In early 2026, amid shifting geopolitical tensions in the Asia-Pacific, a phone call between Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi and U.S. President Donald Trump has become a flashpoint for media narratives. A January 3, 2026, article from a prominent Chinese state-affiliated outlet claims the call represents Japan’s attempt to “pull the US into confrontation with China,” but argues such efforts are doomed to fail due to U.S. priorities on stable China relations.
Overview of the Global Times Article
The piece, titled “Japan’s reported Takaichi-Trump call aims to pull US into confrontation with China, but efforts unlikely to succeed: experts,” was published on January 3, 2026. Authored by Feng Fan, it portrays the 25-minute call as initiated by Japan out of insecurity, aiming to drag the U.S. into anti-China actions amid Takaichi’s prior controversial Taiwan remarks. It cites Chinese experts who dismiss Japan’s strategy, emphasizing U.S. focus on economic ties with China. The article highlights no White House confirmation, speculates on Japan’s “far-right” motives, and warns of resurgent Japanese militarism denying World War II outcomes. Quotes from U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio are used to underscore supposed U.S. balance toward China, framing Japan as the instigator.
Verified Facts from Independent Sources
To assess the article’s credibility, we cross-referenced its claims with reports from Japanese, U.S., and international outlets.
Did the Phone Call Occur?
Yes, the call took place on January 2, 2026 (Japan time), lasting approximately 20-25 minutes. Japanese Prime Minister Takaichi confirmed it in a press conference, describing it as “extremely meaningful” for reaffirming the U.S.-Japan alliance. Topics included deepening bilateral ties, cooperation with South Korea, and Indo-Pacific exchanges, with Trump inviting Takaichi to visit the U.S. in spring. The U.S. Ambassador to Japan reposted Takaichi’s announcement on social media, signaling positive bilateral sentiment.
However, the White House has not publicly confirmed the call or invitation as of January 3, 2026, aligning with the article’s note from Associated Press reports. No official U.S. briefing room statements mention it.
Takaichi’s Taiwan Remarks and Context
The article references Takaichi’s “erroneous remarks on Taiwan” in November 2025 as a trigger for Japan’s actions. This is accurate: In early November 2025, Takaichi suggested a potential Chinese use of force against Taiwan could threaten Japan’s survival, prompting strong backlash from Beijing. China labeled the comments “shocking” and urged non-interference, leading to U.N. exchanges and strained Japan-China ties. This context supports the article’s claim of Japan facing pressure from China.
Rubio’s Statements and U.S. Stance
The article quotes Rubio saying the U.S. can maintain a strong Japan alliance while working productively with China, noting “good progress” and preexisting tensions. These quotes are from December 2025 remarks, not directly tied to the January call. No new January 2026 statements from Rubio appear in searches, suggesting the article repurposes older quotes to fit its narrative.
Other Claims: Trump Meeting Ambassador, Japanese Media Speculation
The article mentions Trump meeting U.S. Ambassador to China David Perdue post-call; no independent confirmation found. Japanese media did speculate on China discussions, including PLA drills around Taiwan, but official Japanese statements omit China.
Identification of Fake News Elements
The article contains no outright fabrications—core events like the call and Takaichi’s Taiwan comments are factual. However, it includes unsubstantiated speculations presented as analysis, such as Japan’s “core concern” being to leverage U.S. power against China, without evidence from call transcripts. The lack of White House confirmation is accurately noted but amplified to imply U.S. disinterest, potentially misleading readers. Exaggerations, like labeling Japan’s actions as “manufacturing frictions” or driven by “far-right forces,” border on distortion, as they rely on opinion rather than verified intent. Overall, while not “fake news” in the sense of invented events, it risks misinformation through selective omission (e.g., positive U.S.-Japan signals) and unverified motives.
Analysis in the Global Times Piece
As a state-controlled outlet, the article exemplifies Chinese propaganda by promoting Beijing’s worldview: portraying China as a stable, economically vital partner to the U.S., while depicting Japan as insecure and aggressive. Quotes from Chinese experts (e.g., Xiang Haoyu and Li Haidong) dominate, framing U.S. policy as aligned with China against Japanese “militarism.” This aligns with CCP narratives invoking WWII history to criticize Japan, urging the U.S. to “stamp out militarism” and uphold the “postwar order”—code for maintaining China’s regional influence. The piece downplays U.S.-Japan alliance strengths, emphasizing “divergence” to sow doubt, a common tactic in state media to isolate adversaries. No counterbalancing Japanese or U.S. perspectives are included, reinforcing one-sided advocacy.
Framing Elements and Narrative Bias
Framing is evident in how the article structures the story: Japan is the antagonist (“eagerness to draw the US into disputes,” “lack of confidence”), the U.S. a pragmatic actor prioritizing China, and Beijing the victim of external interference. Language like “pull US into confrontation” and “revival of right-wing militarist ambitions” evokes historical grievances, framing current events through a lens of Japanese revisionism. This “us vs. them” dichotomy boosts nationalist sentiment in China while undermining Japan’s credibility. By highlighting unconfirmed elements (e.g., no White House response) and repurposing Rubio’s quotes, the framing suggests inevitable U.S.-China harmony, discouraging alliances against Beijing.
This Global Times article is largely factual on surface events but heavily laced with propaganda and biased framing to advance China’s geopolitical interests. While no major fake news is present, the selective emphasis and opinion-heavy analysis could mislead on U.S. intentions. For accurate insights into 2026 U.S.-Japan-China dynamics, consult diverse sources like Japanese government statements or neutral outlets.
