Why Takaichi’s loud support leaves Taiwan quietly worried

Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi recently made some important remarks regarding Japan’s policy towards Taiwan. On 7 November, during questioning by members of the House of Representatives, Takaichi stated that if a “Taiwan contingency” were to occur and if it was accompanied by the use of force, it could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan. In these circumstances, Japan would be justified in exercising its right to collective self-defence. 

It is generally believed that Takaichi’s remarks are a continuation of a statement made by Shinzo Abe on 1 December 2021, when he had already stepped down as prime minister. He argued then that the security situation in the Taiwan Strait is closely related to Japan, and that “a Taiwan emergency is a Japanese emergency, and therefore an emergency for the Japan-US alliance”. This suggests that in an outbreak of war between China and Taiwan — Japan alone, or Japan along with its ally the US, could intervene militarily. Takaichi’s remarks have drawn strong criticism from China and have also generated considerable discussion in Taiwan.

First, while the “pan-Green” (pro-independence) camp in Taiwan welcomed the remarks, they remained cautious and refrained from making an over-enthusiastic response. President Lai Ching-te urged Taiwanese to respect Japan’s political decisions, arguing that China’s strong reaction to Takaichi and any potential follow-up actions would severely impact peace and stability in the entire Indo-Pacific region. Furthermore, in response to the potential decrease in the number of Chinese tourists visiting Japan, some Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) politicians encouraged Taiwanese to demonstrate their support by vacationing in Japan and urged the government to increase its purchases of Japanese agricultural products. 

However, many pan-Green figures were much more cautious about Takaichi’s adherence to Abe’s line that “a contingency in Taiwan is a contingency for Japan”. One reason for this may be that, given Taiwan’s history as a Japanese colony, too much support for Takaichi might provoke discontent among Taiwanese and, at the same time, further irritate Beijing. This could lead to the Chinese adopting a more hardline policy towards Taiwan, further restricting the DPP government’s diplomatic space. Deputy Foreign Minister Wu Chih-chung pointed out that Takaichi’s statement followed the established position of the Japanese government and could not be interpreted as a direct undertaking to defend Taiwan. They also indicated that Taiwan has no plans to establish a formal military alliance with Japan.

In contrast to the attitudes of the pan-Green camp, the pan-Blue opposition expressed dissatisfaction with Takaichi’s “Taiwan contingency” argument. Former President Ma Ying-jeou and former Kuomintang (KMT) chairperson Hung Hsiu-chu both criticised the Japanese prime minister for her “rash” remarks and argued that Japan should not interfere in China’s political affairs. Cheng Li-wen, the current party chairperson, emphasised that the security of the entire region depends on stability between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. She stressed that cross-strait issues should be addressed through dialogue and exchanges aimed at building peace and reducing risks. 

Cheng also warned that national leaders should be especially cautious in their statements during sensitive times to avoid potential regional conflicts. These remarks may be seen as an indirect criticism of both President Lai and Prime Minister Takaichi.

However, the KMT’s criticism of Takaichi’s approach seems to have failed to garner public support. A poll released at the end of November 2025 showed that public support for the KMT declined after KMT figures expressed strong criticism of Takaichi’s remarks. This indicates that many Taiwanese people believe the KMT is too “pro-China” and that the party neglects Taiwan’s political interests.

Takaichi’s “Taiwan contingency” statement is seen as a friendly gesture by most Taiwanese. However, international politics is pragmatic and self-serving, and Japan certainly does not see itself as obligated to assist in defending Taiwan. Therefore, to assume that a quasi-military alliance between Taiwan and Japan is in the offing, or — even more unlikely — that Taiwan is likely to be incorporated into the US-Japan security alliance, is overly optimistic.

Takaichi’s remarks boosted her approval ratings at home, primarily on account of China’s increasingly assertive foreign policy and its use of historical issues to criticise Japan’s domestic and foreign policies, something that has fuelled considerable discontent with Beijing among many Japanese. But whether Takaichi’s remarks are truly beneficial to Taiwan is a question worth considering.

First, Takaichi’s line is similar to that of Shinzo Abe, namely, she seems to be using Taiwan to contain China. The Japanese have indicated that “a contingency in Taiwan is a contingency for Japan” in the past, but this has not been voiced explicitly in public. This strategic ambiguity has led China to be more cautious in its policy towards Japan. 

Although Beijing maintains that Taiwan is an inseparable part of Chinese territory, Japan seems willing to support Taiwan in containing China. This has resulted in a major loss of face for Beijing, and “face” is something that is highly valued by the Chinese. Takaichi’s public statements have led China to believe that Japan has crossed a diplomatic red line. If this leads Beijing to adopt a tougher policy towards Japan in the future, it may also result in a more aggressive policy towards Taiwan — or it may even cause the Chinese to accelerate the unification process. In other words, it is an open question whether Takaichi’s move from strategic ambiguity to strategic clarity actually represents a gain for Taiwan. 

Secondly, Takaichi’s remarks may exacerbate the divisions within Taiwan regarding China policy. As we have seen, the remarks have been interpreted very differently by the pan-Green administration and the pan-Blue opposition. However, both camps are currently adopting a relatively low-key, wait-and-see attitude, and they have refrained from commenting directly. This is because the issue Takaichi raised touches a nerve in cross-strait relations. 

While some Taiwanese would welcome any improvement in relations between China and Japan, the consequences of the diplomatic manoeuvring between these two major powers may have serious consequences for Taiwan. A more direct impact on Taiwan is the intensification of the conflict between the KMT and the DPP regarding Taiwan-Japan relations and the dispute over how to formulate a China policy that aligns with Taiwan’s interests.

For the Taiwanese people, already divided by the issue of unification versus independence, this is undoubtedly a ticking time bomb. With the 2026 mayoral and county magistrate elections and the 2028 presidential and legislative elections on the horizon, the issue of a “Taiwan contingency” may be manipulated by the two camps and exacerbate the conflict between pro-unification and pro-independence groups. This is unlikely to contribute to social harmony in Taiwan.

Finally, the Taiwanese government’s economic support for Japan, driven by diplomatic considerations, may crowd out the interests of Taiwan’s domestic industries. China’s move to halt Japanese imports and discourage Chinese tourists from visiting Japan has caused significant losses for the Japanese. Meanwhile, the Taiwanese government’s current encouragement of tourism to Japan has led to discontent within Taiwan’s tourism industry. If Taiwanese choose to travel to Japan over the nine-day Chinese New Year holiday in 2026, domestic tourism businesses will suffer.

Furthermore, the question of whether the government should excessively intervene in the operation of tourism and other industries warrants serious consideration. Taiwan has always imported Japanese agricultural products, but this trade should be guided by the market, not politics. Otherwise, excessive imports leading to the stockpiling of unsold goods will have a negative impact on Taiwan’s economy. 

In short, Takaichi’s remarks have attracted a great deal of attention in Taiwan, Japan, the US and China. In the current climate, Taiwan cannot afford to dream of becoming a quasi-political ally of Japan. If Taiwan is to ensure its survival and security, it should take care to balance its interests, rather than rashly establishing overly close ties with the US or Japan while excluding the possibility of engagement with China.

Politicians from various political parties in Taiwan have demonstrated their maturity by refraining from commenting directly on Takaichi’s remarks. Indeed, the unpredictable international political environment forces Taiwan to tread carefully and adopt a more ambiguous and flexible approach to foreign policy.

Related: Taiwan’s US$40 billion gamble: Defence buildup amid China-Japan-US tensions | How Sanae Takaichi crossed China’s four untouchable red lines