An Analysis of Japan’s Foreign Policy Approach in the Middle East: The War on Gaza’s Case
Following the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation (as dubbed by Hamas’ Al-Qassam Brigade) that marked the start of the ongoing war (now for over 8 months), the UN declared Gaza to be an “epic humanitarian catastrophe”. Furthermore, following the latest bombing of a refugee camp in Rafah that killed 45 civilians, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres affirmed that “There is no safe place in Gaza” . The worsening situation in the region attracted worldwide popular and official attention. The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict has spurred various reactions, and as a result, turned into a conflict that can draw states into a regional war, if not dealt with adequately, like the case of the Iranian Consulate bombing by Israel in Syria. One can understand that a complex situation involving many regional and international actors would invoke varying stances. With the Israeli government distancing itself from the international community by decisively invading Rafah, the small piece of land that hosts large numbers of refugees from all around Gaza, after fleeing from bombardments in other parts of the city, it is important to take a clear stance. Yet foreign policy might involve many social, economic, and historical factors for a country with a leading economy like Japan.
This article will discuss the significant role of Japan in the Middle East using aid and reconstruction; the strong US-Japan alliance on the government level and its implication on Japanese society; and as the situation escalates, the Japanese government’s approach to the internal discontent with the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Such aspects will be analyzed in light of Japan’s relations and Japan’s economic relations with the world, in addition to how these relations steer Japan’s policies toward the war on Gaza.
Japan: The Middle East’s (and the World’s) Aid Partner
Scrolling through the feed for the latest local and international news on social media, another picture that includes the Japanese Ambassador to Jordan may draw attention; his face is known to many now. Mr. Jiro Okuyama was hosted at the Madaba City Municipality building (Madaba, a city with several historical sites) . This time, the mayor, Mr. Aref AlRawajeeh emphasized the Japanese government’s efforts to support the nation’s development around the world and thanked His Excellency Okuyama for donating funds to Madaba’s Productive Kitchen, an institute that provides jobs for hundreds of women within the municipality.
Okuyama is seen in the northern city of Irbid too, this time at a cultural event to introduce Japan to locals. Many eager students joined, looking forward to learning about new cultures that can open the way to new opportunities. A group of students from the university’s journalism department interviewed attachés and ambassadors at the event. When asked a question on the ways he thought collaboration could be enhanced and maintained with Jordan, Mr. Jiro answered by mentioning the government-funded comprehensive scholarships to Jordanian students, and projects that provided financial support to local facilities to develop their work. Japan’s foreign policy was mainly economic. Another example that stresses Japan’s policy towards the Middle East and developing world is Malaysia, where Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim visited his counterpart in Tokyo on May 23, 2024, for bilateral meetings to meet with industrial companies, and to discuss the possibility of delivering aid to Gazans from Malaysia . Such meetings always come hand in hand with a bundle of economic and developmental aid agreements. In other words, Japan’s policy toward the Middle East and the developing world is internally connected with aid and financial support.
This pattern of behaviour is well studied under “Yoshida Doctrine” literature. The so-called “Yoshida “Doctrine”—although not publicly declared by government officials—emerged with the Japanese Prime Minister Yoshida Shigeru in the 1950s and is claimed to have been sustained well after him by his successors and to have steered Japan’s foreign policy strategy for around 40 years due to its focus on economic development .
“These pillars are related not concurrently but causally. The US-Japan alliance initially leads to minimal armaments by Japan, which promotes economic recovery and realizes economic growth. In addition, (…) the following may be included as the remarkable features of the Yoshida Doctrine: expansion into overseas markets, particularly the Asian market, and avoidance of involvement in international political disputes” . However, this “doctrine” prompted many critics on when it started, questioning whether it was based on Yoshida’s own beliefs and thoughts, and whether the policy actually achieved less rearmament. This “doctrine” does not seem to explain the policy approach of Japan, especially today, when conservative and popular leaders have taken control over the government, like the former Shinzo Abe and the current Prime Minister Kishida Fumio. This makes it necessary to look briefly at the Japanese society and its dynamics.
However, Japan stated a four-point policy toward the ongoing conflict that meant to set itself different than the other G7 states. These policies include 1) the condemnation of Hamas and support for Palestinians; 2) avoiding mentioning Israel’s right to self-defense; 3) advocating for a cease-fire; 4) action-based support for a sustainable cease-fire through aid assistance .
Japan as a Strong Ally of the United States: The Society’s Reaction
- GEOGRAPHY AND WORLD WAR
The United States plays a pivotal role in modern Japan’s politics and how it interacts with the rest of the world. Since the end of World War II (WWII), Japan has sought to harness and maintain a positive image after the country’s militaristic campaign in the war, or the so-called colonial side of Japan, to claim a position within the international community. This may be due to the geostrategic vitality of opening up to the world for a country located away from trade centers but is more realistically due to the expanding economy and the liberalization of Japanese markets following the redrafting of Japan’s constitution by the United States.
With the defeat of Japan in WWII, the constitution was rewritten by American civil officials working with the Allied occupation of Japan, so they prepared for a new and pacifist Japan. On deciding what would be next, four approaches in foreign policy emerged: “1) Heiwashugi: complete denial of realism and acceptance of international responsibility; 2) revisionism in its fullest form tied to statism—kokkashugi; 3) revisionism focused on ethnic nationalism—minzokushugi; and 4) internationalism based on realism—kokusaishugi” .
2) REMILITARIZATION
The Yoshida Doctrine can be a simple explanation of Japanese diplomacy, but it neglects one essential factor:, the moralities of the society. The public opinion and the moral stance of Japanese society are significant in many aspects. Most important are the wide opposition to Japanese military expansion outside of Japan and the genuine interest in oil from the Middle East. One aspect that matters to the Japanese society is the relations with the U.S.
Since the Meiji period (1868-1912), both the society and the political elite in Japan were strictly divided into roughly two camps: one was opposing the Meiji Restorations that integrated Japan with the Western World culturally and economically and the other one that applauded it. Such opposition or agreement to opening up or connecting with the “Western” part of the world has always been a topic of discussion and controversy in Japan even before Meiji (see Perry Expedition), and it is part of the Japanese identity. But this article examines the impact of such conversations on the Japanese society today. Topics like remilitarization, U.S. bases in Japan, and the U.S. alliance with Japan in countering what the state considers as threats, etc. are ones that may affect how Japanese citizens vote according to (the Japanese Communist Party got around 15% of the votes in parliament in the 1970s and 1980 especially due to the popular protests against the renewal of the well-known U.S.-Japan Security Agreement). The Japanese Red Army, a leftist militant group, conducted the first attack by Japanese nationals on Israeli targets in 1972, trained by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Despite being communist, it differs from mainstream Japanese leftist movements but shares a call for Japan’s genuine independence from American influence. Japan’s dependence on U.S. military support is considered one issue that both the right and left agreed to fight against, especially in the years of the Cold War .
On the contrary, Japan imports over 90% of its oil needs from the Middle East. The government was very quick in its diplomatic action in the oil crisis of the 1970s and was keen to maintain stability at the local level and to minimize the heavy impact of the oil shock. Every conflict in the Middle East, in the end, due to the nature of the relations, requires an immediate de-escalating response from Japan. As much as it may seem risky for Japan to oppose the government and people of the Middle East , the U.S. military support for Japan is a necessity for its existence near hostile neighbours.
Between a Rock and a Hard Place : U.S. Support and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Japan wanted to keep its place in the international community given the fact that it was among the top three economies in the world until it recently dropped to number four. This was not purely due to goodwill, as it was also confronted by growing pressure from the United Nations and other world organizations to assume more security responsibility. This pressure increased at the same time when Japan was accused by political scientists of free-riding U.S. security services in exchange for the financial support it is providing to the world. A growing conservative wing in the Japanese Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) is reaching a conviction of Japan’s need to rely on itself to face regional threats, and that the U.S. cannot be reliable. Decision makers in Japan changed approach following the weak responses of the Obama administration and the Trump administration’s intention to Make America Great Again as a new form of isolationism in the United States , and each of these were turning points for Japan’s foreign policy, and thus reflected on domestic affairs. The current LDP) government under Fumio Kishida maintained the main course of action of previous leaders as per international relations . For these reasons, Japan has consistently expressed its worry over escalations in the Taiwan Strait.
As for the Middle East, the United States has consistently made clear its position regarding the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, strongly condemning Hamas, and tirelessly supporting Israel’’s right to self-defense. Japan, the only G7 member state took the opportunity to show once again its strategic thinking and did not join the statement of the summit that reiterated the Israeli right for self-defense . While the U.S. policy remains nearly unchanged since October 7, 2023, Japan did not ride the American wave, calculating the risk of such unwavering support for a military offensive that killed many civilians.
The Israeli-Palestinian issue is too complicated, and “geographically far away” from Japan. However, any move that can complicate Japan’s role in its foreign policy can have unpredictable results. Finding a balance between the oil-rich Arab countries and Japan and responding to climbing militarization in its neighborhood is a challenge. And the increasing opposition to the conservative factions, economic recession, and other domestic issues are making it even more difficult to balance the foreign and the domestic policy. Carefully navigating gray zones is a priority for Japan. On the one hand, Japan condemned Hamas’ attacks on Israel and urged them to distinguish between Palestinians and Hamas militants, but on the other, Japan has managed to separate itself from other G7 members on this issue. However, it is too early to say it has passed the test Hamas continues to give to it after the attacks of the 7th of October.
As observed, remilitarization policies in Japan are influenced by external and internal pressure. Politicians are drawing attention to the nearby threat from countries like China to suppress the outrage created by the sensitive U.S.-Japan relations. The Iraq War witnessed the biggest Japanese military deployment since the Second World War, made under Junichiro Koizumi in 2004. The polls show that more than half of the Japanese population was against this deployment . Therefore, the internal impact on the Japanese foreign policy should not be neglected, as the public opinion from Japan (and the world, for that matter) is increasingly growing unsatisfied with the war. Such a poll made by Save the Children Japan shows that the (56%) majority of the 12,.000 respondents say no matter what the reason, it is unacceptable to involve civilians in the conflict . However, Japan is changing now with the threat from China and North Korea in the west, and the Russian provocations in the north over the Kuril Islands after the invasion of Ukraine.
Conclusion
Japan has been consistently pursuing a balance between economy and security. An important issue to look at while trying to understand Japanese foreign policy is the neighboring countries’ attitude. Threats from neighbors have pushed the Island Nation into great leaps in what was considered unchangeable in the constitution since the Second World War. Japan is trying to keep a nuanced approach in the Middle East to not draw possible hostility from their people or governments. To see if this is working well or not is a matter of time.
[1]Anadolu Agency. “6 Western Nations Back Israel’s Right to Self-Defense in Joint Statement.” Anadolu Agency. Accessed February 24, 2024. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/6-western-nations-back-israels-right-to-self-defense-in-joint-statement/3029726.
2 NST “Japan Ready to Work with Malaysia to Help Palestinians, Says PM.” NST. May 2024. https://www.nst.com.my/news/nation/2024/05/1054341/japan-ready-work-malaysia-help-palestinians-says-pm.
3 Heginbotham, Eric, and Richard Samuels. 1998. “Mercantile Realism and Japanese Foreign Policy.” International Security 22: 170–202. doi:10.2307/2539245.
Green, Michael. 2003. Japan’s Reluctant Realism: Foreign Policy Changes in an Era of Uncertain Power. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
4 Hoshiro, H. 2022. “Deconstructing the ‘Yoshida Doctrine.’” Japanese Journal of Political Science 23 (2): 105-128. doi:10.1017/S1468109922000019.
5 Japan Times. November 8, 2023. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/commentary/2023/11/08/japan/japan-israel-hamas-war/
6 Rozman, Gilbert. 2015. “Realism vs. Revisionism in Abe’s Foreign Policy in 2014.” The Asan Forum 3 (1).
7Kapur, Nick. Japan at the Crossroads: Conflict and Compromise after Anpo, 12-13.
8Asahi Shimbun. “Kishida Pushes for Revisions in Message Sent on Constitution Day.” The Asahi Shimbun: Breaking News, Japan News and Analysis. Accessed March 6, 2024. Quoting the prime minister’s message: “A stance for revising parts of the Constitution that are out of step with the times is required.”
9Anadolu Agency. “6 Western Nations Back Israel’s Right to Self-Defense in Joint Statement.” Anadolu Agency. Accessed February 24, 2024. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/6-western-nations-back-israels-right-to-self-defense-in-joint-statement/3029726.
10 NBC News. Accessed June 23, 2024. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6579906.
11 イスラエル・パレスチナ（ガザ地区）の紛争に関する1万2千人意識調査 国際NGOセーブ・ザ・チルドレン. 2023. プレスリリース・ニュースリリース配信シェアNo.1｜PR TIMES. November 29, 2023.
PS: The views and opinions expressed in the article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of PSI.