Download to read offline
![Introduction
Abstract
[This paper is about Japanese energy foreign policy. I will begin to look at historical
patterns (theory) of Japanese foreign policy behavior; then determine Japan’s current energy
situation. Second I will be to define Japanese business interactions associated with government
foreign policy; then apply existing theory to determine if Japan is following historical patterns
and which pattern Japan is following ]
The main purpose of the paper is to examine Japanese foreign policy and activities
concerning the oil and the uranium industry. What I hope to derive from the paper is trade
interactions since the cold war is over and the United States is not fighting the communist
menace anymore but is Japan still under influence of the United States foreign policy objectives.
Is the war against communism just transferred from the war against terrorism? Those countries
that are associated with terrorist practices and norms considered states that Japanese should not
do business with. During the cold war, Japan did not assist communist label countries and only
did business with countries that were consider pro liberal practices or anti communist states. Is
Japan still taking foreign policy direction from the United States of America?
The method of the paper is to use existing scholarly articles and books that have already
written about to define historical patterns of Japanese foreign policy behavior and theory. I try to
use as many primary and news sources to gather data about Japanese activity in energy field
which is focused on oil and uranium. The gathering of speech acts and narratives, government
and business documentation and press releases about policy. This is to help discern which
2](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/756227bb-68b5-471b-96a9-dc259435275c-160826055238/85/JapaneseEnergy-2-320.jpg)
JapaneseEnergy
- 1.
- 2. Introduction Abstract [This paper isabout Japanese energy foreign policy. I will begin to look at historical patterns (theory) of Japanese foreign policy behavior; then determine Japan’s current energy situation. Second I will be to define Japanese business interactions associated with government foreign policy; then apply existing theory to determine if Japan is following historical patterns and which pattern Japan is following ] The main purpose of the paper is to examine Japanese foreign policy and activities concerning the oil and the uranium industry. What I hope to derive from the paper is trade interactions since the cold war is over and the United States is not fighting the communist menace anymore but is Japan still under influence of the United States foreign policy objectives. Is the war against communism just transferred from the war against terrorism? Those countries that are associated with terrorist practices and norms considered states that Japanese should not do business with. During the cold war, Japan did not assist communist label countries and only did business with countries that were consider pro liberal practices or anti communist states. Is Japan still taking foreign policy direction from the United States of America? The method of the paper is to use existing scholarly articles and books that have already written about to define historical patterns of Japanese foreign policy behavior and theory. I try to use as many primary and news sources to gather data about Japanese activity in energy field which is focused on oil and uranium. The gathering of speech acts and narratives, government and business documentation and press releases about policy. This is to help discern which 2
- 3. direction and possiblereasons why they are choosing a certain policy directions and then compare it to existing theory. The themes I hope to address with this paper are the interesting interactions that rational calculations of market activity versus civilization goals of alliances that Japan is associated with. Is it power seeking, or market rationalization is more important than reaching international civilization goals, or is it civilization goals more rational and reasonable than the most rationalist market calculation. The case studies I am looking is the Iranian and Japanese partnership in regards to oil extraction and refinement and how Japan is integrating into post Soviet bloc countries such as Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, and Russia because of uranium reserves. How is Japan dealing with resource scarcity and resource competition while conforming to international obligation and alliance obligations? These are some of the themes I hope to clarify not directly but through nuances of Japan’s behavior. Through these cases I hope to discern if Japan is following historical patterns or branching off on new trajectories. The outline of the paper, first I will define the theories that have defined past historical behavioral patterns. Second begin to create ontology of the contemporary Japanese energy needs and consumption looking at trade partners and countries in the uranium and oil sectors. Third I will begin to establish ontology about the international energy industry looking at the sectors of oil and uranium. Within energy sectors I will begin to look at theories of world consumption and scarcity about each sector. The fourth section of the paper will begin to look at press releases that define Japanese foreign policy and Japanese behavior in promoting activity in the given sectors 3
- 4. of uranium andoil. The last section I will compare data and theory to do analysis to see if Japanese behavior is following historical patterns. Theory of Japanese Foreign Policy Behavior Major theories about Japanese behavior are called Aikido, Gaiatsu, and Multilateralism. 1 Many authors claim that Japan does not really make its own foreign policy but takes its directives from the United States. In this section I plan on describing some of the theories about Japanese foreign policy behavior. The first one is called Aikido is about quiet diplomacy the interactions are low profile and low risk. The characteristics of this theory that the interaction is flexible the goals are not short term but long term in nature. It is non-aggressive and defensive in nature focusing more on economic rather than military.2 This allows for changes and actions not direct related to achieving the goal but it promotes the end goal and not counter-productive. The second one is called Gaiatsu foreign pressure on Japan. How much influence does the Japanese government take into account when making foreign policy decisions? Authors like Michael Green who wrote the book, Japan the Reluctant Realist, that Japan takes foreign policy direction from the United States. Japanese foreign policy direction has not change but still focused on the economy since the ending of the cold war. The major concern of Japan is to ensure it gets the needed resource to promote economic activity and civil order. The world or the structure of the international system promotes constraints which causes Japanese foreign policy makers not to make the most rationalist decision according to market forces but rational in 1 David Potter and Sudi Sueo Japanese Foreign Policy: No longer Reactive? p.321 2 Ibid p. 321 4
- 5. promoting domestic interestsor civilization goals. The constraints of the international system could be regulative rules such as United Nation mandates and other state’s foreign policy, and security issues. These issues can sometimes redirect foreign policy when it is not the most rationalist to the goals of Japan, which is the procurement of resources and commodities. Gaiatsu is external pressures to have Japan to act in coordination to create a circumstance to contain possible hostile aggressor states. I think this is derived from old cold war policy of containment. Multilateralism could be gaining consensus and influencing and building international coalitions in existing international organizations. Seen historically is using the United Nations and other international groups to act proactively to promote common interest like global warming issue. The World Trade Organization could another method of multilateral approach to interaction with the international system and other states. The goal is to discuss in a transparent forum to build a universal consensus to address international and domestic issues in a proactive method. In the book Japanese Trade Policy Formulation, by Chikare Higashi promotes the Japanese was using its economic influence to assault the America economy.3 This book was written in 1983. The counter argument is that the Japanese do not pursue leisure in consumption but redirects consumption into investments for future development. The major underlying concepts in theories of Japanese foreign policy behavior could be summed up with the terms proactive and reactionary. The basic theory formula is this, If Japan 3 Chikare Higashi, Japanese Trade Policy Formulation, Praegar, p.1 5
- 6. and the UnitedStates disagree and the Japan acts in American interest.4 The second is the null of the formula, If United States and Japan disagrees and Japan acts in its own interest. The implications are that Japan needs to define it image of foreign policy separate from its alliance with the United States. When conflicts arise and Japan does not follow in its interest which could be rational calculations of the market when it comes to energy commodities and is following the security interest of the United States. 5 Is Japan a reactionary decision maker or is Japan proactive which tries to solve problems before they arise, energy policy should promote which method Japan leans towards more. Japanese energy situation Ninety nine point seven percent of Japan’s energy commodities are imports.6 This invokes many questions about how much energy commodities does Japan need to run its country and what energy sources are critical and which ones are abundant. I will begin to explain the basic energy needs of Japan. How I am going to approach this is describe consumption rates then domestic production. I will be to look at where Japan gets its energy commodities from. The focus of the paper is about uranium and oil since oil offers political controversy because of international common problems such as global warming and resource competition because its scarcity and uranium because of the international security implications when it comes to refining and transfer of technology. 4 David Potter and Sudi Sueo Japanese Foreign Policy: No longer Reactive? p.318 5 David Potter and Sudi Sueo Japanese Foreign Policy: No longer Reactive?p.319 6 Leo Lewis, Japan hot with anticipation after extracting Arctic ‘sorbet’ of natural gas April 15 2008 1-All-round Country edition 6
- 7. To begin withJapan’s oil situation, Japan is the third largest consumer of oil in the world. 7 Japan consumes 5.4 million barrels of oil a day. It produces 125,700 barrels of oil a day. The proven reserves of Japan are 59 million barrels of oil.8 This gives Japan estimate of 12 days of supply if all oil imports stop coming into Japanese ports. Why oil is important to Japanese economy because of 48% of Japanese energy source comes from oil.9 The need to secure oil reserves or switch energy sources is vital because of constraints of the international which would be market prices. Market prices are subject to production rates, and cost of transportation. What limits production would be sabotage of production facilities and transportation, resource competition or international restrictions. Ninety percent of Japanese oil imports come from the Middle East. The rest of the oil imports are divided throughout the world. The major import suppliers of Japan are Saudi Arabia with millions of barrels of oil (MB), United Arab Emirates 387 MB, Sudan, Angola 11 MB, Iraq 15 MB, Qatar 151 MB, Iran 176 MB, Russia 11MB, Azerbaijan, 1 MB, Mexico, China, Indonesia. Japan has diversified its oil extraction but is still focused on the Middle East. Japanese companies are exploring and finding fresh reserves such INPEX had holding in Iran and started to create relationships with Azerbaijan. 10 The current scent in the air is for Japan to its funds and from the Iranian project to developing Iraq oil reserves which Japan receives approximately 15 million barrels of oil a year.11 The companies that are promoting cooperation 7 EIA short term outlook for 2006 8 These figure are from the EIA and for the year 2006 9 Hisane MASAKI, Japan Joins the Race for Uranium Amid Global Expansion of Nuclear Power http:// www.japanfocus.org/products/details/1626 10 Hisane Masaki Oil-hungry Japan looks to other sources http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/IB21Dh02.html 11 Ibid. 7
- 8. and development ofoil importation are Nippon Oil Corporation, Sakhalin project, Exxon Mobil Corporation. Japan’s uranium consumption is around 8,000 and 8,500 tons per year.12 Countries that are major contributors to the Japan’s uranium needs are Canada, Kazakhstan, Australia, USA, and Niger. Some of the major uranium companies in Japan that are promoting investment in foreign uranium supplies are Itochu, the Overseas Uranium Resource Development, Sumitomo and Kansai Electric Power, Tokyo Electric Power and Idemitsu Kosan. 13 Uranium is not considered a peak fuel because uranium can be extracting out of the ocean and reused and recycle through special processing.14 International Energy Structure Oil seems to be the cheapest liquid fuel source and easiest method to promote development. The question is the infrastructure being built around a technology that is limited by production rates and finite access to resources to keep infrastructure operating. The need to define the oil infrastructure is vital because production outputs do affect the speed ability to create and maintain infrastructure, and promote trade since oil is related to transportation and transportation is related to trade. Japan began accelerated growth because of the introduction to oil.15 Trade is the key idea that is running the current ideology and practices of the international 12 Hisane MASAKI, Japan Joins the Race for Uranium Amid Global Expansion of Nuclear Power http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/1626 13 Ibíd. 14 http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2006/01/207-uranium-from-seawater-part-1.html 15 Chikara Higashi, Japanese Trade Policy Formulation Praeger 1983 p.2 8
- 9. trade regime. Development,growth and maintenance of the infrastructure and economy are based on energy sources that promote transportation, communications, and production. The table below shows the production rate of oil and rank of countries that produce the most oil. The table is broken up in rank, overall production rank in the world and how many barrels per day which is important because it takes some many barrels of oil to keep daily economic activity per day per state. Uranium output for the world Rank 2004 / (billion barrels, 2006) / production 2004 million barrels (mb)16 1. Saudi Arabia 267 billion bb 10.4 mb/d 2. Russia 60 9.3 mb/d 3. USA 21 8.7 mb/d Crude oil = <5.2 mb/d 4. Iran 132 4.1 mb/d 5. México 13 3.8 mb/d 6. China 8 3.6 mb/d 7. Norway 8 3.2 mb/d 8. Canada 179 3.1 mb/d 9. Venezuela 79 2.9 mb/d 10. United Arab Emirates 98 2.8 mb/d 11. Kuwait 104 16 Hisane MASAKI, Japan Joins the Race for Uranium Amid Global Expansion of Nuclear Power http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/1626 9
- 10. (Some sources say48 billion - The difference is 5% of world reserves) 2.5 mb/d 12. Nigeria 36 2.5 mb/d 13. United Kingdom 4 2.1 mb/d 14. Iraq 115 2.0 mb/d 15. Other FSU Kazakhstan + Azerbaijan 47 1.9 mb/d 16. Algeria 12 1.7 mb/d 17. Brazil 11 1.5 mb/d 18. Libya 39 1.5 mb/d 19. Indonesia 4 1.1 mb/d 20. Angola 6 0.9 mb/d17 Theories about oil reserves and production Most recognize theory about peak production in oil is called Hubert’s Peak. M King Hubert a geophysicist predicted that United State’s oil reserves would meet the half way point of exhaustions.18 Hubert’s prediction did come true during the decade of the 1970’s. Hubert is predictions forecasted that the world oil supply will meet its peak within five years.19 The fact the oil is depleting and is not infinite. The people promoting alternative energy sources are not just activist but European leaders. The fact oil promotes transportation and has a direct influence on 17 http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922041.html 18 http://www.princeton.edu/hubbert/the-peak.html 19 Ibid. 10
- 11. the liberal economicsystem because it was cheap and easy transport and use.20 This had led the way for think tanks to promote alternative sources of energy. 21 The cost is creating a new fuel infrastructure has been a barrier to entry for most new fuel sources. Oil is going to be the fuel source to promote development in the developing world because it is still considered the cheapest. Hubert’s predictions are based on basic ecological processes, or consumption is greater than natural oil creation. The oil cycle takes millions of years to go through its process while it takes months and years to extract and consume oil, thus it will deplete because the speed of consumption is greater than the speed of replenishment.22 The more oil reserves are discovered the more oil will be used to build new infrastructure and activity this explains the acceleration in economic activity and more rapid depletion of new reserves.23 I do not think scientist do not agree with Hubert’s theory of depletion of reserves, but disagree when the oil is going to meet its peak, because data to measure oil reserves could be unreliable and maybe there exists more reserves that we have not found.24 Uranium Uranium is sought after because it helps the creation of electricity and transportation. Transportation sector is limited to military uses. Electricity is associated with transportation, communication and production and uranium can be a chief an energy source that creates electricity. Total world consumption of Uranium is 66,000 tons of metal per year, 20 Erika McDonald Hubert's Peak http://www.cleanhouston.org/energy/features/huberts_peak.htm 21 The Hubbard peak for world oil http://www.hubbertpeak.com/summary.htm 22 Erika McDonald Hubert's Peak http://www.cleanhouston.org/energy/features/huberts_peak.htm 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid. 11
- 12. with approximately 20,000tons coming from stockpiles, recycling of spent fuel and weapons decommissioning, see below.25 Uranium is consider quite cheap still and efficient 7 grams of uranium can create as much energy as 3.5 barrels of oil and 17,000 cubic feet of gas or 1,780 pounds of coal.26 The cost of uranium per pound is estimated around 103 US$. 27 One pound is equal to 457 grams or 227.5 barrels of oil which can equate in this current market around 22,750 US$ or 115,700 pounds of coal which equate in a estimated price around 5300 US$. The cost in uranium is the building of the infrastructure and building the power plant and maintenance and disposal or used uranium to produce the electricity. The reason for possible price increase in uranium could be because the world production only produces 40,000 tons per year and the world demand is 65,000 tons per year. The estimate global reserve of uranium is around 4 million tons in discovered reserves. The need to create infrastructure to promote extraction and transportation is needed. The table below is to rank the top producers of uranium and how many tons are produce per year per country. The Uranium producers in 2006 2006 Annual Uranium Production (WNA 2007) 25 http://www.peakoil.org.au/peakuranium.htm 26 Hisane MASAKI, Japan Joins the Race for Uranium Amid Global Expansion of Nuclear Power http://www.japanfocus.org/products/details/1626 27 http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2007/03/uranium-price-to-peak-around-103-pound.html 12
- 13. 1. Canada 9862tons 2. Australia 7593 3. Kazakhstan 5279 4. Niger 3434 5. Russia 3400 (18) 6. Namibia 3077 7. Uzbekistan 2270 8. USA 1692 9. Ukraine 800 (18) 10. China, 750 (18) 11. South Africa 534 (3) 12. Czech Rep. 359 13. India 230 (18) 14. Brazil 190 15. Romania 90 (18) 16. Germany 50 (7) 17. Pakistan 45 (18) World Total 3965528 28 Top 20 Uranium Producers for 2006 13
- 14. Theories about Uraniumreserves and depletion The question is does Uranium have a peak like oil? According to Japanese Atomic Research Institution had perfected a method to extract uranium from sea water.29 The claim is that there is potential reserve of 4.5 billion tons of uranium in the oceans of the world. The process to capture uranium take approximately 240 days, but the limited of extraction is about how many devices are employed during a cycle.30 The next possible solution is creating artificial uranium through breeder reactors. The breeder reactor takes the output of the fissile material during the nuclear process and then creates an output that can be use a future fissile material. It is like a recycling process.31 There are many processes to the reprocessing of uranium it changes the molecular state of uranium but through another process fuel can be made. It is a process that promotes a recycled product that can be reused. These process do not promote an infinite supply of energy resource but allows does promote a potential cornucopia of electrical energy through electricity. Iran and Japan’s historical relationship Iran and Japan has been working together in the petrochemical industry. 32 Petrochemicals are the use of oil in the fabrication of goods such as plastics and other chemical products.33 It was 1979 Japan and Iran was working out a joint own company to refine oil into petrochemicals in 29 URANIUM FROM SEAWATER (PART 1) http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2006/01/207-uranium- from-seawater-part-1.html Saturday, January 07, 2006 207 30 Ibíd. 31 http://www.3rd1000.com/nuclear/nuke101g.htm 32 Michael M Yoshitu Iran and Afghanistan in Japanese Perspective Asian Survey Vol.21 No.5 May 1981 pp.501- 514 University of California Press p.501-502 33 Virtual Chembook http://www.elmhurst.edu/~chm/vchembook/325petrochem.html 14
- 15. Iran. This projectwas called the Iran Japanese petrochemical company. The Japanese invested close to 2 billion dollars of Japanese capital into the venture. The background to the interaction with Iran; the oil suppliers to Japan began to reduce shipments of oil by 1 million barrels a day which is significant reduction to Japanese energy demands in context in the era.34 This promoted the Japanese to look for alternative partnerships to access oil reserves to meet resource consumption needs. This behavior corresponds with the concept of Official Development Assistance that Japanese promote development of need resources in less develop countries which the Japanese government have been pursuing. The crux to this situation is that the Iranian had ties with Soviet Union, because Iran was going through a revolution. The other aspect is the United States nationals were taken hostage by the revolutionary government of Iran, which the Shia movement had strong communist undertones in their ideology. The advancement of Soviet troops in the neighboring Afghanistan in Kabul created tensions for the Japanese.35 The problem was Japan had almost finished 85% of the project, when the Secretary of the State Cyrus Vance, criticized the Japanese being insensitive to the United States.36 This was done in a foreign capital and in public to draw international pressure. The United States wanted to put sanctions against Iran for transgressions in the month of December in 1979 veto by the Soviet Union in January 1980. This was the same time the Japanese firms and Iran were discussing oil contracts. The Japanese did not to give up 34 Michael M Yoshitu Iran and Afghanistan in Japanese Perspective Asian Survey Vol.21 No.5 May 1981 pp.501- 514 University of California Press p. 511 35 Ibid. p.512 36 Ibid. p513 15
- 16. investment, future oilresource and they had thousand national living in Iran that could be subjected to reprisals.37 How the situation was resolve Japan began to receive the needed shipments of oil from Kuwait, Qatar and Mexico. The Japanese refused to purchase Iranian oil above market price, and had fears that Iran would fall under Soviet influence, or be annexed. This falls under certain past foreign policy objects of Japan to support America foreign policy objectives, even though it goes against economic needs of Japan. When the Soviet influence became apparent in the region, then it became a security issue, and a cold war issue about containing Soviet influence and not promoting states that lean towards Soviet alignment. The main argument of the Japanese was because of the Iranian price for the oil was too high and the Japanese had reserves to sustain and other options. The current Japanese Policy goal on the use of oil is to reduce the use of oil by 80% by the year 2030. 38 This is to reduce the current uses of oil by 80%. This can be look at two ways to reduce overall consumption of oil to 9.6% of the all of consumption or reduce the current 5.4 million barrels of oil per day to approximately to 1.29 million barrels a day. This would require a shift of energy sources and conservation on Japans part. The current situation of Japan now in 2008 what is Japan to do with the current situation with rising prices in oil and competition for oil to develop new infrastructures and economies. In the past Japan went to undeveloped sources an offered financial assistance to acquire goods. 37 Ibid. p.511 38 Japanese Atomic Energy www.jaea.go.jp/04/turuga/tief5/images/TIEF5-S1_4E.pd slide 5 16
- 17. The current situationI am looking at in Japanese energy foreign policy is about Iran and Azedegan oil field. This could be considered an echo from the past when Japan and Iran was working on a joint petrochemical plant. This oil field is claim to the second largest know reserve in the world. The problem is that Iran is again the focus of international controversy with its non-compliance with the International Atomic Energy Association and the accusations of promoting terrorism in Iraq, or promoting war. Currently Japan receives 14% of its oil from Iran.39 The problem with this is Japan is funding Iran giving them the ability purchase goods from the international market, which the goal is quarantine Iran, so any thing that can help development of a nuclear fuel cycle and to fund military operations. The second problem is the Japanese funds for oil had been associated with an exchange triangle or commodity chain. The exchange triangle is Japan buys oil from Middle East oil suppliers, the oil suppliers invested in Europe and America and then America and Europe buy manufacture goods from Japan and Japan buys oil from the middle, and the cycle repeats.40 The problem Iran does not promote this relationship because they are not integrated trade partners and not members of the World Trade Organization. Plus Europe and America does not want Iranian nationals investing in America and European markets thus creating a greater influence in their economies and the world. The goal is to stop Iranian soft and hard power because they are deemed a threat to international tranquility because they do not follow international norms. 39 Calev BenDavid Why Iranian oil is the fuel propelling Olmert's visit to Japan February 25, 2008, Monday 40 J Kaoru Sugihara and Ja Allan, Japan in the Contemporary Middle East, Routledge 1993 chapter 1 17
- 18. Japan was seekingto develop the Azedegan oil field in Iran it had a 90% percent claim through a development company name INPEX.41 As seen in 1979 Japan withdrew from the project because of international pressure, such as they did with Azedegan project cited “The project has been handled fully by Iranian experts as the Japanese company, INPEX42 , under US pressure, declined to invest in the huge project.” 43 The question what is the Japanese motivation connected with its long term goals and or Giaiatsu pressure stemming from possible security issues in the international system. As stated in Japanese foreign policy is that Japan is moving away from oil as a source of energy and investing in a large reserve does not meet long term goals. Plus Japanese foreign policy has been known to be flexible. The old cold war concept of containment does come into play here, as Japanese did in the past with communist nations did not promote development through foreign aid and investment, because the notion of economic power can equate into military power. -The question that is raised is all economic issues are becoming military potential issue?- Does the Japanese decision not develop the second largest oil reserve in the world to have 90% claim was the most rationalist decision for the Japanese to make in a pure market perspective or own foreign policy goals. As stated in Japanese energy policy is that they will maintain a good reliable partner with the United States, which this could be interpreted as economic and security partner. Through a realist perception to maintain a relative advantage over 41 BC Monitoring Middle East – Political Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring March 6, 2008 42 INPEX homepage states mission statements http://www.inpex.co.jp/english/ 43 BC Monitoring Middle East – Political Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring March 6, 2008 18
- 19. Iran in economicsand limit the ability for Iran to gain soft and hard power does promote security but does interfere with other pressuring issues of human rights of citizens. From a realist perception if Japan did go through with the Azedejan Project it would secure oil reserves and affect the relative economic influence of Europe and the United States, plus reduce dependency on current trade partners. Japanese policy has known to be long termed and has worked around domestic issues to conform to international alliances objectives. The decision could be interpreted to conform to Japanese stated foreign policy objectives. This also conforms to the Japanese belief about using economics over military in interstate relations. If the stated long term goal of Japan is to move away from oil to uranium then the Japanese is complying with own stated goals. To support assumptions about Japanese switching from oil to uranium as stated in documents that define Japanese energy foreign policy. “Japan will send a big delegation of around 100 government officials and business people to Kazakhstan on April 29-30 in a bid to secure uranium supply amid an intensifying global race for the key nuclear fuel.”44 … “Japanese firms, Kansai Electric Power Co. and trading house Sumitomo Corp. are planning to start uranium test production in Kazakhstan within this year.”45 This document is about a year before the Azedegan decision was made, this was occurring in April 10, 2007 and the Azedegan decision was made in March 10 2008. The Japanese foreign policy statement was created in June of 2006. This does support a notion that Japan is following a pattern set done in a goal; the exploration of uranium and expand its use and begin to decrease the use of oil. The problem is terrorism influencing the supply of oil in which increase demand, which is followed by an 44 BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific – Political Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitor April 10, 2007 Tuesday 45 Ibid. 19
- 20. increase of pricebecause of scarcity. 46 This could be a motivation of Japan in the short term to develop oil reserves that have not been tapped into. Like in the 1980’s oil shortage and Iran became off limits because of security issues, Japan had reserves and began to seek other supplies. In this situation Japan began to look at Malaysia and Indonesia to meet need short term oil needs.47 Conclusion The question what is the pattern of Japanese behavior, I would argue that the Japanese are proactive with their stated goals. As seen in the past, Japan is quick to give Official Development Assistance to countries with undeveloped energy reserves, and is quick to joint ventures to develop reserves. When security issues come up and it is needed for Japan to enforce international mandates, they do act in a reactionary manner, but always keep their long term objective in mind. Could Japan be considered a reactive state, I would argue they are not because they seek to overcome obstacles before they arise, they do not seem to be consumed by the moment. Can their foreign policy be considered Aikido, or Gaiatsu? The Japanese foreign policy behavior does not change the world but does influence the world by promoting development and trade, is sculpted by external actors I would argue no, but it is influence by the constitutive rules of the structure, the limitation of resources of Japan, and the scarcity level of the world resources. The realist perception of Japanese behavior could be that they do not develop states that are not promoting the same civilization goal as them, this would be to promote relative power and limit the country’s ability to create a military and promote reach but I think this is not a stated goal but a result of economic policy but Japan does not want to hinder all states but the 46 Russell Hotten The Daily Telegraph (LONDON) April 22, 2008 Tuesday OIL World warns Opec as prices rocket 47 Malaysian oil plan gets partners http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6697969.stm 20
- 21. ones that couldbe perceived as hostile. The Japanese foreign policy appears to be proactive in nature but has the flexibility to overcome obstacles as they appear, but stays on the track to meet long terms goals. Book Review Japan’s Reluctant Realism by Michael Green The book was easy to read it was laid out to promote an understanding for each subject covered. The major themes covered in the book are Identity, Domestic institutions and foreign policy, relations with China, Korea, Russia Southeast Asia, and Finance. The book was written in 2001. 21
- 22. The overarching themesin the book were United States influence on the trajectory on Japanese foreign policy, that economic is the primary subject, and Japanese foreign policy has no new direction. There was an interesting discussion about internationalizing the Yen and lessons from the Asian crisis, which were that there needs to be more monitoring of movement of capital, technical assistance to strengthen financial sectors in countries that need strengthening and IMF resources to deal with future crisis. The way to make this work is through frameworks in the international system, thus either International government organizations to promote proper financial flows. This follow along with Japanese belief of development of institutions and helping the development happen through expertise consulting. This could be attributed to Japanese idealism according to the author. The book was full of case studies supporting notions about Japanese foreign policy behavior. Interview I had the chance to speak with Professor Tsygankov about Russian and Japanese relations and some parts of Central Asia. The main points of the interview were about the territory dispute and how this hindered and created tensions between Russia and Japanese. The Sakhalin Island dispute and upcoming new projects, that included the joint building of nuclear facilities and the possible far east pipeline that would be close to Japanese homeland. 22
- 23. He gave mea couple of policy papers about Japanese foreign policy from think tanks that mostly explain about primordial myths, and Waltz assumption about mutual assured destruction. The interview was informative, but most of information I could not really use for the paper but did give more insights about Japanese trade relations and certain projects. It did support the notion that Japan works hard in developing needed relations to promote development of energy reserves in other countries. The interview was about fifteen minutes. Bibliography Books 1. J Kaoru Sugihara and Ja Allan, Japan in the Contemporary Middle East, Routledge 1993 2. Glenn D Hoo Harukyo Hasegawa, Japanese Response to Globalization Palgave 2006 3. Chikara Higashi, Japanese Trade Policy Formulation Praeger 1983 4. Jun Morikawa, Japan and Africa African World Press Theron NJ 1997 5. Michael Green, Japan’s Reluctant Realism Palgrave 2001 23
- 24. 6. Reinhard Drifte,Japan’s Foreign Policy for the 21st Century from Economic Superpower to What Power? St. Anthony’s Series 1998 7. Thomas Berger, Japan in International Politics Lynne Rienner Publishers 8. Nakao, The Political Economy of Japan Money University of Tokyo Press 1995 Websites 1 Mitsubishi Motors www. _motors_delivers_ele.html 2 CIA Fact Book https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ja.html 3. International Energy Association Key World energy Statistics2007 4. Japanese Atomic Energy www.jaea.go.jp/04/turuga/tief5/images/TIEF5-S1_4E.pd 5. Virtual Chembook http://www.elmhurst.edu/~chm/vchembook/325petrochem.html 6. Japanese Nuclear Energy Policy in 2007 Shunsuke KONDO, ChairmanJapan Atomic Energy Commission Government and industries to follow 7. INPEX homepage states mission statements http://www.inpex.co.jp/english/ 8. Malaysian oil plan gets partners http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6697969.stm Journals Articles 1.Iran and Russia in 'Strategic Alliance' Author(s): Adam Tarock Source: Third World Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 2, (Jun., 1997), pp. 207-223 Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3993220 2.Three Years on a Path to Nowhere: The Hashimoto Initiative in Russian-Japanese Relations Author(s): Alexei V. Zagorsky Source: Pacific Affairs, Vol. 74, No. 1, (Spring, 2001), pp. 75-93 Published by: Pacific Affairs, University of British Columbia 3.Japanese Foreign Policy: No Longer Reactive? David Potter and Sudo Sueo Nanzan University 24
- 25. 4. Michael MYoshitu Iran and Afghanistan in Japanese Perspective Asian Survey Vol.21 No.5 May 1981 pp.501-514 University of California Press 5. Mira Wilkins Japanese Multinationals in the United States: Continuity and Change, 1879-1990 The Business History Review, Vol. 64, No. 4, (Winter, 1990), pp. 585-629 News Articles 1. The Jerusalem Post February 25, 2008, Monday Why Iranian oil is the fuel propelling Olmert's visit to Japan Calev BenDavid 2. Uzbek agency seeks to draw Japanese firm in uranium prospecting BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific – Political Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring April 30, 2007 Monday 3. Russell Hotten The Daily Telegraph (LONDON) April 22, 2008 Tuesday OIL World warns Opec as prices rocket 4. Kazakhstan uranium deal, BBC Monitoring Asia Pacific – Political Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitor April 10, 2007 Tuesday 5. Azedegan Iranian oil field BC Monitoring Middle East – Political Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring March 6, 2008 6. http://peakoildebunked.blogspot.com/2006/01/207-uranium-from-seawater-part-1.html 7. Petroleum Economist November 1, 2006 Competition heats up for uranium; Central Asia Pg. 26(1) Vol. 73 No. 11 ISSN: 0306-395X 25