Shigeru Ishiba and Japan's Evolving Role in the American Empire

https://reihotakeuchi.substack.com/p/the-new-japanese-prime-ministers

Ishiba who assumed the office of prime minister in October is important because he represents new thinking in terms of Japan's role in the Asia-Pacific and its relationship with the United States. A member of the Far-Right Nippon Kaigi faction (which has a significant presence in the ruling LDP), he seems to represent two tendencies - one, to strengthen Japan's relationship with Washington and build a NATO-type alliance in the Pacific, and two, resentment of US domination and a wish for Japan to re-establish its autonomy and take its place among the great powers.

Some clearly view the first view as a means to the second. And others would say Japan is already in the top-tier of nations - a member of the G7 no less.

And yet, for Japanese nationalists the inability for Japan to possess and project its own military interests means that it is at best a client state of the US Empire and they resent this. Some like the late Shinzo Abe advocated for not only militarisation but significant revisionism of Japan's history during World War II.

The US has encouraged Japanese nationalism to a point. Some in Washington clearly want a rich nation like Japan to develop its military - as long as it serves and is subservient to US interests. And yet this unsettles many people in the Korean peninsula - both North and South as the country was under Japanese domination for decades prior to 1945. And Korea's relationship with Japan played no small part in the lead up to the Korean War and its aftermath. The American-established regime in the south (the ROK) was filled with former Japanese collaborators while the North (DPRK) has always been able to take the moral high ground as Kim Il-Sung fought the Japanese as well as the former cronies installed by the Americans.

Japanese militarism upsets Korea and some in the South resent being in an alliance with Tokyo - even though they know the US is calling all the shots. Also, some in Korea do not want to provoke a war with the DPRK and believe such alliances will lead not only to war with Pyongyang but with Beijing.

South Korea's Yoon has pushed for militancy and closer ties with both Washington and Tokyo. To no one's surprise he has faced opposition - which he labels communist. His recklessness has brought him to the brink of political ruin.

Ishiba wants to boost Japan's profile and bring about more equity between Tokyo and Washington - a price the US may be willing to pay to a point. However Washington is publicly reticent to embrace a NATO-type arrangement - presumably one that would combine the Quad and AUKUS, possibly bringing other nations on board as well. Biden was uneasy regarding this plan - perhaps out of fears that it would accelerate war with China. Others would argue the US power-base in Asia operates differently than in Europe and that a NATO-type umbrella would weaken US power and that Washington can wield its strength more efficiently in bi-lateral and so-called mini-lateral forms of alliance. In each case the US dominates while a NATO-type arrangement would grant these nations power in their own right and a means to defend themselves without the need for American dominance of their militaries and the presence of American troops. America still has plenty of troops in Europe and yet some nations like France have successfully resisted American domination and forged an independent foreign policy.

Analysts believe there is little hope for such an Asian NATO-type arrangement with Trump in the White House given his well-established dislike of multi-lateral alliances and agreements.
There are other obstacles specifically for Japan as such an alliance would involve a significant amendment to their constitution - allowing Tokyo to fully re-arm. At present their military is curtailed and this (in part) justifies the massive US military presence - something Washington does not want to jeopardize. Also an Asian NATO would (potentially) mean the stationing of US nuclear weapons in Japan - a policy officially ended by the US in the early 1970's. And there are political actors in both the US and Japan that fear the re-opening of these questions - and the risk of social upheaval.

As a recent VOA article suggests, there are fears in both South Korea and Japan that Washington may bypass them and cut some kind of deal with North Korea or China. Some analysts wonder if Trump will again attempt to 'flip' North Korea - a move which would thrill some, but generate great anxiety in Seoul and Tokyo.

Though some view Ishiba's proposals as counter-productive or potentially weakening US standing, there are some Right-wing think-tanks like the Hudson Institute that seem willing to give him a platform. It should be noted that Ishiba is a professing Christian - whatever that means in the 21st century. But for some actors within the American Right, any profession that manifests Right-wing political tendencies is reckoned orthodox and if he's willing to pledge his nation in the inevitable war with China (as they see it) then they will support him. For some of these thinkers, the war with Beijing is not only inescapable but necessary to secure American dominance and unipolarity for what remains of the 21st century.