Week 6 SeminarDr. Aimee Richmonda.richmond@sheffield.ac.uk

Exam prep &Japan’s security relations with the

United States

Essay Preparation

• Why are we writing this essay?• What are the requirements?• How is it assessed?• How should I answer the questions?

Learning OutcomesBy the end of the module you will be able to 1. demonstrate knowledge of Japan's role in the world in the three

dimensions of politics, economics and security in two key sites of international activity, the United States and East Asia.

2. Apply conceptual tools to analyse how structure, agency and norms can be used to explain Japan's international relations.

3. Demonstrate appropriate cognitive, communicative and transferable skills, including the ability to evaluate social scientific concepts and theories.

4. Employ primary and secondary sources to present reasoned and effective arguments in written and oral form.

5. Pursue independent learning6. Show critical judgement.

Essay RequirementsThe deadline for the essay is 15:00 on Tuesday 26th April 2016. It is worth 40% of your grade

Requirements Checklist: 2500 words (+/- 10%) In-text references Proper footnotes (where appropriate) Bibliography Use cover sheet (available on MOLE) Cover sheet/first page must show: Module name and title, your registration

number (not your name), essay title, word count Student registration number must be on every page Electronic copy submitted via Turnitin

**Submission details can be found in the module handbook**

SEAS ask that you use http://library.lincoln.ac.uk/learning-teaching/referencing/As a guide for referencing

Assessment

• Introduction• Conclusion• Use of Relevant Evidence• Critical Analysis and Originality• Structure and Organization• Style, Grammar, Spelling, Syntax• Referencing (includes Bibliography)

First70-

II.160-69

II.250-59

Third45-49

Pass40-44

Fail0-39

Introduction

Conclusion

Use of Relevant Evidence

Critical Analysis & Originality

Structure and Organization

Style, Grammar, Spelling, Syntax

Referencing

Summary Assessment

On the basis of the above criteria, the strengths of this work are…

Areas for improvement are…

Approaching the Questions• What is the question asking?• Identify the main topic and discussion areas• Is the question broad? Do you need choose a specific area to address

in detail?• Do you need a case study? Do you need more than one case study to

illustrate difference?• Identify the points and arguments that you can make• Read the required and suggested reading and beyond this• Has anything changed since what is in the reading?• Can you find anything (figures etc) that are more recent?• Be careful to keep it academic rather than journalistic• Make a plan – we’re happy to look over it for you!

1. Why have the metaphors of Japan as an economic giant but military pigmy been used to characterize Japan?

2. What is the utility of structure, agency and norms for understanding Japan’s international relations?

3. How has Japan’s economic policy towards the United States changed in the postwar period?

4. Why did trade conflicts arise between Japan and the United States?

5. How can structure, agency and norms be used to explain Japan’s security relations with the United States?

Choose one essay title…

6. How can structure, agency and norms be used to explain Japan’s economic relations with East Asia?

7. How can structure, agency and norms be used to explain Japan’s political relations with China?

8. How should Japan deal with the increasing challenges of balancing between the US and China?

9. To what extent can Japan’s response to the War against Terrorism be seen as a fundamental shift in Japan’s foreign policy?

10. What are the implications for Japanese security policy of the current Abe Shinzō administration?

• What is the role of the US-Japan security treaty?• How does the Okinawa debate fit into the wider context of

US-Japan relations?• Why are there so many agents involved?• Can domestic agency and public opinion make a

difference?

(the original seminar questions for this week can be found on Mole. The slides following this one give an overview of the US-Japan security relationship for you to read at home)

Cold War: Structure• When we look at structure, we look at the international system and

international events. Why events? Because events can change or be used to explain the structure of the system.

• International system: signed in the structural context of Japan being an occupied state in an emerging bipolar world order.

• International event: the Korean War (1951-1953) was being carried out at the time when Japan signed it.

So we could say that the bipolar structure of the international system and the elevated tension due to the Korean War gave Japanese policy-making

agents little power

Cold War: Agency• PM Yoshida’s normative orientation was anti-communist

– Considered the Security Treaty as a means to protect Japan from communism• Political and bureaucratic policy-making agents largely shared this view.

– Attachment to the Security Treaty left them vulnerable to US pressure to boost defence spending, purchase US weapons, carry out new military roles to cooperate with the US military strategy regionally and globally.

• While the structural relationship set in place was the crucial factor to explain Japan’s signing of the 1951 treaty, its revision in 1960 demonstrates the importance of agency.– PM Kishi both anti-communist and pro-American, and was similar to Yoshida in terms

of normative orientation.– It is unlikely that the US would have stood for Yoshida rejecting the peace treaty during

the time of Occupation. With Kishi, Japan was no longer occupied, and many who protested clearly felt that abandoned the treaty was a legitimate option. But despite this protest, Kishi elected to revise the treaty.

Cold War: Norms• Antimilitarist norms were important in mitigating conservatives and

checking US pressure.– Contribution to US war in Vietnam.– Continual constrain on the militarization process.

• Antimilitarism was often challenged by the norm of bilateralism in security issues as well as political and economic issues.– Angering the US enough for them to renege on some of their economic

ties with Japan as punishment could lead to extremely heavy job loss. Job loss can lead to individual crisis. This wouldn’t be great for the PM’s political career either.

• So there has been a balance with a commitment to anti-militarism but a perceived need to rely on the US.

Post-Cold War: Quick OverviewStrengthening of bilateralism and weakening of anti-militarism. So Japan’s security role has expanded:• Interoperability important for military forces so they can cooperate with each

other– Joint weapon development

• Countries are increasingly cooperating in trying to produce weapons that can be used by both sides.

• Logistical support or reconstruction– Providing fuel for military conflicts– Reconstruction

• Building schools• Give water/Building dams• Building roads

– Trying to improve educational facilities in Afghanistan

• Still remains enormous tension over the bases in Okinawa– Government and US have been trying to move Futenma base since the 1990s, but the local

and prefectural governments want it moved outside of Okinawa

Expanding scope and conceptual boundaries of ‘security’

• 1978 Guidelines for Japan-US Defence Cooperation– Japan to take more proactive security role (shortly after the ‘Guam Doctrine’) President

Carter has just taken office and US is still feeling the ‘energy crisis’. We see a change in Japan’s security role.

– Joint studies of operational issues in:• Preventing aggression against Japan• Dealing with attacks against Japan• Bilateral cooperation in case of conflict in the Far East

– Revised Guidelines in 1997 are much more wide-ranging in their implications. Changing conceptual boundary of ‘security’ alliance with the US

• March 1996, China’s test-firing of missiles to intimidate Taiwan in the run up to the Taiwanese presidential election in. Shortly after, Japan-US Joint Declaration on Security: Alliance for the 21st Century signed by PM Hashimoto and President Clinton in 1996.– Expanded scope of security: From ‘Far East’ to ‘Asia Pacific’ Changing scope of ‘security’

Expanding scope and conceptual boundaries of ‘security’

• 1999: Surrounding Areas Emergency Measures bill, passed in the Diet– Facilitated military cooperation in line with the revise Guidelines, particularly in the

area of logistics.

• Post-9/11: PM Koizumi, MOFA and the JDA supported a more proactive military role for Japan: and challenged the anti-militarist norm.

• Oct 2001 (10/11): Diet passed the Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law (ATSML), building on what was already set in order to expand the SDF’s noncombat operations.– Logistical support to the US and other members of ‘the coalition of willing’– SDF can use their weapons to protect not only themselves, but also persons and

property under their care.– Law Concerning Special Measures on Humanitarian and Reconstruction Assistance

in Iraq humanitarian and reconstruction assistance

Post-Cold War: StructureInternational Structure:• Weakening of the constraints on the role and degree of independence of the SDF

– The end of the Cold War and the decision by the JSP to recognize the SDF as constitutional and accept the US-Japan Security Treaty, opened up the opportunity for those in favour of using the SDF to expand the boundaries of what is permissible under Article 9 and the preamble of the Constitution.

• End of bipolarity and the onset of multipolarity.– Move away from a hegemonic system to a multipolar system and the emergence of different regional

groupings. • Much more pressure on states to contribute to the global agenda

– Actions through the UN UNPKO– So a change from ‘contributing to US global strategy’ to contributing to international society.

International events:• International events raise the level of threat to Japan and the need for US to maintain a military presence in

East Asia. – Rising China– 1991 Persian Gulf Crisis– 1996 Taiwan Strait Crisis– 1998 Taepodong Crisis– 9/11– ‘Sabre rattling’ from Pyongyang and tension with China

Post-Cold War: Agency• The JSP recognized the SDF as constitutional and the conceptual

boundaries of Article 9 and the preamble had been expanded.– The end of JSP opposition went a long way to the despatch of the SDF

overseas because the prominent voice of anti-militarism had been quietened.

• Revisionists within the LDP came to the fore– Koizumi– Aso– Abe

• Generational change– The number of people who have experience of war has declined so

anti-militarism depends on the socialization process e.g., school textbooks, parenting etc.

Post-Cold War: Norms• International events (issues of security) have challenged the norm of anti-

militarism.

• We have seen crises before:– Vietnam War– Soviet invasion of Afghanistan etc.

• But with the end of the JSP, generational change, and calls on Japan to make an international contribution, to become a ‘normal state’, the norm of anti-militarism is being challenged.

• Rise of multipolarity over bipolarity may further strengthen internationalist norms and see multilateral norms supplement the norm of bilateralism. At the moment, however, bilateralism is still a strong norm as seen with interoperability agreements with the US.

History of the US-Japan Security Treaty

• Signed in 1951 the US-Japan Security Treaty alongside the Peace Treaty– Highly unequal• Did not give Japan a written commitment to the defence

of its land and shores by the US• Allowed the US to intervene in Japan’s domestic affairs• Gave the US the right to administer Okinawa• Gave the US the right to station troops on US bases

within Japan

• Revision (1960) From “Security Treaty

Revision of the Treaty 1960• From “Security Treaty Between the United States and Japan” to “Treaty of

Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan”• PM Kishi revised the treaty despite mass protest calling for its abolition. This

is said to have cost Kishi his position.– Many protestors called for unarmed neutrality. So this was about not wanting to

become part of the Cold War confrontation in order to reduce the international tension of the time.• Many conservatives: The enemy is communism, it is evil.• Many opposing: The enemy is not communism, it’s a nuclear catastrophe/Armageddon.

• Revision– Removed the US’s right to intervene in Japanese domestic affairs– Secured commitment from the US on defending Japan– Placed restrictions on US military bases in Japan

• The treaty has been automatically renewed every ten years since but there is not a consensus on its primary purpose

Security Treaty three perspectives

1. It keeps Japan down.– It stops Japan from becoming a ‘big power’• Advocates: stop it from becoming ‘a threat to peace’

– US troops are the ‘cap in the bottle’2. Trip-wire It guarantees peace and security– US presence in East Asia ensures the containment of communism on the

continent which means peace and security• Anti-militarists on the other hand mind suggest US presence contributes the exact

opposite of this

3. Pipe through which US can pressure Japan to militarize– It is a constraint to the realization of ‘unarmed neutrality’ and Japan as truly a

‘peace nation’, and works to encourage Japan to engage militarily on the US side.

– No ‘cap in the bottle’ necessary – Japan is anti-militarist! US is encouraging militarism not restraining it.

Security Treaty: Impact and legacy• Tied Japan to the Western camp in the early Cold War period.• From

– 1950s bastion against communism– 1960s and early 1970s supporting the war in Vietnam– Late 1970s and early 1980s offering close military cooperation– Late 1990s introducing legislation for logistical and other support of US

forces– Early 2000s backing the US in the ‘war on terror’– 2000s onwards interoperationalizing military capabilities and missions (e.g.,

Operation Tomodachi)• Throughout all this, bilateral security relations have been forged out of the

tension between pressure on the Japanese government from the US and domestic political forces and the interests of specific policy-making agents.