Xinhua Commentary: Takaichi cannot talk her way out with a hollow claim of "consistency"

TOKYO, Dec. 9 (Xinhua) -- Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's latest remarks on Taiwan during a House of Councillors plenary session once again revealed a troubling reality: a failure to reflect on her wrongdoing, while attempting to use deliberate vagueness to put the matter to rest.

When pressed on her earlier erroneous remarks related to Taiwan, Takaichi simply asserted "the Japanese government's basic position regarding Taiwan remains as stated in the 1972 Sino-Japanese Joint Statement, and there has been no change to this position," while deliberately avoiding any explanation of what that stance actually entails.

Takaichi had previously claimed during a Diet meeting on Nov. 7 that the Chinese mainland's "use of force on Taiwan" could constitute a "survival-threatening situation" for Japan, which immediately drew strong criticism at home and abroad.

It is a shame that Takaichi refuses to retract her words and shows no remorse and no intention of correcting a statement widely viewed as inflammatory and dangerous.

The principles governing Japan's position on Taiwan are anything but ambiguous. The facts and Japan's commitments are written down in black and white in historical records.

The 1972 Sino-Japanese Joint Statement explicitly states that "the Government of Japan recognizes the Government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legal Government of China" and that "the Government of the People's Republic of China reiterates that Taiwan is an inalienable part of the territory of the People's Republic of China. The Government of Japan fully understands and respects this stand of the Government of the People's Republic of China, and it firmly maintains its stand under Article 8 of the Potsdam Proclamation."

Subsequent treaties and statements between the two countries have consistently reaffirmed these commitments. These political documents carry international legal significance, and no administration, political party, or individual leader has the authority to reinterpret or hollow them out.

Merely repeating that "no change to the position" while declining to explicitly explain that position, paired with actions that crossed a red line, renders such reassurances meaningless and hollows out Japan's stated commitments.

From suggesting that a "Taiwan contingency" could constitute a "survival-threatening situation" for Japan to touting the so-called "undetermined status of Taiwan" narrative, Takaichi has repeatedly made remarks that undermine mutual trust and damage the political foundation of China-Japan relations. Such behavior not only contradicts Japan's longstanding commitments but also erodes its credibility within the international community.

If Tokyo truly maintains its "consistent position," it should be able to state that position accurately -- clearly reaffirming its adherence to the one-China principle and the spirit of the four political documents that underpin the bilateral relationship -- rather than ambling through with vague language. ■