Challenges for Japanese Diplomacy After the End of the Cold War

Abstract

Introduction Two prominent and interrelated traits of Japanese foreign during COLD WAR were close relations with Western democracies and a minimalist approach. did not need to take bold initiatives on international stage when it relied on West. Thus, willingly went along with rules set by other countries because it wanted to concentrate on its own economic development and refrained from taking on extra tasks. However, political changes in 1990s gave an impetus to transform its old-fashioned diplomatic style into a more independent and progressive way to conduct foreign policy. In 1991, vice-minister in Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) and a leading proponent of diplomatic activism, Takakazu Kuriyama, asserted that passive diplomacy, that took a given international order for granted, was no longer relevant. As he put it, Japan must take an active role in reconstruction of world order. (1) Kuriyama called for a sharing of responsibilities for peace and prosperity among United States, Western Europe, and in an arrangement that he termed global partnership. More importantly, Kuriyama defined Asia-Pacific region as the main theatre of Japan's foreign policy in post-Gold War period, and global partnership meant a leadership role for in East Asia. (2) An important reason why is set to play an active role in East Asia is that sees itself as part of Asia and Japanese consider themselves Asian. As Ishizuka put it: Despite strong political and economic ties with West, Japanese people are inclined to identify themselves with Asia. This is only natural. (3) A top officer in MOFA, Toru Bessho, has pointed out that for a long time refrained from taking initiatives in Asia. However, in 1990s, search for an identity and diplomatic role prodded to reassess its relations with rest of Asia. As a result, Bessho claims that in future, may be more willing to come up with new initiatives for region. (4) In a similar vein, Lincoln has argued that in 1990s, Japanese Government began to consider possibility of assuming a leadership role in Asia. He has noted: end of Cold War opened way for to pursue an independent foreign (using foreign aid as a key element) focused primarily on Asia. If intends to play a more significant role in Asia, it is important for to find a balance in its diplomatic relations with Western and countries. On one hand, Western democracies abide by universal such as human rights, democracy, freedom, and market economy, and consider those as ideals to be shared by every country. As Jack Donnelly has argued, in new international society, all members must share common values, and human rights emerge as a standard of civilisation. (6) On other hand, some leaders eschew universal and insist that there exists another set of values -- Asian values. These leaders claim that Asia has its own history, culture, and traditions, and therefore Western concepts of human rights and democracy cannot be applied to Asia. The Asian argument could become a contentious issue of Japanese diplomacy. This is partly because Japanese Government has traditionally shown solidarity with West and often criticized other countries' policies. countries, in their turn, might begin to consider a betrayer of interests. Thus, Japanese Government once came under attack from other countries for being too Western in its approach when at Regional Conference on Human Rights in Bangkok in 1993 insisted on need to promote human rights. (7) governments suggested that issue should be considered in context of a dynamic and evolving process of international norm-setting, bearing in mind significance of national and regional particularities, and various historical, cultural, and religious backgrounds. …