[Wang Son-taek] Diplomatic options for China and Japan

Tensions between China and Japan have escalated rapidly in recent weeks, raising serious concerns about the stability of Northeast Asia. As both sides harden their positions and display military force, the scenario of an accidental conflict can no longer be dismissed as purely a remote possibility. The region once again stands at a dangerous crossroads.

The current crisis began in early November, when Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi stated that a potential conflict over Taiwan could constitute a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan. The remark implied that Tokyo might consider direct military involvement in a Taiwan contingency. Beijing viewed this as a direct challenge to the "one China" principle and an infringement on Chinese sovereignty, demanding that Japan retract the comment. Tokyo refused.

China responded with a dramatic show of force by deploying an aircraft carrier group and conducting large-scale military operations. Japan subsequently reported that Chinese carrier-borne aircraft locked fire-control radar on Japanese fighter jets, a move that suggested how easily miscalculation or technical error could trigger a dangerous confrontation.

The prospect of full-scale war between China and Japan is almost unimaginable and would produce catastrophic consequences for both countries.

Yet a limited armed clash, be it accidental or deliberate, cannot be ruled out. Even a brief skirmish would send shockwaves through regional security, global markets and international supply chains, inflicting serious damage far beyond the boundaries of Northeast Asia.

For South Korea, the balance of power in this part of the world is not a distant abstraction, but a matter of existential security. A confrontation between China and Japan would affect maritime routes, air operations, US military force posture and the regional alliance system in ways that directly influence Seoul’s defense and economic stability. South Korea is not a passive observer; it has immediate and vital interests at stake. If this crisis continues, the country will confront profound uncertainty across diplomacy, security and trade.

Neither China nor Japan stands to gain from escalation.

Military chest-thumping may deliver political satisfaction at home, but the long-term outcome is predetermined: economic cost, diplomatic isolation and heightened strategic risk. China, already grappling with intense competition with the United States, accelerated supply-chain restructuring and tariff pressure, cannot afford additional instability in its immediate region. Japan likewise faces urgent priorities of economic resilience, defense modernization and global credibility. Prolonging this crisis serves neither side. It is a lose-lose situation.

What makes this confrontation particularly concerning is that it is not merely a regional dispute. A military clash between Asia’s two major economic powers would have global ramifications.

Instability in Northeast Asia threatens international supply chains, maritime security, energy markets and financial systems. The stakes extend well beyond Tokyo and Beijing. They are shared by the international community as a whole.

To prevent matters from worsening, it is important to recognize how the crisis began and why it deteriorated so quickly. The initial provocation was Takaichi’s statement, which unnecessarily inflamed tensions with China and failed to account for the foreseeable diplomatic and strategic reaction. Japan has a responsibility to acknowledge the consequences of that undiplomatic expression. Being technically correct is not enough; prudent statecraft requires anticipating outcomes.

Yet China also bears responsibility for the deterioration of the situation. Beijing moved from political protest to military escalation at remarkable speed, rather than exhausting diplomatic efforts.

As a major power, China has an obligation to pursue the peaceful resolution of disputes. Sending warships and fighter jets near Japanese territory does not strengthen China’s position. It damages its international image, alienates potential partners and undermines the growing interest in China as an alternative power to the United States, particularly in countries frustrated by Washington’s tariff-driven foreign policy.

China needs to recalibrate its response strategy.

The United States is not blameless. It remains a hegemonic power, regardless of domestic political rhetoric claiming otherwise. US President Donald Trump may insist that America is not the “world’s police,” a claim echoed in the latest National Security Strategy, but reality is more complicated.

The duties of a hegemon do not dissipate simply because it announces its intentions to reduce the burden. Washington continues to define itself as “the strongest and greatest nation.” The National Security Strategy declares that the United States will not carry the world “like Atlas,” yet simultaneously proclaims America’s determination to maintain global dominance. By neglecting Sino-Japanese tensions, the US risks losing both its hegemonic legitimacy and its claim to be the “greatest nation on earth.” The US should play a stabilizing role by encouraging both sides to de-escalate.

South Korea must recognize that it can no longer remain on the sidelines.

Historically, Seoul refrained from involvement in Sino-Japanese disputes due to its relative size and vulnerability. Today, that rationale no longer applies. Korea’s international status has risen, and its national interests are directly affected by regional power dynamics. Moreover, South Korea is uniquely positioned because it maintains trusted communication channels with China, Japan and the United States simultaneously. In a region where diplomatic grammar differs across capitals, Seoul can serve as a useful platform for dialogue, not by imposing solutions, but by enabling communication.

Even though Takaichi recently made a provocative remark that constituted an infringement on Korea’s sovereignty over the Dokdo islets, Seoul would still do better to respond firmly but calmly — registering its protest while helping facilitate communication between Beijing and Tokyo.

If South Korea’s diplomatic engagement helps revive constructive American leadership, encourages China to act as a responsible major power and persuades Japan to pursue prudent diplomacy, the current crisis could become an opportunity. Such a development would benefit not only the countries involved, but the international community at large.

China and Japan must now regain their composure. The path forward lies not in military brinkmanship, but in dialogue and negotiation. That is the only responsible choice — for themselves, for their neighbors and for the world. It is in this direction that South Korea should lend its voice and leadership.

Wang Son-taek

Wang Son-taek is an adjunct professor at Sogang University. He is a former diplomatic correspondent at YTN and a former research associate at Yeosijae. The views expressed here are the writer’s own. — Ed.