T HE SHORT TITLE to this chapter conceals the host of complex geographical, historical, definitional and ideational factors inherent in any attempt to understand what is meant either by ‘security’ in a given region, or the very definition of ‘East Asia’ itself in this particular case. East Asia is not a legally definable entity; it is not bound
’s conclusions. Regional security isolationism during the Cold War During the Cold War, Japan pursued a strategy of regional security isolationism. This isolationism rested on two pillars. First, Japan abstained from direct involvement in regional security. Tokyo refused even to discuss regional security with other East Asian countries. Second, Japan entrusted its stake in regional security to American hands. Tokyo’s contribution to regional security was indirect and passive. Japan passively served as the major Asian platform
these endogenous regional drivers has been the exogenous factor of the US’s declining ability to singly maintain the burden of the East Asia security framework ( Goh, 2011 ). Endogenous and exogenous factors have led to what some scholars call bipolarisation of the South China Sea ( Burgess, 2016 ). Lastly, political stability under the Abe administration has enabled a more sustained, engaged and proactive foreign policy, making Japan a more reliable partner in the areas of economic, political and security cooperation ( Mark, 2016 ). The
This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of Japan’s new security
partnerships with Australia, India, countries and multilateral security
structure in East Asia, as well as with the EU and some of its member
Most books on Japanese bilateral relations focus exclusively on the Japanese perspective, the debate in Japan, positions of Japanese government leaders and parties, or the public discourse. This edited volume is organized in pairs of chapters, one each analysing the motivations and objectives of Japan, and a second analysing those of each of the most important new security partners.
After solely relying on the United States for its national security needs during the Cold War, since the end of the Cold War, Japan has begun to deepen its bilateral security ties. Since the mid-2000s under LDP and DPJ administrations, bilateral security partnerships accelerated and today go beyond non-traditional security issue are as and extend far into traditional security and military affairs, including the exchange and joint acquisition of military hardware, military exercises, and capacity building. It is argued, that these developments will have implications for the security architecture in the Asia-Pacific.
This book is a primer for those interested in Japan’s security policy beyond the US-Japan security alliance, non-American centred bilateral and multilateral security cooperation through the eyes of Japanese as well as partner country perspectives. It is also an ideal as a course reading for graduate courses on regional security cooperation and strategic partnerships, and Japanese foreign and security policy.
. The historical experience of the East Asian region, particularly its unparalleled, rapid and largely unexpected economic development over the last 50 years or so, has a number of important implications. Indeed, if economic development is taken as one of the most fundamental preconditions for the accomplishment of more encompassing forms of security that promote human
Organisation and the various Asian and East Asian frameworks for cooperation, generate mutual interests between China, the US and Asian states which make armed conflict between them unlikely and counter-balance pressures for strategic competition (Ikenberry 2008). If China becomes a liberal democracy, it may even become part of the zone of democratic peace – within which wars have become inconceivable – with the major Western powers. Liberalism’s focus on domestic politics, however, also directs attention to an alternative scenario: if China descends into extreme
partnership. It addresses these two corollary problems: What are the external and domestic factors that account for the increasing security cooperation between the Philippines and Japan? And what is the state of this security partnership? It also looks into these related issues: What is the origin of the Philippine–Japan security partnership? How has China’s maritime expansion in East Asia affected the security policies of these two countries? What are the components of the Philippine–Japan security cooperation? And finally, how will this security partnership evolve over
tradition of civilisational analysis. I then move to explore a key phase of Japanese civilisation’s interactions. My strategy involves pushing the notions of inter-civilisational interactions and encounters at work in Arnason, Bellah and Eisenstadt further by examining how deeper connections have influenced the coalescence of modern cultural and political thought. The phase I examine begins in the early Meiji period (1868–1912) and ends in the 1920s. Echoing Duara’s analysis of East Asia, I submit that a ‘discourse of civilisations’ formed in Japan through intensive
of global history. Since the formative phase of human expansion, nomads have also re-stimulated civilisational bases at different points (Cox, 2002: 144). Sea-bound movements were crucial (Gillis, 2013: 22–4). Voyaging brought distant ancestors of Australian Aboriginal civilisation through South-East Asia to the southern 83 Inter-civilisational engagement 83 continent. In the last primary migration, Lapita peoples consolidated the western Pacific and then spread to Fiji and Samoa before completing colonisation of the ocean basin by reaching the Polynesian
changing international order mean for Japan? And second, how should Japan respond? With one very major exception – the tragedy of the Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere – Japan has not historically sought to establish itself as a pole in its own right. Rather, it has focused on finding ways to adapt to, maintain autonomy in, and gain prestige from the given international order. Thus, the explanatory and normative sides of the Japanese discourse have been closely intertwined, with one informing the other. The interplay between these dimensions is