Katsuya Okada of the Constitutional Democratic Party (left) questions Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi (right) during a session of the House of Representatives Budget Committee at the Diet on the afternoon of November 7.
The uproar from the Chinese government over Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's comment on Taiwan inadvertently made the once-obscure term "survival-threatening situation" widely known in Japan.
But Katsuya Okada, the opposition Constitutional Democratic Party lawmaker who first raised the matter at the November 7 session of the Lower House Budget Committee, took issue with Takaichi's choice of words.
He argued that the term survival-threatening situation "shouldn't be thrown around so casually."
Okada Aims at the Wrong Target
During the Diet session, Okada warned, "If Japan were ever to face a survival-threatening situation, we would be compelled to use force. And retaliation would naturally follow. As we've seen in Ukraine and Gaza, there's no telling where the conflict will erupt. It could escalate into a full-scale war, placing our citizens in an extremely perilous situation."
He followed up with a question to the prime minister. "Avoiding that outcome at all costs is, in my view, the highest duty of any politician. Yet some ruling party lawmakers and commentators — including former Self-Defense Force members — speak lightly about how it might happen or how it's highly likely. I find such remarks deeply troubling. Prime Minister, how do you respond?"
Okada's remarks sounded remarkably similar to those of the Japanese Communist Party.
It's all the more striking given that during the Japan–China row prompted by Japan's nationalization of the Senkaku Islands in September 2012, it was Okada himself who oversaw the response under Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda. He was then serving as deputy prime minister.
Japan's Position Remains Unchanged
In response to Okada's question, Takaichi answered, "If it involves the use of warships and the exercise of military force, it could certainly amount to a survival-threatening situation."
At the same time, she stressed that "the government would make its determination through a comprehensive assessment of all available information, based on the specific circumstances as they unfold."
In other words, she did not declare with certainty that a Taiwan contingency constitutes a survival-threatening situation.
While preventing war is a basic premise, it's equally essential to prepare for every scenario to ensure that conflict never breaks out in the first place. Against that backdrop, Okada's line of questioning was unbecoming of someone who has served as foreign minister.
What Taiwan Crisis Simulations Reveal
Moreover, his questioning suggests a lack of familiarity with the Taiwan Strait crisis simulation hosted by the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies. These exercises have previously involved senior ruling-party figures and retired Self-Defense Force officials.
From Okada's standpoint, one might read the current Cabinet's stance as treating a potential national crisis too lightly.
Yet, having served as a media liaison and taken part in four consecutive sessions from 2021 to 2024, I urge Okada to join the crisis simulation himself before making such criticisms.
In fact, every exercise has shown just how contentious "situation assessment" can be. During the simulation held on August 6–7, 2022, for example, the following exchange unfolded over how to interpret the developing situation.
Assessment Becomes a Bottleneck
Defense minister (role-playing): "If we don't establish the nature of the situation quickly, it will create serious operational difficulties for the Self-Defense Forces."
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (role-playing) responded: "As the defense minister noted, it is essential to make a situation assessment as quickly as possible when the time comes."
National Security Secretariat Director (NSS, role-playing): "When determining the situation, certain criteria must be met. We will ensure that orders can be issued immediately once they are satisfied."
Throughout the exercise, however, diplomatic considerations caused a delayed assessment.
The participant playing the role of Minister of Foreign Affairs, noting that refugees from Taiwan had reached Okinawa and the Sakishima Islands, including the Senkaku Islands, requested, "We ask that the situation be assessed promptly, even for evacuation purposes."
To that, the role-playing NSS director explained: "The Civil Protection Law is triggered only in the event of a domestic emergency, specifically upon the determination of a 'state of armed attack' or a similar situation. Even if a 'survival-threatening situation' were declared in the context of a Taiwan contingency, the Civil Protection Law would not apply."
"Determining the situation here could, in a sense, create a 'decisively major diplomatic problem' with China," the NSS director added.
Facing Danger Amid Deliberation
Even so, the simulation's defense minister insisted, "At the very least, without declaring a survival-threatening situation, we will be unable to provide the necessary security."
The response from the prime minister's office (role-playing) was: "Japan has no choice but to regard this as a 'significant impact situation.'"
As a Chinese naval destroyer moved south toward the Senkaku Islands and Uotsuri Island in the simulation, the situation continued to deteriorate.
Then, on October 5, the Chinese government informed both Japan and the United States: "We will eliminate Taiwan independence forces. This is an internal matter, and no interference will be tolerated. Any intervention will be treated as an armed attack against China."
In response, the role-playing defense minister said, "We are concerned that delaying the determination of a 'state of armed attack' could make recovery far more difficult."
The simulation's NSS director replied, "Whether an armed attack is actually taking place in the Senkaku Islands is the most crucial element of the assessment. We cannot invoke a survival-threatening situation solely to rescue Japanese nationals [abroad]."
He added, "A survival-threatening situation or an armed attack situation applies when an attack has already occurred, and we respond with full force. Once we have confirmation, we intend to move forward with the procedures necessary to recognize the situation."
Too Slow, Too Costly
Ultimately, the Prime Minister declared a survival-threatening situation only on October 5. This was nearly two months after the August 7 incident in which 20 crew members from a simulated Chinese fishing vessel landed on the Senkaku and Uotsuri Islands.
Akihisa Nagashima — who served as a senior adviser to the Noda administration and was directly involved in the Senkaku nationalization — participated in every simulation.
In an article for the October 2023 issue of Seiron, he wrote:
"Given the confusion in decision-making, the operational risks on the ground, and the diplomatic precariousness exposed through these exercises, we should fundamentally reconsider this uniquely Japanese system of 'situation assessment.'"
The real issue requiring scrutiny is Japan's system of situation assessment, as Nagashima emphasizes, rather than calls for Prime Minister Takaichi to withdraw her comment on Taiwan.
RELATED:
- Can Taiwan Survive if China Strikes for Real?
- Contingency in the Taiwan Strait: Japan Must Speak Frankly Now
- Takaichi Approval Remains High at 75%, Majority Support Taiwan Remarks
Author: Takashi Arimoto, The Sankei Shimbun
(Read this in Japanese)
