NOVEMBER 17 — In a year when South-east Asia desperately needs calm, predictability, and a rules-based strategic environment, the escalating rhetorical exchanges between China and Japan currently have become an unnecessary — and dangerous — distraction. 

The war of words may still be contained in diplomatic communiqués and press statements, but it reflects a deeper structural tension that could spill over into the wider region if both sides fail to steady their tone.

The ascent of Sanae Takaichi as Japan’s first female Prime Minister is historic, breaking the highest political glass ceiling in a society long defined by male-dominated leadership. Her election represents a profound symbolic shift for Japan, and for Asia as a whole. Yet it has also triggered sharper political scrutiny from Beijing, which remains wary of Tokyo’s evolving security posture and its alignment with the United States.

This is precisely where Asean becomes vulnerable. When China and Japan sharpen their rhetoric, Asean becomes the unintended shock absorber — caught between competing narratives, rival ambitions, and spiralling misperceptions.

Takaichi’s rise and Japan’s new strategic posture

Prime Minister Takaichi inherits an already complex strategic environment. Her predecessors had steadily expanded the scope of Japan’s defensive capabilities, strengthened intelligence-sharing with the United States, and supported greater operational flexibility for the Self-Defense Forces. Takaichi is expected to continue this trajectory, but with a stronger mandate to pursue deterrence, cyber resilience, and supply-chain security.

Her identity as Japan’s first female leader amplifies the scrutiny. In diplomatic circles, symbolism carries consequences. To her supporters, she represents continuity with a democratic mandate. To her critics, especially in Beijing, she is viewed as a conservative nationalist determined to strengthen Japan’s role in regional security — perhaps at China’s expense.

But these assumptions, however politically convenient, risk oversimplifying a far more complicated reality. Japan remains deeply integrated with China economically. China remains Japan’s largest trading partner. Neither side benefits from escalation, yet both are edging dangerously close to miscalculation.

China’s unease and the danger of hardening positions

Beijing views Japan’s increased diplomatic and security engagement through a lens shaped by history and by contemporary fears of containment. With US–China tensions already raw — exacerbated by tariff volatility, technology sanctions, and zero-sum security rivalries — China is hypersensitive to any movement that appears to tighten the US-Japan alliance.

This is why Takaichi’s early rhetoric, while measured in Tokyo, has been interpreted sharply in Beijing. Even routine references to the rules-based order or freedom of navigation are now treated as strategic signals, not merely diplomatic language.

China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea, its growing ties with Cambodia, and its deepening economic footprint in mainland Southeast Asia all reflect a confidence that South-east Asia remains a key arena for geopolitical leverage. But if China overreacts to Tokyo’s new leadership, or if Japan over-signals alignment with Washington, Asean will find itself increasingly boxed into crisis-management mode — something the region cannot afford.

Asean’s strategic fragility

Asean enters 2025–2026 with unprecedented challenges.

Malaysia’s chairmanship has been defined by multiple crises:

• the Thai–Cambodian landmine clashes,
• the fragile ceasefire that displaced 300,000 people within days,
• the slow-burning collapse of Myanmar’s Union,
• the global “scamdemic” emanating from border towns,
• and the worsening tariff cycle under President Donald Trump.

Asean’s bandwidth is already overstretched. The last thing the region needs is a worsening Sino–Japanese confrontation that places pressure on the East Asia Summit, Asean+3, and the wider architecture of Asian multilateralism.

Every time Beijing and Tokyo lock horns, Asean’s centrality is tested. Asean must reassure both sides without appearing to tilt; it must maintain neutrality without appearing passive; and it must safeguard regional stability without igniting perceptions of favoritism.

Why Sino–Japanese rifts are dangerous for Asean

South-east Asia’s prosperity depends heavily on stable great-power relations. The region cannot grow if it becomes an arena where China and Japan exchange diplomatic blows. Three risks stand out:

First, economic spillover.

Both China and Japan are among Asean’s top trade and investment partners. Rhetorical escalation can harm supply chains, investment confidence, and long-term mega-projects in infrastructure, manufacturing, and digital energy networks.

Second, security miscalculations.

The South China Sea and the East China Sea are already tense maritime spaces. A war of words can easily translate into overreaction at sea — with Asean vessels, fishermen, and naval patrols caught in the middle.

Third, diplomatic paralysis.

Asean needs both China and Japan to finalize the Code of Conduct, advance the East Asia Summit agenda, and strengthen regional frameworks like RCEP and ACFTA 3. Sino–Japanese divisions slow these processes down.

A call for restraint — and renewal

Both Beijing and Tokyo must rediscover the diplomatic maturity that has allowed the region to flourish despite history and rivalry. For China, recalibrating its strategic communication toward Japan would reassure South-east Asia that great-power competition has limits. For Japan, Prime Minister Takaichi can set a new tone — one that balances deterrence with dialogue, strength with restraint, and security with inclusivity.

Her position as Japan’s first female leader offers an opportunity for a refreshed diplomatic approach — one grounded in pragmatism rather than perceptions of nationalist rigidity.

Asean cannot bear the weight of other nations’ rivalries

South-east Asia is already struggling with conflict mediation, trade disruptions, illicit border economies, and deteriorating global norms. Asean cannot be expected to manage the fallout from Sino–Japanese tensions while juggling its own immediate crises.

If Beijing and Tokyo choose confrontation — even rhetorically — Asean’s structural vulnerabilities become exposed. The region needs stronger commitments to stability from all external partners, not sharper barbs exchanged from afar.

Conclusion: The future depends on restraint

A stronger Asean requires calmer waters, not sharper diplomatic currents. Sino–Japanese brickbats may be politically convenient for domestic audiences in both countries, but they threaten the strategic equilibrium that South-east Asia has spent decades building.

This is the moment for both China and Japan — and for Asean’s dialogue partners — to remember that Asia’s future is interdependent. Escalation is easy. Restraint is leadership.

And in 2025 and beyond, restraint is precisely what Asean needs most.

* Phar Kim Beng is Professor of Asean Studies and Director, Institute of International and Asean Studies (IINTAS) International Islamic University Malaysia

** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.