Japan and other East Asian states have never been able to issue their own views regarding the history disputes in the region because they have served the US-led cold war system as a cog, not a major actor. In this period, Japan turned a blind eye on the historical responsibility for the East Asian invasion, bandwagoning on the US anti-communist system inj East Asia. It was then irritating even for progressive intellectuals and political elites to mention the history of East Asia, which often leads them to a controversy over historical accountability of invasion. In addition, a rightist tendency of history prevails Japanese society as conservative Liberal Democratic Party assumes a dominant leadership for many decades. Then came Taquewuchi Yoshimi, who put forward an issue of Japanese East Asianism in an introspective way for the first time ever since the Pacific war. Based on the idea of separation of historical structure and phenomenon, he comes to terms with an intellectual project, which tries to divide Japanese East Asianism into two flows, an ideology of East Asian solidarity and an ideology of East Asian invasion. In so doing, he tries to rebuild Japanese national identity, which has gone missing since the defeat in the WW II, and then transpose it with Asian principle. This author tries to address different interpretation on Taquewuchi's Asian discourse, consulting some existing comments of his arguments.