This article discusses five prescriptions Japan should adopt by learning from Europe’s movement to break away from China.
It argues that Japan, as a liberal democratic nation, must clarify its position by joining an international investigation into the source of the virus, restructuring supply chains away from China, protecting domestic companies from Chinese investment and acquisitions, and moving beyond dependence on Chinese inbound tourism.

June 14, 2020
If Japan does not make its position clear out of consideration for China, it may be labeled a “barbaric country” by Europe and America, just like China.
The following is the continuation of the previous chapter.
Prescriptions for “breaking away from China.”
Then, taking Europe as a reference, how should Japan proceed with “breaking away from China”?
First, Japan should suppress infections as quickly as possible through the democratic method of “voluntary behavioral change by the people,” and aim for a “declaration of containment.”
China, under one-party dictatorship, contained infections by restricting privacy, or so it claims.
If the West struggles, there is also concern that the value judgment that “for the sake of safety, it cannot be helped even if freedom is suppressed” may spread.
To prevent that, liberal nations, including Japan, must show that the coronavirus can be contained without restricting freedom.
For Japan, which believes in freedom, democracy, and the rule of law, Taiwan and Germany, which succeeded in infection control, can serve as references.
Second, Japan should participate in an international investigation team into the source of infection.
In Europe and America, led by the United States, there are calls for information disclosure and on-site investigations, on the grounds that responsibility for the pandemic lies with China, which continues to conceal information.
If Japan does not make its position clear out of consideration for China, as in the postponement of President Xi’s state visit to Japan, it may be labeled a “barbaric country” by Europe and America, just like China.
The rift between Europe and America on one side and China on the other will only deepen.
As a member of the G7, Japan should align itself with Europe and America, participate in an international investigation team, and defend liberalism.
Third, Japan, the United States, and Europe should transform supply chains that have placed emphasis on China.
The government included a total of 243.5 billion yen in emergency economic measures as expenses to support companies in bringing their China-based operations back to Japan or moving them to third countries.
In Asia, there are friendly countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia that can become destinations for the relocation of investment from China.
For high-value-added strategic industries, Japan should bring production bases back home and diversify them in cooperation with the Five Eyes.
Following the example of the Trump administration, inducement measures such as tax cuts and deregulation are also necessary.
Japan should make use of its experience of expanding procurement sources for rare earths, once dependent on China, to France, Vietnam, and other countries, and of working with the United States and the EU to break down China’s unjust resource diplomacy.
Fourth, from the standpoint of national security, Japan should protect domestic companies from Chinese investment and acquisitions.
On May 8, in conjunction with the enforcement of the revised Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act, the government designated 518 companies in 12 fields of high importance for national security, including nuclear power, weapons manufacturing, and pharmaceuticals, as “core companies.”
It strengthened regulations by lowering the threshold for prior notification when foreign investors acquire shares from “10 percent or more” to “1 percent or more.”
However, in the United States, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, in which intelligence departments also participate, can impose penalties retroactively if national-security concerns are found in any industry.
In Japan, however, only formal prior regulations can cast the net, and “blind spots” may arise.
Japan should share information with Europe and America to prevent technology outflow to China.
Fifth and finally, could Japan not aim to break away from inbound tourism dependent on China?
The coronavirus dealt a severe blow to department stores and tourism-related industries, but the problem was, in the first place, the structure of dependence on the “explosive buying” of Chinese tourists.
Around the world, Japanese content such as anime, manga, and games is creating a boom as “Neo-Japanism.”
In London, many British people visited the “Katsushika Hokusai” and “Manga” exhibitions held at the British Museum, and the “Mitsumasa Anno” exhibition held at Japan House was also a great success.
Japanese-style katsu curry is also extremely popular.
Japanese culture is becoming soft power.
British acquaintances who visited Japan last year to watch the Rugby World Cup were all fascinated by the beautiful and courteous “omotenashi,” and their eyes shone as they said they wanted to visit again.
Why not also consider tourists from Britain and other Commonwealth countries such as New Zealand, which participated in the Rugby World Cup?