In a recent article published by China’s state-run Global Times on August 31, 2025, titled “Japan’s planned deployment of ‘Chinese mainland coast, Taiwan island-covering’ missiles exposes military expansion ambition, to become own burden: expert,” the outlet critiques Japan’s missile plans amid escalating regional tensions. The piece, which has garnered attention amid ongoing China-Japan disputes, frames the deployment as aggressive and ties it to historical grievances.
Summary:
The article reports that Japan plans to deploy an upgraded Type 12 surface-to-ship missile at Camp Kengun in Kumamoto Prefecture “this year,” with a range exceeding 1,000 kilometers—allegedly capable of reaching parts of China’s mainland coast and Taiwan. It claims this is to “counter China’s increasing maritime movements” and that the deployment is being accelerated from 2026 due to a potential “Taiwan emergency.” Quoting Chinese military expert Wang Yunfei, it accuses Japan of abandoning its pacifist constitution and risking a repeat of World War II aggression, especially on the 80th anniversary of the war’s end. It notes local opposition, including from Okinawa Governor Denny Tamaki, and references a March 2025 statement from China’s Ministry of National Defense spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang criticizing Japan’s militarism.
While the core facts align with public reports, the article employs sensational language and historical analogies to portray Japan as the aggressor, a common tactic in state-backed media.
Key Claims
We cross-referenced the article’s assertions with independent sources, including Japanese media (e.g., Japan Times, Asahi Shimbun), international outlets (e.g., AP News, Reuters), and defense analyses (e.g., IISS, Janes). No major fabrications were found, but some details are exaggerated or selectively presented.
Claim 1: Japan Is Deploying Upgraded Type 12 Missiles in Kumamoto with a >1,000km Range, Covering China’s Coast and Taiwan
- Verdict: Mostly True, but Timeline Slightly Misrepresented.
- The upgraded Type 12 missile, developed by Japan’s Ground Self-Defense Force (GSDF), indeed features an extended range of approximately 1,000 kilometers, up from the original 200 kilometers. Future iterations aim for 1,200-1,500 kilometers.
- Deployment is confirmed at Camp Kengun in Kumamoto Prefecture, part of Kyushu island, by the end of Japan’s fiscal year 2025 (March 2026). The article says “this year,” which could refer to the fiscal calendar, but it’s ambiguous and potentially misleading for readers using the Gregorian calendar.
- Range coverage: From Kyushu, the missiles could theoretically reach the Taiwan Strait (about 800-1,000km away) and parts of China’s eastern coast, aligning with Japan’s “counterstrike” doctrine for deterrence. However, Japan emphasizes defensive use against maritime threats, not offensive strikes.
Claim 2: Deployment Is to Counter China’s Maritime Movements and Is Being Accelerated Due to a “Taiwan Emergency”
- Verdict: Partially True, with Exaggeration.
- Japan’s defense buildup, including this deployment, is explicitly linked to concerns over China’s growing military presence in the East China Sea and around Taiwan. The missiles are part of a broader strategy to defend southwestern islands like Okinawa.
- Acceleration: Reports confirm Japan is fast-tracking the rollout from an original 2026 timeline, citing heightened tensions over Taiwan. This coincides with a record ¥8.8 trillion ($59.9 billion) defense budget request for 2026. However, the “Taiwan emergency” phrasing is sensational; official statements frame it as deterrence, not imminent crisis.
Claim 3: Expert Wang Yunfei Says Deployment Breaks Japan’s Pacifist Constitution and Risks Repeating WWII Mistakes
- Verdict: Opinion-Based, Not Factual; Limited Independent Verification.
- Wang Yunfei is cited as a “Chinese military affairs expert,” but his comments appear primarily in Chinese state media like Global Times. No major Western or Japanese sources quote him independently on this issue, suggesting he may be a go-to commentator for Beijing-aligned narratives.
- The claim that Japan is violating its pacifist constitution (Article 9) is a common critique, but Japan’s government interprets the missiles as defensive, within legal bounds. Tying it to the 80th anniversary of WWII is rhetorical, not factual evidence of aggression.
Claim 4: Local Concerns, Including Opposition from Okinawa Governor Denny Tamaki
- Verdict: True, but Contextually Misplaced.
- Tamaki did express opposition in March 2025 during a meeting with Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi, citing increased attack risks. However, this was specifically about potential deployments in Okinawa, not Kumamoto (the focus of the article). Okinawa hosts many U.S. bases and has long opposed militarization. The article conflates this to imply broader Japanese dissent.
Claim 5: Chinese Spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang’s Response in March 2025
- Verdict: True.
- Zhang’s statement, urging Japan to learn from history and avoid militarism, was issued in March 2025 in response to Japan’s long-range missile plans. It’s part of ongoing PRC rhetoric, echoed in recent responses to U.S.-Japan exercises.
Analysis:
- No blatant fabrications, but the article inflates threats: The missiles are anti-ship (defensive against naval incursions), not land-attack weapons targeting civilians. Claiming they “cover” China/Taiwan implies offensive intent without evidence. The “burden to Japan” claim is speculative opinion, not fact.
- As a CCP-affiliated outlet, Global Times often amplifies Beijing’s narratives. This piece promotes China’s victimhood, portraying Japan as a resurgent militarist power while ignoring China’s own military expansions (e.g., hypersonic missiles, South China Sea militarization). It leverages WWII anniversaries to evoke anti-Japanese sentiment, a staple in Chinese propaganda.
- Aggressor-Victim Inversion: Japan is framed as the expansionist threat, reversing roles amid China’s Taiwan drills and island claims. Selective quotes from Wang and Zhang reinforce this without Japanese perspectives.
- Omission of Context: No mention of U.S.-Japan alliances or China’s actions prompting the buildup, like the Typhon missile deployments.
- Emotional Appeal: Linking to WWII and urging Japan to “reflect” frames the story as moral, not strategic, to rally domestic support in China.
The Global Times article is factually grounded in verifiable events but serves as propaganda by framing Japan’s defensive measures as aggressive expansionism. For accurate insights into “Japan missile deployment China tensions,” consult diverse sources like Japan Times or AP News. This fact check underscores the need for critical reading in geopolitical reporting—especially from state media amid rising Asia-Pacific rivalries in 2025.
