China’s complex legal warfare and Japan’s unified defense strategy ~ Before 2026 deadline, urgent proposal to sustain national sovereignty
Japanese : https://i-rich.org/?p=2565
Nakamura Satoru
Senior Researcher
International Research Institute of Controversial Histories
Introduction: the narratives as an “invisible battleground”
The primary principle of this proposal is to reconfirm the fact that “in China’s strategy, narratives stand above military power.” The greatest crisis facing present Japan is that Japan is helpless and defenseless against the “complex legal warfare” waged by China attempting to rob Japan of sovereignty legally and ethically, which is more threatening than physical military invasion. Without decerning this strategy, it is impossible to defend Japan’s sovereignty.
1. October and November 2025: the truth about the silent declaration of war
From October to November 2025, the Japanese society was totally exposed to harsh diplomatic and verbal attacks by China. According to general reporting, these attacks were interpreted as “unilateral anger” or “emotional repulsion” on the part of China against specific incidents such as the so-called Prime Minister Takaichi’s statement. However, the truth is completely different.
What happened during this period was the start of a planned war or “silent declaration of war”. China has been preparing over several decades for the operation to deprive Japan of its sovereignty over Okinawa. China used the specific statement only as a “convenient trigger” and the true nature of China’s reaction was not emotional panic but the start of an extremely cool-minded, calculated and legally and ethically structured attack. While Japan has been attempting to “calm down through dialogue,” China has been steadily moving the process to deny Japan’s right to rule Okinawa in the international community.
2.Heavily layered logic of “deprivation of sovereignty” plotted by China
China’s invasion in the form of narratives aims to dissolve Japan’s sovereignty from within by pursuing the following three levels of logical structure.
(1) “Historical weapon” as the basis (the existence of the Ryukyu Kingdom)
The lowest level of logic is the distortion of history and emotional narratives. The narrative that the former independent state of the Ryukyu Kingdom was annexed by military power, deprived of its culture and during World War II was deserted as mere means to an end is disseminated to the world. By emphasizing such “historic tragedy,” China defines present Japan’ rule in Okinawa as “continuous and illegal colonial rule.”
(2) “Ethical weapon” as apparatus (United Nations human rights mechanism)
It is the United Nations human rights mechanism that changes the historic narrative into international “justice.” In the United Nations, China has made the narrative that the Okinawan people are indigenous people an established fact and switched the issue of the United States base in Okinawa with the ethical cause of “violation of human rights against the indigenous people.” Using this “human rights” weapon, China aims to deprive the Japanese Government of credibility in the international community and lead the global opinion in favor of China.
(3) “Legal weapon” as the conclusion (the theory of the superiority of the Potsdam Declaration)
After cementing the outer moat with history and ethics, China inflicts the final blow of legality. Its core is the assertion that “San Francisco Peace Treaty (SFPT) was an illegal secret pact intended to conceal human rights violation, and the Potsdam Declaration is the supreme law.”
- The nullification of the SFPT: to deny the SFPT as the hindrance to the “liquidation of colonialism” which the Potsdam Declaration upheld.
- The fulfilment of the Cairo Declaration: Based on the Cairo Declaration as quoted in Article 8 of the Potsdam Declaration “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,” China claims that the territorial position of Okinawa is not yet defined and therefore Japan has no territorial right to Okinawa. China imposes this new interpretation in terms of international law.
Along this logic, activities of the Japan Self-Defense Forces are to be regarded as “challenge to the new post-war order” and Japan’s national defense itself can be branded as “violation of international law.”
3. Historical trap of “2014 Agreement”
China has been elaborately promoting its long-term plans since 2012. Among them, the 2014 Four-article Agreement between Japan and China was a fatal point in which Japan willingly recognized “the existence of conflict” and gave China a “permission” for international maneuvering on the part of China. Japan had “different views” on the concept of “crisis management” but China interpreted it as “official recognition of the territorial conflict” and posted it on its digital museum and elsewhere as historical outcome. On the leverage of this agreement, China has completed the syllogism in which it justifies Chinese Coast Guards expelling activities around the Senkaku islands belonging to Okinawa as legitimate official duty based on the agreement.
4. March 2026 -- The final time limit for the defense of sovereignty (deadline)
The plot to deprive Japan of sovereignty over Okinawa has entered the final countdown.
- Phase 1 (now to March 2026): In the United Nations Human Rights Council, China condemns Japan as a human rights violator and continuous colonial ruler. If Japan fails to clearly refute China’s claim and passes this period without taking any action, “Acquiescence” in terms of international law comes into effect and the legal ground for defending Japanese sovereignty over Okinawa will be lost forever.
- Phase 2~3 (2027 and thereafter); in the case of Okinawa emergency, China will demand “Ryukyu’s neutrality,” backed by the United Nations resolution and the U.S.-Japan deterrent power is legally numbed. This is the moment of “check mate” when China will take hold of the hegemony over East Asia.
5. Counterstrategy: Integrated defense policy led by NSC (National Security Committee)
Given that the enemy attacks using historical, ethical and legal narratives, Japan needs integrated defense, getting rid of the ineffective “vertical administration.”
Operation A (International front): legal and diplomatic attack
Clearly declare to the international community that “the final determinant of the postwar order is not the Potsdam Declaration but the San Francisco Peace Treaty.” Completely destroy China’s legal interpretation based on “piecemeal history” from the root and let the world re-recognize the legitimacy of Japan’s territorial right in terms of international law.
Operation B (Domestic front): development of national unification narrative
- Reform of ceremonial events: change the role of memorial days to the symbol of “national unity,” not “division.”
- Use of the authority of the Royal Ryukyu Family: The head of the Royal Ryukyu Family should make a historically and culturally significant statement that “The Okinawan people are Japanese,” which will be distributed and officially used by the Japanese Government. Through the message, the false historical structure of the narrative “Ryukyu versus Japan” which China depends on will be destroyed from within.
Conclusion: Sovereignty should not be lost without fighting
The United Nations examination in March 2026 will be the last turning point to defend Japan’s sovereignty. Here, representatives from Okinawa will directly refute China’s demands by stating, “We are not an indigenous people but Japanese.” This simple and yet powerful statement of the truth is the only means to stop China’s invasion steadily under way through the silent declaration of war. Now, we must fully recognize that we are in the middle of a war fought with weapons called words.
