China’s state-linked commentary has strongly criticised Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi following her recent visit to Australia, where she reportedly paid tribute at a war memorial in Canberra.
During the visit, Takaichi laid flowers at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, a gesture that has since triggered heated debate in Chinese media, with some outlets accusing her of turning remembrance into a political performance aimed at Western audiences.
A widely circulated opinion piece from a prominent Chinese WeChat account with official affiliations, “Niutanqin”, described the act as a “carefully calculated political show” rather than a sincere expression of reflection over Japan’s wartime past. The commentary argued that the move was designed to signal alignment with Western allies and advance Japan’s broader security agenda.
The article further claimed that the gesture was viewed negatively in countries such as China and South Korea, where historical grievances linked to Japan’s wartime actions remain sensitive. It contrasted the Canberra memorial with sites in Asia, suggesting that meaningful acts of remembrance should be directed towards victims in countries affected by Japanese occupation.
It also questioned Japan’s diplomatic approach, alleging that Japanese leaders often display humility in Western settings while avoiding formal apologies in parts of Asia that suffered during the Second World War. The commentary suggested this reflects a “selective” approach to historical responsibility.
In its analysis, the piece linked Takaichi’s visit to broader Japan-Australia relations, noting recent agreements on energy security, rare earths and defence cooperation. It argued that these developments are part of Tokyo’s strategy to strengthen ties with like-minded partners in the Indo-Pacific, excluding China.
The commentary drew comparisons with former West German Chancellor Willy Brandt’s historic kneeling at a Holocaust memorial in Warsaw in 1970, saying that true remorse is universal and not dependent on audience or political gain. It claimed that Takaichi’s actions lacked the same moral weight and international impact.
The article concluded by asserting that Japan must confront its wartime history more consistently across all regions, warning that selective remembrance risks deepening mistrust with neighbouring countries in Asia.
