This document summarizes the key topics and questions covered in Week 1 of a seminar on Japan's international relations. The seminar addressed why Japan remains an important actor to study, and how its relations can be analyzed through the lenses of politics, economics, and security. Specific discussion points included Japan's role in the US, East Asia, common characterizations of its international activity over time which have changed from "rising sun" to perceptions of economic challenge or contradiction. The seminar utilized group activities and discussions to explore these themes in more depth.

1. Week 1 Seminar
Introduction and significance of Japan’s
international relations:
politics, economics and security
Dr. Aimee Richmond
a.richmond@sheffield.ac.uk

2. This week’s seminar questions:
Q1. Why is Japan still an important actor in the study of international
relations?
- why does Japan matter?
Q2. How can we use the questions what, why and how to study Japan’s
international relations?
Q3. How useful is it to approach Japan’s international relations in terms of
the three dimensions of politics, economics and security in the key sites of
international activity, the United States, East Asia?
Q4. Why have the metaphors and perceptions of Japan’s role in the world
changed? Do you recognise any of these characterisations of Japan’s
international activity? Why do Japan’s international relations appear
paradoxical, ‘normal’, ‘aberrant’ or ‘abnormal’?

3. Q1. Why is Japan still an important actor in the study of international
relations?
- why does Japan matter?
Icebreaker:
- Why did you choose to study Japan?
- Why did you choose this module?
- Give one reason why you think Japan is an
important actor in international relations /
Why Japan matters

4. Q2. How can we use the questions what, why and how to study Japan’s
international relations?
• What – to establish what has been and is
Japan’s pattern of behaviour and role in the
international system
• Why – explaining why Japan opts to behave in
the way it does
• How – the means, methods and effectiveness
of how Japan pursues its international role
Group activity
Try to come up with three questions that could be used
to investigate one area of Japan’s international
relations

5. Q3. How useful is it to approach Japan’s international relations in terms of the
three dimensions of politics, economics and security in the key sites of
international activity, the United States, East Asia?
1. Overviews:
- Economics
- Politics
- Security
- United States
- East Asia
2. Discuss Q3 in Groups

6. Economics
• Before the war Japan had twin military and
economic objectives: “rich country strong army”
(fukoku kyohei)
• Economic ambition remains
• PM Ikeda Hayato’s income doubling plan in 1960s
• Economism became the ‘norm’
• Since 1945 the principle image of Japan’s
international relations has been linked firmly to
the pursuit of economic interests
• This has meant that politics and security are less
prominent

7. Economics
• 3rd largest economy in terms of GDP
• 4th largest economy in terms of exports
• Invests a lot in FDI and ODA
• in contrast, the size of Japans national debt is growing
(gross public debt was 200% of GDP at end of 2010)
• This now makes the Japanese government the biggest
borrower among the major industrialized powers, although
most of this is borrowing from domestic sources.
• Japanese goods known for quality and innovation
• These goods are in many ways the ‘face’ of Japan’s overseas
economic activities and the physical manifestation of its
global power and reach (Emmott 1991)
• Japan has gradually enhanced its presence in global
economic institutions
• From 2008 Japan has been the 2nd largest contributor to
the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World
Bank

8. Politics
• Japan’s economic weight has inevitably brought it a degree of
political power in global institutions. (only East Asian country
in G8, member of G20, Second largest contributor to the UN’s
budget)
• Japan generally appears to lack the political appetite and
capacity to assert a clearly identifiable leadership role on the
world’s political stage
• Japan has often been seen to lack a readily identifiable or
forceful political and international ideology.
• Japan is seen as having a ‘legitimacy deficit’ (Rapkin 1990:195)
- inability to pursue a fully independent foreign policy and to
demonstrate a decisive political leadership
- Wartime memories have left Japanese policy-makers wary
of making attempts to reassert global or regional leadership
• This ‘legitimacy deficit’ has been compounded by Japan’s
apparent lack of any universalistic values that can be exported
to other countries.

9. Politics
• The exact extent of Japan’s global political power is hard to
aggregate and to compare on the same basis as the other
major industrialized powers
• This is because the Japanese Government concentrates on
consensus building and financial support in global institutions,
along with a greater attempt to raise its profile internationally
• This makes it seem like Japan is poised for a more assertive
political leadership role in the world, although how
independent a role Japan plays remains to be seen
• Through the global diffusion of Japan’s economic products, it
has begun to acquire ‘soft’ political power (Nye 1990; Drift
1998)
• This soft power is accompanied by a degree of acceptance of
Japanese culture and knowledge frameworks
• This influences the norms and value judgements of the
recipients, which in turn can influence their economic,
political and security decisions and policies in relation to
Japan and the wider world (Strange 1988: 120)

10. Security
• Maintains the 5th largest defence budget in the world
• Article 9 of the Japanese constitution still serves to constrain
the state’s use of military
• Japan makes a contribution to global security based upon the
extension of economic power and cooperation
• The Japanese state and its people, then, harbour a view of
security which is much broader than the military approach of
most of the other major industrialized powers
• The concept of ‘human security’ remains an important aspect
of Japanese foreign policy (Hughes 2004a: 121-2)
• Alliance with US (US-Japan security treaty)
• Japan is becoming an increasingly active partner
• This more proactive role is emerging in the context of a
remilitarizing Japan (Hughes 2009a)
• Hence the attempts to develop a ’human security’ dimension,
is being complemented by an increased military role.

11. United States
• During occupation US promoted Japan’s economic
growth
• Bilateral trade and investment relations
• Japanese TNCs are now part of the US landscape
• There are also negatives reaction – e.g. to Matsushita’s
purchase of the Rockefeller Centre
• Politically – The US’s relationship to Japan is in line with
victor and vanquished
• US-Japan security treaty (right to construct military
bases)
• Entanglement
• Japan’s political independence is constrained in some
instances, and in others foreign pressure has forced
Japan to expand its political contribution to global and
regional orders

12. East Asia
• Japan is the largest provider of ODA
• Provision of economic aid designed to build political and security
stability
• FDI
• Complex web of manufacturing production systems and trade links
• Extended production networks through the activites of Japanese
TNCs
• The legacies of WW2 and the Cold War have left Japan still largely
distrusted
• Continued fears of Japanese militarism mean that Japan contributes
instead through US-Japan alliance
• Territorial and resource disputes (Senkaku and Takeshima)
• However, Japan has constructed a set of special political
relationships with the ASEAN states
• Japan has returned to a central, and possibly dominant position
within the East Asia region as a political, economic and security
player and organiser during the first decade of the 21st century

13. Q3. How useful is it to approach Japan’s international
relations in terms of the three dimensions of politics,
economics and security in the key sites of
international activity, the United States, East Asia?
In groups, discuss:

14. Q4: Why have the metaphors and perceptions of Japan’s role in the world
changed? Do you recognise any of these characterisations of Japan’s
international activity? Why do Japan’s international relations appear
paradoxical, ‘normal’, ‘aberrant’ or ‘abnormal’?
Keep these questions in mind as we go through the
following sections:
• Metaphors of change
• Metaphors of challenge
• Metaphors of contradiction
• Metaphors of capriciousness
• Expectation vs reality
• Discussion of Q4 (time reliant)

15. Metaphors of change
• 1960s-90s ‘Rising sun’ – implied Japans ascent to great status
• 1962 The Economist ask readers to ‘consider japan’ and its
startling economic advances
• 1971 ‘Superstate’ (Kahn, 1971)
• 1976 East Asia’s new economic ‘giant; (Patrick and Rosovsky
1976)
• 1979 Harvard academic Ezra Vogel warns the American
people that Japan was likely to overtake the US to become the
world’s ‘No 1’ (Vogel, 1979)
• 1982 Economic ascendance declared a ‘miracle’ (Johnson
1986)
• 1986 Pax Nipponica could replace Pax Americana (Vogel 1986)
• 1990s Routinely talked about as a ‘superpower’ (Horley and
Buckley, 1990; Garby and Brown bullock 1994)

16. Metaphors of challenge
Japan was portrayed as an economic juggernaut. At best, driverless and
careering out of control. At worst, a peril and parasitic threat to the
international order:
• rise of the ‘Japan problem’ (Van Wolferen 1986/7)
• ‘free riding’ on the US? (Prestwitz, 1988)
• No aim in the international sphere save the shortsighted and reckless
pursuit of market share and the systematic crushing of economic rivals
(Van Wolferen 1990).
• Climbed to prominence on the back of other major industrialized powers
Since the economic slowdown and onset of the Heisei recession, a new series
of metaphors associated with Japan’s decline have emerged:
• Japanese sun ‘also sets’ and is ‘divided ’(Emmott 1989; Callon 1997)
• Japan is ‘anything but number one’ (Woronoff 1991)
• Economic miracle is over (Katz 1998)
• ‘head[ing] for the edge’ (Paul Krugman, economist, financial times Jan
1999)
• Would Japan ever awake from its slumber?
• No longer seems to pose a threat to Western industries

17. Metaphors of contradiction
• Political pygmy (disproportionately large in terms of economic
power, but small in terms of its political power in the world)
• Japan as a ‘free rider’
• From potential superpower to international weakling
• From economic juggernaut to economic write-off
• From military cipher to uniformed helper

18. Metaphors of capriciousness*
• Often changing PMs
• Consequently proved unable to pursue a consistent foreign policy
line
• Wavering between highly ambitious values-orientated diplomacy
informed by strong, near neo-conservative sentiment, and reverting
to cautious and pragmatic diplomacy
• Clashing with the US?
Japan’s international behaviour exhibits a number of characteristics
which contrast sharply with those of the other major industrialized
powers.
As a result, attempts to conveniently categorize Japan in line with
traditional interpretations of international relations remain frustrated.
* Capricious = given to sudden and unaccountable changes of mood or behavior

19. Expectation vs Reality
Scenario: Realist school of IR theory would posit that a rise to
economic superpower status can be expected to be
accompanied by the acquisition of comparable military power,
including even nuclear weapons
Expectation: Japan would remilitarise, perhaps adopt a pro-
nuclear stance or acquire nuclear weapons
Reality: Japan puts up strong resistance to the expansion of its
military role

20. Expectation vs Reality
Scenario: Major industrialized powers typically follow the model
of having a proactive stance
Expectation: Japan’s leaders would readily pursue a set of
dynamic international relations
Reality: Japan tends to react to, rather than shape, international
events

21. Expectation vs Reality
Scenario: Japan holds G8/G20 membership and strives to attain
a permanent seat on the UNSC
Expectation: Japan would make a concerted effort to raise a
voice equal to those of other major industrialized powers
Reality: Japan doesn’t tend to raise much of a voice and is often
a silent participant

22. • Q4: Why have the metaphors and perceptions
of Japan’s role in the world changed? Do you
recognise any of these characterisations of
Japan’s international activity? Why do Japan’s
international relations appear paradoxical,
‘normal’, ‘aberrant’ or ‘abnormal’?