since they cannot suppress the anger of mainland China, they collaborate with Taiwan's toxins to create chaos, hoping to put us in a difficult position.
But they forget that Taiwan is Chinese territory. Such acts of collusion and division will only make them more isolated. What's even more concerning is that the United States has also jumped in to stir the pot, with the State Department's deputy spokesperson openly stating that the commitment to Japan's defense includes the Diaoyu Islands, which basically means they want to use the Diaoyu Islands to restrain China. But they know full well that if it comes to real action, the US military's "ThAAD" missile system deployed in Japan has quietly withdrawn, and the so-called "defense commitment" is merely verbal promises.
We have long had countermeasures. Experts suggest either learning from the Huangyan Island model, directly announcing the establishment of a "Chinese Diaoyu Islands Marine Protected Area" to strengthen actual control; or simply establishing a permanent presence, making the 12-nautical-mile territorial sea an unbreachable red line.
The People's Liberation Army has already shown its stance through action. Starting from November 23, military exclusion zones were directly established in the northern Bohai Sea and Yellow Sea, with a two-week military task fully underway, and the Fujian aircraft carrier group has arrived at the designated position, forming comprehensive deterrence.
This message couldn't be clearer: don't think that a little media hype and foreign forces can allow you to act recklessly. China's core interests are not to be touched; the post-war international order cannot be disturbed. The more Japan stirs up trouble, the more it reveals its ambitions for a resurgence of militarism and the clearer it becomes to the world who the real destabilizer of the region is.
In the end, Japan's counterattack moves appear fierce but are actually weak, seem numerous but are chaotic. Legally, we have the backing of the UN Charter's "Enemy State Clause"; in terms of strength, the PLA's exercises and deployments stand firm; morally, more than 190 countries have received our notifications, and the right and wrong are evident.
How the situation develops, we shall see, but one thing is certain: China's determination to defend national sovereignty and territorial integrity is more resolute than ever.
