Tokyo – AFP
From agreements covering air defense and the deployment of additional US forces on Okinawa to a “very important” treaty with Britain, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s intense diplomatic tour is more than just a photo op.
Defense dominated Kishida’s agenda this week during meetings with leaders of the Group of Seven, his country’s allies in Europe and North America, as he seeks to strengthen ties in the face of growing pressure from China, analysts say.
Amy King, assistant professor at the Center for Strategic and Defense Studies at the Australian National University, said Japan wanted to perpetuate its “superpower role”.
Japan is looking for “strategic partnerships and defense relations”, which is a natural approach for other countries, “but it was largely forbidden to Japan” because of its pacifist constitution applied since the end of World War II.
Kishida also discussed various topics, from trade to climate, in an indication of his efforts to strengthen Tokyo’s relations with its allies. King said that Japan is “fortifying itself against a decline in the ability of the United States, and is working to attract other major democracies to Asia.”
Mitsuru Fukuda, a professor at Nihon University who specializes in crisis management, said Kishida’s diplomatic efforts “indicate that Japan’s national defense cannot be undertaken by Japan alone.”
He added, “In the past, Japan was able to separate economics from politics” and establish trade relations with countries such as China and Russia, in parallel with obtaining security protection from its alliance with the United States.
But the growing tension, exacerbated by the war in Ukraine, means that “we can’t keep this up”.
Japan is hosting the G7 summit this year, and Kishida is visiting all bloc countries except Germany on a tour that he will conclude with talks, Friday, in Washington with US President Joe Biden. The US and Japanese foreign and defense ministers agreed to expand the scope of their countries’ mutual security treaties and announced the deployment of a rapid reaction unit from the US Marine Corps (Marines).
In Britain, Kishida signed a “mutual access agreement” that legally allows both sides to deploy forces in each other’s territory. Japan concluded a similar agreement with Australia last year and is in talks about another agreement with the Philippines. Last year, Tokyo also agreed to develop next-generation fighter jets with Britain and Italy and to increase intelligence sharing and defense cooperation with Australia.
Beijing has watched developments with some alarm, warning Japan last year not to “deviate” from the course of bilateral relations. However, analysts say: Tokyo is treading carefully to avoid challenging its powerful neighbor directly. “Expanding (Japan’s) military network is definitely an effective way to confront or try to deter China,” said Daisuke Kawai, a researcher at the Japan Institute of International Affairs.
But since the agreements did not amount to full alliances with mutual defense commitments, they should remain “acceptable for the time being” for Beijing, according to Kawai.
While some interpreted the reform of Japan’s defense policies and spending as a break with the past, others see it as a gradual shift.
The international security professor at the University of Tokyo’s Graduate School of Public Policy said these steps “will at least complicate Chinese calculations about the extent to which they can expand the reach of their activities in the region.”
The Japanese constitution, which was drawn up after the war, prevents Tokyo from waging war, and the government’s plans to purchase missiles capable of hitting enemy launch pads have sparked debate about the limits of the legal framework for that.
However, polls indicate that the Japanese public opinion supports that shift, although opinions about paying the cost of it are divided, and some observers even consider that it is too late.
“These deterrence efforts should not be seen as destabilizing or provocative,” said Ewan Graham, a researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. “Rather, it represents a belated reset of the balance of power that has tipped dramatically in favor of those authoritarian challenges to the status quo.”
