Resolutely Thwart Any Plot to Revive Japanese Militarism: An Interview with Hu Dekun, Senior Professor of Humanities and Social Sciences at Wuhan University
Journalist: Sanae Takaichi, a prominent Japanese figure, has publicly made erroneous remarks regarding Taiwan, crudely interfering in China's internal affairs, damaging China-Japan relations, and creating an extremely malignant impact. How should we understand the deep-seated motivations behind this phenomenon from a historical perspective?
Hu Dekun: Takaichi's dangerous rhetoric reflects the fact that the ghost of Japanese militarism has not been exorcised and is still making mischief. The ideological origins of Japanese militarism can be traced back to the late Sengoku [1] period and the Tokugawa Shogunate.
At the end of the 16th century, Japan's de facto ruler, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, proposed an arrogant plan to invade Joseon (Korea) and occupy China, delusional in his attempt to use the Korean Peninsula as a springboard to "sweep through the four hundred-odd provinces of the Ming Dynasty and incorporate them into the map of the Imperial Realm." During the Tokugawa Shogunate, scholars such as Honda Toshiaki and Sato Nobuhiro advocated that Japan should "manage" Manchuria and conquer the islands of the South Seas. In the final years of the Shogunate, Yoshida Shoin, while planning Japan's future "path out," explicitly stated that Japan should "sever Manchuria in the north and seize Taiwan and the Philippines [2] in the south." Their aggressive propositions became the ideological fountainhead of Japanese militarism.
After the Meiji Restoration, the Japanese government inherited the militarist ideology formed during the late Sengoku and Tokugawa periods and rapidly embarked on a path of militaristic external expansion.
In 1874, Japan dispatched troops to Taiwan under the pretext of Ryukyuan castaways being killed there. The following year, it provoked the Ganghwa Island Incident to invade Korea. In 1879, Japan annexed the Ryukyu Kingdom.
From 1894 to 1895, Japan launched the First Sino-Japanese War and forced the Qing government to sign the Treaty of Shimonoseki, seizing China’s Taiwan as its colony. During World War I, taking advantage of the European powers' preoccupation with the West, Japan rapidly expanded its influence in China, presenting the "Twenty-One Demands" to the Yuan Shikai government and formulating a general goal of invading China from the ports to the interior. In the early 1930s, to escape economic crisis and externalize domestic contradictions, Japan accelerated its pace of aggression against China. In December 1941, Japan launched the Pacific War, and by the summer of 1942, it had occupied Southeast Asia and the Southwest Pacific.
Japan implemented brutal colonial rule in these areas, conducting cruel political suppression and massacres, and frantically plundering economic resources, leaving the vast population in a state of extreme misery. Under the joint strikes of the Allied forces—China, the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union—Japan was defeated and surrendered on August 15, 1945. The so-called "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere" subsequently collapsed, marking the end in total defeat of the militaristic expansionist path Japan had pursued since the Meiji Restoration.
Post-war, the Allied powers conducted the Tokyo Trials [3] of Japanese militarist war criminals, exposing their war crimes and proclaiming to the world the firm conviction that justice will prevail over evil. On this basis, the United States implemented three major reforms in occupied Japan to clear the soil upon which militarism survived across political, economic, and ideological fields. They formulated the "Peace Constitution," prompting Japan to embark on a path of peaceful development.
However, as the Cold War began, the U.S. occupation policy toward Japan shifted from "punishment" to "support," providing breathing room for right-wing forces that stubbornly cling to historical revisionism, which has long influenced the direction of Japanese politics. During his tenure, Yasuhiro Nakasone, who became Prime Minister in 1982, raised the slogan of a "General Settlement of Post-war Politics," calling for the revision of the "Peace Constitution" and the swift establishment of Japan as a major international political and military power.
After Shinzo Abe was re-elected Prime Minister in 2012, right-wing media voices regarding historical issues showed a clear trend of normalization. They repeatedly denied historical facts such as the forced recruitment of "comfort women" and the Nanjing Massacre in the public sphere; Japanese militarism showed clear signs of a resurgence.
Sanae Takaichi’s erroneous remarks regarding Taiwan were made against this backdrop. Their essence is to embolden the aggressive acts of Japanese militarism, carrying the grave risk of returning to the old path of militarism.
Journalist: Sanae Takaichi claimed that if an "existential crisis" (存亡危机事态) deemed to threaten Japan occurs, Japan will be able to exercise the right of collective self-defense even if it has not been directly attacked. What are some typical historical examples of Japanese militarism launching external aggression under the guise of so-called "existential crises" and "self-defense"?
Hu Dekun: Historically, Japan has used "existential crisis" as a pretext to launch wars of aggression on numerous occasions. Representative examples include:
First, the September 18th Incident. In 1927, the Giichi Tanaka cabinet convened the "Eastern Conference," placing the focus of Japan’s aggression and expansion against China on the "Manchuria-Mongolia" region. At the end of 1928, Zhang Xueliang announced the "Northeast Flag Replacement," [4] thwarting Japan's plot to control Northeast China by manipulating the Fengtian warlords. Ishiwara Kanji and other staff officers of the Kwantung Army nakedly advocated for "the military taking the initiative to create opportunities through stratagem," intensifying plans to occupy Northeast China by force. In January 1931, Yosuke Matsuoka, Vice President of the South Manchuria Railway, clamored in the Diet that "Manchuria and Mongolia are Japan's lifeline," and Japanese newspapers manufactured public opinion to play up a crisis in those regions. Under the planning of Ishiwara Kanji and Itagaki Seishiro, on September 18, the Kwantung Army blew up a section of the South Manchuria Railway at Liutiaohu and falsely accused Chinese troops of the act, creating the September 18th Incident that shocked China and the world, and rapidly occupied our Northeast. This is a typical case of Japanese militarism using changes in China's political situation as Japan's "existential crisis" to launch a war of aggression.
Second, the July 7th Incident. After occupying Northeast China, Japan began expanding toward North China. In 1935, Japan's attempt to manufacture a puppet regime in North China failed. In 1936, under the pretext of protecting Japanese nationals, Japan unilaterally increased its Garrison Army in Tianjin. Subsequently, the Japanese military conducted frequent military exercises, deliberately provoking Chinese troops and seeking an opportunity to start a war. On the night of July 7, 1937, the Japanese army stationed in Fengtai claimed to have been subjected to "illegal" gunfire by Chinese troops, using this as a pretext to attack the Lugou Bridge (Marco Polo Bridge) and Wanping County, provoking the July 7th Incident and beginning a full-scale war of aggression against China.
Third, the Pacific War. Due to Japan's armed expansion in China and its subsequent occupation of French Indochina—taking the first step in its "Southern Advance" to launch the Pacific War—countries like Britain and the United States imposed trade sanctions and economic blockades on Japan. Japan then claimed it was being "encircled" by Britain, the U.S., China, and the Netherlands, and again used "existential crisis" as a pretext to launch the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor and initiate the Pacific War.
Today, Sanae Takaichi’s association of "a Taiwan contingency" with Japan’s "existential crisis" is a "familiar" historical discourse of militaristic aggression and expansion, which cannot but arouse high vigilance among the Chinese people and people all over the world.
Journalist: What profound disasters did the wars of aggression launched by Japan bring to the people of Asia and the world?
Hu Dekun: The atrocities committed by Japanese militarism against the people of Asia and the world during World War II are too numerous to record, writing the bloodiest and darkest chapter in the history of human civilization.
Massacres followed the footsteps of the Japanese army’s aggression. From the First Sino-Japanese War to the end of World War II, the Japanese military committed numerous inhuman massacres in China and Southeast Asia. As early as the First Sino-Japanese War, after occupying Port Arthur (Lushun), the Japanese army carried out the Port Arthur Massacre, with more than 20,000 civilians killed. In September 1932, the Japanese army dispatched the Fushun Garrison and Gendarmerie detachments to Pingdingshan Village, driving more than 3,000 villagers into the open and shooting them all—this was the "Pingdingshan Massacre." After the September 18th Incident, the Japanese military carried out multiple large-scale massacres in China, of which the Nanjing Massacre was the most severe, with the total number of victims reaching over 300,000. In the early stages of the Pacific War, after the Japanese army occupied the Bataan Peninsula in the Philippines, 75,000 prisoners of war from the U.S.-Filipino forces were abused on a 120-kilometer march to a POW camp, resulting in approximately 15,000 deaths, known as the "Bataan Death March."
Disregarding international law, the Japanese military carried out indiscriminate bombing of cities in the rear of the resistance. On June 5, 1941, the Japanese army dispatched a large number of aircraft for a night raid on Chongqing, forcing a massive number of citizens into poorly ventilated tunnels for a long period, where many even suffocated to death, causing the "Chongqing Great Tunnel Massacre." After the outbreak of the Pacific War, the Japanese military similarly conducted indiscriminate bombing of Southeast Asian cities. On the morning of December 9, 1941, Japanese planes arrived over Pontianak, Borneo, dropping a large number of bombs and incendiaries, turning the city center into a sea of fire and causing more than 2,000 deaths.
The biological and chemical warfare launched by Japan during the war of aggression against China was an extremely cruel crime against humanity, among which the human experimentation conducted by Unit 731 of the Kwantung Army was the most horrific. To clarify pathology and collect toxic pathogens, this unit performed extremely cruel vivisections on subjects. To observe and measure the lethal power of biological and chemical weapons, they even tied subjects to wooden stakes on outdoor firing ranges, exposing them to bacterial and chemical bombs dropped by planes or fired by artillery. The Japanese army's widespread use of chemical weapons on the Chinese battlefield caused casualties to more than 200,000 Chinese soldiers and civilians.
Sexual violence and sexual slavery were also evils committed by the Japanese military in theater. During the period of the full-scale war of aggression against China, the Japanese army forcibly recruited and kidnapped women from respectable families in occupied areas to serve as "comfort women," establishing a large number of comfort stations. With the outbreak of the Pacific War, the Japanese military extended comfort stations to Southeast Asia. In addition to mainland China and Korea, "comfort women" also came from Taiwan and various parts of Southeast Asia, representing a crude violation of human rights.
The Japanese military implemented forced labor for the people in occupied areas. By 1944, the labor force forcibly recruited by Japan in Northeast China reached 3 million, of whom 29% died from exploitation and abuse. In North China, from 1937 to 1942, up to 5.29 million laborers were captured and sent beyond the Great Wall by the Japanese invaders. Additionally, more than 40,000 Chinese laborers were transported to Japan; of the 986 laborers at the Hanaoka Mine in Akita Prefecture alone, 418 died tragically. In Southeast Asia, during the construction of the Thai-Burma Railway, more than 200,000 laborers were forcibly recruited from Thailand, Burma, and elsewhere; a massive number of laborers and POWs died under high-intensity labor, and the railway thus became known as the "Death Railway."
In short, the monstrous crimes committed by Japanese militarism brought unprecedented deep disasters to the people of Asia and the world. According to incomplete statistics, casualties among Chinese soldiers and civilians exceeded 35 million, accounting for about one-third of the total casualties of all countries in World War II.
Journalist: After the victory of the war, international legal documents such as the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, and the Japanese Instrument of Surrender clearly stipulated Japan's obligations as a defeated country. In what ways do the erroneous China-related remarks by the Japanese figure violate international law and the basic norms governing international relations?
Hu Dekun: In November 1943, the heads of state of China, the U.S., and Britain held a meeting in Cairo, Egypt, specifically to discuss major issues related to the Allied war against Japan, resulting in the Cairo Declaration. The Declaration emphasized that territories Japan had stolen from China, such as the Northeast, Taiwan, and the Penghu Islands, must be restored to China. From July 17 to August 2, 1945, the heads of the Soviet Union, the U.S., and Britain held a meeting in Potsdam, Germany. During the meeting, China, the U.S., and Britain issued the Potsdam Proclamation in the form of a declaration, urging Japan to surrender unconditionally immediately and stating that "The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine." This proclamation not only reiterated the provision that Japan must return territories seized through colonial expansion to China and relevant countries after the war but also defined Japan's post-war territorial scope.
On August 15, 1945, Emperor Hirohito of Japan issued the Imperial Rescript on the Termination of the War to the citizenry, announcing the acceptance of the Potsdam Proclamation. On September 2 of the same year, on the U.S. warship Missouri in Tokyo Bay, the Japanese Foreign Minister and the Chief of the General Staff, representing the Japanese government, signed the Japanese Instrument of Surrender. The document stated: "We, acting by command of and in behalf of the Emperor, the Japanese Government and the Japanese Imperial General Headquarters, hereby accept the provisions set forth in the declaration issued... at Potsdam." This implies that not only did the Japanese government at the time promise to accept the Potsdam Proclamation, but all subsequent Japanese governments must also abide by its provisions. The Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, and the Japanese Instrument of Surrender laid the legal foundation for the post-war international order in East Asia.
The Taiwan-related remarks by Sanae Takaichi not only directly challenge China's sovereignty over Taiwan as established by international legal documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, but also seriously violate the spirit of the four political documents between China and Japan [5].
In the "China-Japan Joint Statement" signed in 1972, the Japanese side explicitly recognized the Government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legal government of China; Japan fully understood and respected the Chinese government's position that Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory, and maintained its adherence to the position of Article 8 of the Potsdam Proclamation. The "China-Japan Treaty of Peace and Friendship" signed in 1978 declared that both contracting parties should develop enduring relations of peace and friendship between the two countries on the basis of principles such as mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, and mutual non-interference in each other’s internal affairs. The "China-Japan Joint Declaration" of 1998 and the "China-Japan Joint Statement on All-round Promotion of Strategic Relationship of Mutual Benefit" of 2008 both emphasized the strict observance of these principles established by the "China-Japan Joint Statement" and the "China-Japan Treaty of Peace and Friendship." The Taiwan question is purely an internal affair of China and brooks no interference from any external forces. Sanae Takaichi’s floating of the fallacy concerning a so-called "Taiwan contingency" [6] violates international law, breaches the norms of China-Japan relations, and contravenes Japan’s "Peace Constitution." It will inevitably encounter opposition from the people of China, Asia, and all countries across the world.
Reporter: How should the international community today effectively prevent and resolutely block these challenges and threats, so as to jointly safeguard the post-war international order and protect world peace?
Hu Dekun: In light of Sanae Takaichi’s consistent advocacy for "constitutional revision" and "nuclear possession," it is not difficult to discern the strategic intention of the right-wing forces behind her. They are actively plotting to break through the post-war international order and accelerate Japan’s transformation into a major military power. This constitutes a threat of war to China, Asia, and the world, and will sabotage the excellent situation of world peace and development that has existed since the post-war period. To this end, China, Asia, and the international community must all maintain high vigilance.
First, we must strengthen international supervision and the constraints of international law. International supervision and legal constraints are necessary measures to respond to the revival of Japanese militarism. Should any country use the theory of a "contingency" [7] in its periphery as a pretext to carry out the reality of interfering in the internal affairs of another country, the international order established after the war will vanish without a trace. Documents such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation still possess legal effect today and should not be ignored by the international community. We should maintain the authority of the United Nations (UN), particularly by emphasizing through the UN that these legal documents are unshakable "iron laws," and calling upon member states to jointly uphold the international order centered on the UN Charter. In response to the arrogant rhetoric of Japanese right-wing forces and the rightward drift of the Japanese government on historical issues, we should inherit the spiritual legacy of the Anti-Fascist Alliance—namely, that "justice will prevail, peace will prevail, and the people will prevail." We must fully utilize diplomatic stages, legal accountability, public opinion propaganda, and academic exchanges to implement international supervision over Japan's militaristic tendencies and voice the sound of justice to the international community.
Second, we must strengthen historical warnings and show zero tolerance for erroneous remarks concerning China. Given that Japanese militarism has historically been accustomed to launching aggression under pretexts such as "existential crisis" or "self-defense," the Chinese academic community should continue to expose and critique the various fallacies used by Japanese right-wing forces to distort history and beautify aggression, as well as the sinister intentions behind them. In particular, we must use iron-clad historical facts to expose to the international community the hazardous nature and criminal essence of Japanese militarism toward world peace. The issue of Japan’s war responsibility is both a historical issue and a contemporary practical issue. The denial of the history of aggression and the evasion of war responsibility by Japanese right-wing forces are, in essence, attempts to break through the "Peace Constitution" and shatter the existing international order. We must take a clear-cut stand in refuting the historical revisionism advocated by Japanese right-wing forces, exposing the ugly face of militarism to the world, and precisely puncturing their schemes to "reclaim a soul in a different body" [8].
Third, we must declare China's determination and confidence in safeguarding its national sovereignty. If Japanese militarism were to revive and launch an external war, the first to bear the brunt would once again be neighboring countries such as China, Russia, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and the Republic of Korea. Today’s China is no longer the China of old that was left to the mercy of others. How could we permit the history of Japanese militarist aggression against China to repeat itself? The Chinese government has already warned the extreme right-wing forces in Japan, represented by Sanae Takaichi, not to underestimate China’s determination and capability to defend its national sovereignty. No matter how the situation develops, China’s resolve to maintain national unity will not waver. If Japan dares to use force to intervene in the Taiwan question and obstruct China’s reunification, it will inevitably bring about serious consequences from which there is no recovery.
In summary, the international community should draw on the historical experience of the Allied cooperation in achieving victory in the Anti-Fascist War. We must remain highly vigilant and resolutely block any scheme to revive militarism, jointly safeguarding the post-war international order and protecting the hard-won situation of peace and stability.
(Staff Reporter Zhou Xiaofei, Guangming Daily)
Source: Guangming Daily (January 12, 2026)
Web Editor: Huihui