In November 2025, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi made a striking declaration in parliament that reverberated across East Asia.
During a budget committee session, she stated that a Chinese military attack on Taiwan — such as a naval blockade or use of force — could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan.
Such an assertion is significant: by framing a Taiwan crisis as existential for her own country, Takaichi suggested that Japan might deploy its Self-Defense Forces under collective self-defense, a legally and historically sensitive move.
The Legal Basis Behind the Statement
Takaichi’s remarks drew on Japan’s reinterpreted security posture. Under a 2015 law, Japan does not need to be directly attacked to act militarily in defense of an ally; it can use collective self-defense in circumstances deemed critical to its national survival.
By calling a potential Taiwan conflict a “situation threatening Japan’s existence”, she placed the hypothetical scenario within the framework that could allow Japanese military intervention.
A New Strategic Realism
Takaichi insisted that she had no intention of walking back her comments. She emphasized that she was discussing a “worst-case scenario” and that the government would assess any real crisis based on detailed, case-by-case judgments.
Her willingness to publicly entertain such a dramatic scenario reflects a broader shift: Japan is increasingly ready to imagine military engagement beyond its own territory when national survival is at stake.
Strong Pushback from China
Beijing reacted angrily to the remarks, warning of “serious consequences” if Japan intervened, as reported by Asahi News.
A Chinese diplomat in Osaka went even further. On his X account, he openly threatened the life of Takaichi, even though he deleted his comment afterwards.
Such fierce criticism underscores how sensitive the Taiwan issue remains in Sino-Japanese relations. For China, any military involvement by Japan in Taiwan would not only be interference in its domestic affairs — it would be seen as aggression.
Tokyo’s Response
In response to China’s backlash, the Japanese government sought to clarify its stance. According to Bloomberg, Chief Cabinet Secretary Minoru Kihara reaffirmed that Tokyo still supports a peaceful resolution to the Taiwan issue.
He pointed out that Japan’s longstanding “one-China policy,” as codified in the 1972 joint communique with Beijing, remains formally unchanged. At the same time, Kihara defended Takaichi’s remarks as part of her role in considering national security contingencies.
An Unprecedented Statement
What makes Takaichi’s comments especially notable is that, according to some reports, she is the first Japanese prime minister to officially characterize a Taiwan contingency as a “situation threatening Japan’s existence” that could require Japanese military action.
In previous years, other senior Japanese politicians — like Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso — had floated the idea that Japan and the United States should defend Taiwan together if it came under attack.
But until now, no sitting prime minister had publicly made such a strong linkage between a Taiwan conflict and Japan’s own existential risk.
Implications for Regional Security
Takaichi’s remarks carry wide strategic implications. First, they signal a more assertive Japanese posture in the face of mounting Chinese military pressure.
By framing Taiwan’s security as tied to Japan’s survival, Tokyo is essentially treating a Taiwan crisis not just as a foreign contingency, but as a core national security issue.
Second, her declaration could strengthen deterrence by raising the political cost for China of any aggressive action toward Taiwan — though it also risks escalating bilateral tensions.
Third, the public linking of Japan’s defense to Taiwan highlights the deepening security integration between Japan and the United States, especially in their shared concern about the future of the Taiwan Strait.
Challenges and Risks
Despite the strength of the rhetoric, implementing such a scenario would not be easy. Legal, political, and operational hurdles remain.
For one, any Japanese military intervention would likely require very careful judgment from Tokyo, especially given how directly invoking “survival-threatening” language could provoke Beijing.
Politically, Takaichi noted that her comments describe “worst-case” circumstances and are not formal government policy. Diplomatically, Japan must tread a fine line: affirming its security commitments while avoiding being drawn into a full-scale military confrontation.
Meanwhile, China’s vehement response demonstrates how volatile such discussions are — any miscalculation could heighten the risk of a major crisis.
