Week 9 Seminar

• Japan’s Security Relations with East Asia

• Exam Prep 1

Exam Prep timetableThe provisional exam date is: May 26th 2015 However, this is not final yet!

This session:• Areas for revision• Exam format• Submission of anonymous questions/topics not understood

11th May:• Understanding the questions• Planning and structuring your answer• What is the marker looking for in your answer?• Submission of anonymous questions/topics not understood

18th May:• Review of module• Further clarification/seminar slides about topics not understood

All questions are within the boundary of what has been required of you in this module:• Attend all lectures• Participate in all seminars• Do all required reading• Participate in the Okinawa debate

… So what should I be looking at for revision?

Exam Prep 1: What do I need to know?

Areas for revision should reflect the requirements of the module as a minimum:• Attend all lectures Understand the content of all the

lectures• Participate in all seminars Be able to answer all seminar

questions, use seminar slides to fill in gaps in knowledge• Do all required reading Have read the required reading for

each week• Participate in the Okinawa debate Have done all the

research asked of you in the ‘Okinawa debate’ document on MOLE

Exam Prep 1: Areas for revision

The following are also recommended but are not essential:• Additional readings for each module found in the course

handbook• Pursue further research around the topics, e.g what is

happening now?• Practise using the past exam questions on MOLE and the

sample exam paper in the handbook / create model answers

• Practice using the seminar questions / create model answers

Exam Prep 1: Areas for revision

• The exam is three hours long• There are nine questions, split into three sections• You must answer one question from each section

SECTION A: contains three questions relating to Week 1-3. You must answer one question from this section

SECTION B: contains three questions relating to Week 4-6. You must answer one question from this section

SECTION C: contains three questions relating to Week 7-10. You must answer one question from this section

Exam Prep 1: Exam format

Last week’s ‘food for thought’ question…

• What examples can you give of Japan’s proactive economic policy vis a vis East Asia? What about reactive policy? What accounts for the difference?

• ARF• Quiet diplomacy• Japan’s definition of ‘security’

Previous key terms and concepts for this section:ASEAN, ASEAN + 3 (APT), ARF, dōbun dōshu, seikei-bunri, Watashiyaku, Seirei keinetsu, NIES – 4, ASEAN – 4, ARF, IMF, AMF, FDI, ODA

This week’s key terms and concepts

Unit 9 seminar questionsQ1. Why has Japan been reluctant to develop a security relationship with East Asia?

Q2. What is the role of structure, agency and norms in explaining Japan’s security relationship with East Asia?

Q3. How has Japan instrumentalised its security relationship with East Asia in different periods? What changes have occurred ? What accounts for these changes?

Q4. What examples can you give of Japan’s proactive security policy vis a vis East Asia? What about reactive policy? What accounts for the difference?

1. Overviews• Japan’s concept of security• Human security• Japan, security and the ARF

2. Discuss Seminar questions in groups and feedback if time –pay attention to the wider definition of security

Japan’s concept of Security• Wider or ‘comprehensive’ definition of security • Military security through the US-Japan alliance and alternative

conceptions of security designed to supplement or substitute for military power

• Active diplomacy and extension of economic power in the form of ODA and economic co-operation Addresses root cause of social and political instability which often generate military conflict in the first place

• derived from the norm of developmentalism and the belief that ec progree and interdependence can become the ultimate guarantors of peace and sec

• Security of population rather than sending them to war to die• Human security

Human security

• Yet to be fully defined• Addresses various humanitarian, economic and

social issues in order to alleviate human suffering and assure security

• The human security agenda can only be addressed effectively by the extension of economic power

• For example: Japan assisted the socially vulnerable by meeting food and medical needs following the East Asian financial crisis

Japan, security and the ARF• Helps to support international and anti-military norms in a regional setting• Fitting with anti-militarist norm as it is a forum for dialogue and

emphasizes co-operative security. I.e. Security with rather than against members, and through political and diplomatic rather than military means

• Allows Japan to contribute to regional security without using military force• Helps Japan to set the security agenda, as it allows them to push for a

wider definition of security, e.g. the security of the population• Japan’s non-traditional security agenda in the region includes the issues of

water resources, energy security, health and the environment• The ARF is not a challenge to the US-Japan security treaty, but rather a

supplement to it

Group discussionsQ1. Why has Japan been reluctant to develop a security relationship with East Asia?

Q2. What is the role of structure, agency and norms in explaining Japan’s security relationship with East Asia?

Q3. How has Japan instrumentalised its security relationship with East Asia in different periods? What changes have occurred ? What accounts for these changes?

Q4. What examples can you give of Japan’s proactive security policy vis a vis East Asia? What about reactive policy? What accounts for the difference?

Remember to discuss these within the wider definition of security

Cold War Security Relations with East Asia: Structure

• Bipolar division Japan on the opposite side of the divide to:– China until normalization of relations in the 1970s– Vietnam until the end of the war and rebuilding of relations in

the late 1970s– North Korea

• Legacy of colonialism– Japan was heavily associated with the military after WWII.– Lee Kuan Yew – allowing Japan a military is like giving

chocolate liquors to an alcoholic.

Cold War Security Relations with East Asia: Agency and Norms

• Cold War Japanese politics = LDP. – PM Takeshita encourages relations with SKorea– PM Tanaka pro-China– PM Kishi & PM Nakasone resistance to the Yoshida Doctrine

• Yoshida doctrine prioritizing economic growth• Bilateralism emphasis on US-Japan security treaty and military bases for

the US.• Antimilitarism particularly strong in the Cold War era having derived

from the experience of WWII.• Developmentalism & Asianism promoted later on. Active primarily on

the level of economic relations – But think ‘soft power

Post- Cold War Security Relations with East Asia: Structure

• End of bipolarity and subsequent rise of unipolarity/(potentially) multipolarity.

• Expansion of NATO in Europe includes many former communist states, in East Asia no such institution exists.– North Korea’s nuclear programme– The rise of China and unfreezing long-standing territorial

disputes

• Flourishing of multilateral institutions– ARF

Post-Cold War Security Relations with East Asia: Agency and Norms

• Post-Cold War: shift in the influence and number of agents

• Post-Koizumi: – power of PM’s office has increased.– Power of foreign minister has increased.

• Japan Defence Agency upgraded to full ministry status in 2007.

• End of LDP one party system other parties have a chance to implement their own security policies.– Immobilism of state agency (e.g., Hatoyama Kan/Noda Abe)

• Bilateralism remains vital

• Norm of antimilitarism has been gradually eroded.

• Internationalism/Multilateralism has come to the fore.

Multilateralism: Structure, Agency and Norms

Structure• End of bipolarity saw the rise of multilateral institutions.

– Depending on one’s view this could either be a sign of unipolarity (e.g., US hegemony through IMF) or multipolarity. (Increasingly things are considered multipolar due to changing power dynamics but this can always change)

• Confidence building measures through multilateral fora has helped erode the legacy of colonialism, especially within ASEAN states.

Agency• Multilateral fora promote consensus among its members. It follows, however, that its members play a

role in determining what and how consensus needs to be established.

Norms• Norm of internationalism/multilateralism and the broadened scope of international security helps to

legitimize Japan’s involvement in regional security affairs.• ARF allows Japan to maintain East Asian security without making any military commitment – which

may challenge the existing norm of antimilitarism

Japan’s Security Policy in relation to Taiwan/China: Structure

• Japan restricted from engaging with PRC during Cold War before the normalization of relations between China and the US.

• Change in structure saw the expansion on ‘international security’ which was championed by Japan who simultaneously prioritized bilateral relations with the US.– Strengthened ties indicates that US may become embroiled in conflicts between Japan

& China over territorial issues, while should there be major conflicts between China & the US, Japan is situated in a very precarious position

• Historical legacy of China/Taiwan has and continues to constrain prospects of long-term peace and security. Historical legacy of Japan informs its interests and actions within this dilemma.– Is it currently possible for a Chinese, Taiwanese of Japanese leader to renounce

sovereignty over Senkaku islands?

Japan’s Security Policy in relation to Taiwan/China: Agency

• Agency was important in Sino-Japanese normalization of relations as negotiations formally began under PM Tanaka, not anti-communist Satō.

• Democratic change in Taiwan/social demographic change in China/political change in Japan may yield a broader range of input into policymaking in the future but negotiations and compromise may be constrained by interests emanating from key agents within international structures and norms such as statist nationalism.

Japan’s Security Policy in relation to Taiwan/China: Norms

• Antimilitarism, developmentalism/economism at the heart of legitimizing the normalization of relations with China.

• Antimilitarism has gradually eroded while the norm of internationalism has emerged post-Cold War.

• Internationalism supplements antimilitarism in security affairs to an extent so that if Japan is seen to be part of the international community, then international security affairs are somewhat justifiable.

• Curiously, bilateralism with the US has not waned as internationalism has arisen, meaning that currently, to an extent, US security issues are Japan’s, and vice versa.

• Norms of internationalism and bilateralism with the US obfuscate Japan’s exact position on the Taiwan issue.