Following WWII, a defeated Japan was ordered to dismantle the military machine that wreaked havoc throughout the Pacific. Internally, the Japanese people were ashamed and agreed to abandon any offensive use of military weapons. This has evolved over time to what is known as their comprehensive security and omni-directional foreign policy. Both of these policies take a pacifist approach to their dealings with nation states. Comprehensive Security in summary is a way of protecting their interests by opening specific doors to specific countries based on their needs. Omni-directional policy looks to gain global power economically and ensuring their interests are protected by maintaining a policy of neutrality.
I have one problem with this utopian view of Japan. Their rise to economic power has been under the very large umbrella of United States protection. They have the luxury of remaining pacifist and neutral - there is a big brother who will protect them on their dollar.
I know my post comes across with a negative light; however, allow me this comparison:
As a middle income wage earner, I am more than able to afford my simple car, my small 3-bedroom home and support my two children. My car payment, mortgage and expenses are manageable; however, the black hole for my wallet is the money I dump into the protection of these things -- insurance. Car insurance, home insurance, life insurance, medical insurance -- all monies paid out to protect the "if". If I live my entire life never getting in an accident, watching my home burn down or getting deathly ill, I have easily spent 5-6000 dollars a year for something I never use. How much better would my finances be if I could invest all that money into my budget while my neighbor were to pay those things for me. I don't think I will knock on his door with that request anytime soon.
Japan spends less than 1% of their GDP on their defense budget because they don't have to. It must be comforting to lean on the United States for their offensive fire power who also has to deflect international scrutiny everytime they act on the behalf of another. Comprehensive Security and Omni-Directional Foreign Policy are nice terms and it is fantastic that Japan has the freedom to pursue these at the expense of the United States.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Your post is right on. It reminds me somewhat about NATO protecting Germany and Italy in the Cold War. We are definitely the insurance policy for the Japanese, allowing them to pursue wallet diplomacy in the region and allocate resources elsewhere that would have been spent on defense and diplomatic matters. I’m not sure how much longer that will last, though. If the recent Japanese PM visit to the White House (President Obama’s chose Japan as his first state reception) is any indicator, the relationship will be strong during his administration and Asia will be at the top, or near the top, of the U.S. policy agenda.
ReplyDeleteI believe the U.S.-Japan relationship is built on three things. First, there is a genuine loyalty towards the U.S. in the way it handled post-war Japan (after all, it would have been much worse under the Chinese of Russians). Second, Japan has been a faithful friend, building car factories in the U.S. and even helping out a bit with the 2003 Iraq invasion when most of the world thought it was a rotten idea. Third, no one wants to see Japan even slip back into armed nationalism and get into a row with China or North Korea. So, to maintain the peace, we play bad cop and they get to play humanitarian, devil-turned-angel Of course, we would hope we would never, as George Washington warned us, place the interests of another state above our own (state suicide), so there must be something in it for us to be Japan’s insurance policy. At least our deductibles on Japan are much lower than our other, less productive policies in the Middle East (where we pay deductibles in the billions each year). It’s nice of us, isn’t it? : )