Will "Change" Come to Japan-U.S. Relations?
FUKUHARA Koichi / Journalist
February 2, 2009
President Barack Obama has taken office, carrying the American people's expectations for "change" squarely on his shoulders. His predecessor President George Bush sought unilateralism in the war against terrorism, leaving the country in a quagmire, while a financial crisis of U.S. origin has thrown the world into recession, causing loss of prestige for America. In last year's presidential elections, Obama harshly criticized the Bush administration's track record and achieved a landslide victory. The enthusiastic support shown by the American people towards Obama as he quickly prepared to fully implement his new policies as soon as he took office indicated both the severity of the circumstances facing the country as well as the vigorous resilience of American politics and society.
Japan considers its alliance with the United States the cornerstone of its diplomacy and conforming with U.S. policy has been its basic stance. President Bush and then Prime Minister Koizumi Jun'ichiro had gotten along well, leading the Japanese government to claim in self-praise that bilateral relations had never been better due to the solid friendship between the two leaders, while the Prime Minister himself had proudly exclaimed that "all's well as long as Japan-U.S. relations are well." So the loss of U.S. prestige and a new administration succeeding Bush that calls for "change" present a grave situation for Japan that also brings back bitter memories. It is only natural that the need for "change" on the part of Japan come to mind.
It was not surprising that opinion polls conducted during last year's presidential elections revealed that 82% of the Japanese people took an interest, a figure almost as high as the Americans. Unfortunately, since last year the world of Japanese politics has been gripped by speculation over the timing of lower house elections. Politicians were in no mood for a serious discussion on the significance of the "change" taking place in the United States, and thus the opportunity for a lively national debate amidst an election that would decide Japan's government was left to slip by.
"Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened," President Obama said in his inauguration speech on January 20, and explained his policies for dealing with these difficult times. However, "change" - a phrase he frequently used during his presidential campaign - was only used in the sentence "For the world has changed, and we must change with it," where he touched upon resource conservation. He must have decided that though "change" was effective as an electoral weapon, it was not appropriate when promising government policy.
A week ago, Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State-designate of the new administration, had spoken before the Senate Confirmation Hearing. She explained the new U.S. policy of emphasizing international cooperation instead of unilateralism, and said the aim was to "use what has been called smart power, the full range of tools at our disposal -- diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural -- picking the right tool or combination of tools for each situation" instead of leaning towards the "hard power" of military force. For Japan, which often comes under pressure to boost its cooperation in the area of defense, this was a welcome policy that would expand the arena of bilateral cooperation and enable Japan to more willingly contribute in its areas of strength.
Even so, the issues confronting U.S. foreign policy are complicated and diverse, starting with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and including Middle East peace, relations with Russia and Europe, nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran, and rivalry between India and Pakistan. The new administration is expected to place its priority on dealing with pressing economic issues such as the expanding financial crisis, rising unemployment and rescuing the auto industry. It will probably be some time before the results of its shift to international cooperation in foreign affairs will be felt. It is important for Japan to seek a path to closer bilateral relations along the lines of "change" and to present it to the United States.
A well-discussed topic in Japan with respect to changing U.S. foreign policy is concern that the United States will focus more on fast growing China and be less attentive to Japan. In the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program, Japan's request that the United States withhold lifting North Korea's terrorist state status until progress was made in the abduction issue was ultimately rejected.
As if to dispel Japanese concerns, during the Senate Hearing Clinton declared that "Our alliance with Japan is a cornerstone of American policy in Asia, essential to maintaining peace and prosperity in the Asia Pacific region." At the same time, she also said: "China is critically important as an actor who will be changing the global landscape. We want a positive and cooperative relationship with China."
U.S.-China relations have seen broad and deep development in a variety of areas. In January this year, President Bush and President Hu Jintao exchanged congratulations to commemorate the 30th anniversary of establishment of diplomatic relations. Meanwhile, former President Jimmy Carter and his wife, along with figures such as Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski, who promoted closer ties between the two countries, gathered in Beijing to praise the advance of "mutual dependence" and exchanged encouragements for further expansion in U.S.-Chinese cooperation. The two countries have become each others' second-largest trading partner and China has been supporting the U.S. budget deficit by using its enormous trade surplus to purchase U.S. government bonds. However, they were both badly damaged by the financial crisis and the future outlook of the relationship is unclear. While U.S. suspicion and distrust over issues such as China's military buildup, Tibet and human rights persist, the two countries have achieved considerable success in cooperating to contain important issues that could drag the United States and China into war such as North Korea and Taiwan, which has led to a confirmation of common interests. Perhaps this is an example of "smart power" diplomacy.
Japan need not worry about progress being made in U.S.-China dialogue that prevents conflict in Asia. Fortunately, since Prime Minister Koizumi stepped down, Japan's relationship with China has significantly improved due to efforts on the part of successive prime ministers Abe, Fukuda and Aso. Various frameworks of talks including Japan, such as those with China and South Korea, with the United States and China, and with the United States and South Korea, are also being developed. These could be linked together into an experimental framework for Asia as a whole.
The six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program did not reach agreement under the Bush administration and the task has now been passed on to the Obama administration. Obama's inauguration speech included the following words after his mention of Iraq and Afghanistan: "With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet." While signalling U.S. emphasis on holding talks with North Korea, namely on its nuclear development, it could just as well be a call for Japan to reconsider its own policy regarding the six-party talks.
The writer is a former Chief Editorial Writer of Kyodo News Service.
Japan considers its alliance with the United States the cornerstone of its diplomacy and conforming with U.S. policy has been its basic stance. President Bush and then Prime Minister Koizumi Jun'ichiro had gotten along well, leading the Japanese government to claim in self-praise that bilateral relations had never been better due to the solid friendship between the two leaders, while the Prime Minister himself had proudly exclaimed that "all's well as long as Japan-U.S. relations are well." So the loss of U.S. prestige and a new administration succeeding Bush that calls for "change" present a grave situation for Japan that also brings back bitter memories. It is only natural that the need for "change" on the part of Japan come to mind.
It was not surprising that opinion polls conducted during last year's presidential elections revealed that 82% of the Japanese people took an interest, a figure almost as high as the Americans. Unfortunately, since last year the world of Japanese politics has been gripped by speculation over the timing of lower house elections. Politicians were in no mood for a serious discussion on the significance of the "change" taking place in the United States, and thus the opportunity for a lively national debate amidst an election that would decide Japan's government was left to slip by.
"Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened," President Obama said in his inauguration speech on January 20, and explained his policies for dealing with these difficult times. However, "change" - a phrase he frequently used during his presidential campaign - was only used in the sentence "For the world has changed, and we must change with it," where he touched upon resource conservation. He must have decided that though "change" was effective as an electoral weapon, it was not appropriate when promising government policy.
A week ago, Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State-designate of the new administration, had spoken before the Senate Confirmation Hearing. She explained the new U.S. policy of emphasizing international cooperation instead of unilateralism, and said the aim was to "use what has been called smart power, the full range of tools at our disposal -- diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal, and cultural -- picking the right tool or combination of tools for each situation" instead of leaning towards the "hard power" of military force. For Japan, which often comes under pressure to boost its cooperation in the area of defense, this was a welcome policy that would expand the arena of bilateral cooperation and enable Japan to more willingly contribute in its areas of strength.
Even so, the issues confronting U.S. foreign policy are complicated and diverse, starting with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and including Middle East peace, relations with Russia and Europe, nuclear programs in North Korea and Iran, and rivalry between India and Pakistan. The new administration is expected to place its priority on dealing with pressing economic issues such as the expanding financial crisis, rising unemployment and rescuing the auto industry. It will probably be some time before the results of its shift to international cooperation in foreign affairs will be felt. It is important for Japan to seek a path to closer bilateral relations along the lines of "change" and to present it to the United States.
A well-discussed topic in Japan with respect to changing U.S. foreign policy is concern that the United States will focus more on fast growing China and be less attentive to Japan. In the six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program, Japan's request that the United States withhold lifting North Korea's terrorist state status until progress was made in the abduction issue was ultimately rejected.
As if to dispel Japanese concerns, during the Senate Hearing Clinton declared that "Our alliance with Japan is a cornerstone of American policy in Asia, essential to maintaining peace and prosperity in the Asia Pacific region." At the same time, she also said: "China is critically important as an actor who will be changing the global landscape. We want a positive and cooperative relationship with China."
U.S.-China relations have seen broad and deep development in a variety of areas. In January this year, President Bush and President Hu Jintao exchanged congratulations to commemorate the 30th anniversary of establishment of diplomatic relations. Meanwhile, former President Jimmy Carter and his wife, along with figures such as Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski, who promoted closer ties between the two countries, gathered in Beijing to praise the advance of "mutual dependence" and exchanged encouragements for further expansion in U.S.-Chinese cooperation. The two countries have become each others' second-largest trading partner and China has been supporting the U.S. budget deficit by using its enormous trade surplus to purchase U.S. government bonds. However, they were both badly damaged by the financial crisis and the future outlook of the relationship is unclear. While U.S. suspicion and distrust over issues such as China's military buildup, Tibet and human rights persist, the two countries have achieved considerable success in cooperating to contain important issues that could drag the United States and China into war such as North Korea and Taiwan, which has led to a confirmation of common interests. Perhaps this is an example of "smart power" diplomacy.
Japan need not worry about progress being made in U.S.-China dialogue that prevents conflict in Asia. Fortunately, since Prime Minister Koizumi stepped down, Japan's relationship with China has significantly improved due to efforts on the part of successive prime ministers Abe, Fukuda and Aso. Various frameworks of talks including Japan, such as those with China and South Korea, with the United States and China, and with the United States and South Korea, are also being developed. These could be linked together into an experimental framework for Asia as a whole.
The six-party talks on North Korea's nuclear program did not reach agreement under the Bush administration and the task has now been passed on to the Obama administration. Obama's inauguration speech included the following words after his mention of Iraq and Afghanistan: "With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet." While signalling U.S. emphasis on holding talks with North Korea, namely on its nuclear development, it could just as well be a call for Japan to reconsider its own policy regarding the six-party talks.
The writer is a former Chief Editorial Writer of Kyodo News Service.
The English-Speaking Union of Japan
日米関係にチェンジが可能か？
福原亨一 / ジャーナリスト
2009年 2月 2日
米国民の『チェンジ』への期待を背負ってオバマ政権が発足した。ブッシュ前大統領がテロとの戦争で一国行動主義に走って泥沼に陥り、加えて米国発の金融危機が世界を不況に巻き込んで米国の威信を失墜させた。昨年の大統領選はオバマ氏がブッシュ政権の実績を厳しく批判して大勝した。就任と同時に新政策を全面展開させようと準備を急ぐオバマ氏に熱狂的な声援を送る米国民の姿は、米国の直面する事態の深刻さと、米国政治社会の復元力の強さをも感じさせた。
日本は米国との同盟を外交の基軸と考え、米国の政策に同調することを基本にして来た。ブッシュ大統領と小泉首相（当時）が意気投合し、「二人の堅い友情で日米関係は史上最高の状態」と日本政府が自讃、首相は［日米関係が良ければ全て良し］と得意だった。だから米国の威信が失墜し、ブッシュを引き継ぐ政権が『チェンジ』を叫ぶのは日本にとって容易ならぬ事態で、苦い記憶も呼び起こす。これに対応する日本側の『チェンジ』も必要ではないか、との疑問が生じて当然だろう。
昨年の大統領選期間の世論調査で日本国民の82パーセントが関心を表明、米国民に劣らぬ高い数字が現れたのも意外ではなかった。残念ながら日本の政界は昨年以来、衆議院の解散の時期をめぐる思惑が渦巻き、米国の『チェンジ』の意味を深く論議する雰囲気はなく、日本の政権選択の選挙の場で国民的な議論を盛り上げる機会を逃してしまった。
オバマ大統領は１月20日の就任演説で米国が「暴力と憎悪の大規模なネットワークとの戦争状態にあり、経済はひどく疲弊している」として、この難局に対処する方針を説明した。しかし選挙戦中に多用した『チェンジ』の言葉は資源節約に触れた文脈の中で「世界が変わったから私たちも変わらなければならない」という文に用いられただけ。『チェンジ』は選挙戦の武器として有効だが、政府の政策として約束するのは不適当と判断したようだ。
新政権の国務長官に指名されたヒラリー・クリントン氏は一週間前、上院の指名承認公聴会で新方針を「一国行動主義をとらず、国際協調を重視する。ハードパワー（軍事力）に偏らず、政治、外交、経済、文化などソフトパワーを動員するスマートパワーの外交を目指す」と説明した。防衛面での協力強化を迫られることが多い日本にとっては、日米協力の舞台が広がり、得意な分野で納得できる協力が進めやすくなるから歓迎すべき内容だ。
ただ米外交の抱える課題は、イラク、アフガニスタンの戦争を筆頭に、中東和平、ロシア・欧州関係、北朝鮮、イランの核、インド・パキスタン対立など複雑、多岐にわたる。新政権は金融危機の拡大、失業の増大、自動車業界の救済など緊急の経済問題の処理が最優先となるはず。外交問題で国際協調路線の成果が実感されるまでには相当の時間を要するのではないか。日本は『チェンジ』に沿った日米関係強化の道を探り、米国に示すことが重要だ。
米外交の変化について日本でよく話題になるのは、アジアでの米国の関心は台頭著しい中国に傾き、日本は軽視されるのでは、との懸念だ。北朝鮮の核をめぐる六者協議の場で「拉致問題の前進なしに米国は北朝鮮のテロ国家指定を解除すべきでない」という日本の要請は結局認められなかった。
クリントン氏は上院の公聴会で、日本の疑念を払うように「日米同盟は米国のアジア政策の要石であり、アジア太平洋地域の平和と繁栄に必要不可欠」と明言した。同時に中国については「世界の展望を変化させて行く役割を担うとても重要な国」「積極的、肯定的な関係を築きたい」と述べている。
米中関係が各分野にわたって広く、深く発展している。この１月、両国は国交樹立30周年を記念してブッシュ大統領、胡錦涛主席が祝辞を交換し、北京ではカーター元大統領夫妻やキッシンジャー、ブレジンスキー各氏ら米中接近の推進者たちが集まって、米中“相互依存”の進展をたたえ、米中協力の一層の発展へエールを交換した。両国は互いに第二の貿易相手国になり、中国は膨大な貿易黒字を米国債の購入に充てて米国の財政赤字を支えてきた。しかしこの関係は金融危機で双方ともに大打撃を受け、今後の展望は不透明だ。中国の軍備増強、チベット、人権問題などに対する米国の疑惑、不信は根強いし、同時に北朝鮮、台湾など米中を戦争に巻き込みかねない重大な問題を協力して封じ込める仕事では相当な実績を積み、共通の利益を確認し合っている。これもスマートパワー外交の一例だろう。
アジアの紛争を抑制する米中協議の進展を日本が気に病む必要はない。幸い日中関係も小泉元首相の退陣後は安倍、福田、麻生の歴代政権の努力で著しく改善されている。日中韓、日米中、日米韓など日本の加わる多彩な協議の枠組みも育ちつつある。結びつけてアジアの枠組みとする試みもよかろう。
北朝鮮の核をめぐる六者協議は、結局ブッシュ政権下の合意はならず、オバマ政権に持ち越された。オバマ就任演説には，イラク，アフガニスタン問題に続いて「古くからの友好国とかつての敵対国とともに，核の脅威を減らし地球温暖化の恐れを巻き戻す不断の努力を行う」の一節がある。北朝鮮の核を念頭に米国が北との協議を極めて重視していることをうかがわせるが、六者協議に対する日本の方針もいま一度、検討を促されたようにみえる。
（筆者は元共同通信論説委員。）
日本は米国との同盟を外交の基軸と考え、米国の政策に同調することを基本にして来た。ブッシュ大統領と小泉首相（当時）が意気投合し、「二人の堅い友情で日米関係は史上最高の状態」と日本政府が自讃、首相は［日米関係が良ければ全て良し］と得意だった。だから米国の威信が失墜し、ブッシュを引き継ぐ政権が『チェンジ』を叫ぶのは日本にとって容易ならぬ事態で、苦い記憶も呼び起こす。これに対応する日本側の『チェンジ』も必要ではないか、との疑問が生じて当然だろう。
昨年の大統領選期間の世論調査で日本国民の82パーセントが関心を表明、米国民に劣らぬ高い数字が現れたのも意外ではなかった。残念ながら日本の政界は昨年以来、衆議院の解散の時期をめぐる思惑が渦巻き、米国の『チェンジ』の意味を深く論議する雰囲気はなく、日本の政権選択の選挙の場で国民的な議論を盛り上げる機会を逃してしまった。
オバマ大統領は１月20日の就任演説で米国が「暴力と憎悪の大規模なネットワークとの戦争状態にあり、経済はひどく疲弊している」として、この難局に対処する方針を説明した。しかし選挙戦中に多用した『チェンジ』の言葉は資源節約に触れた文脈の中で「世界が変わったから私たちも変わらなければならない」という文に用いられただけ。『チェンジ』は選挙戦の武器として有効だが、政府の政策として約束するのは不適当と判断したようだ。
新政権の国務長官に指名されたヒラリー・クリントン氏は一週間前、上院の指名承認公聴会で新方針を「一国行動主義をとらず、国際協調を重視する。ハードパワー（軍事力）に偏らず、政治、外交、経済、文化などソフトパワーを動員するスマートパワーの外交を目指す」と説明した。防衛面での協力強化を迫られることが多い日本にとっては、日米協力の舞台が広がり、得意な分野で納得できる協力が進めやすくなるから歓迎すべき内容だ。
ただ米外交の抱える課題は、イラク、アフガニスタンの戦争を筆頭に、中東和平、ロシア・欧州関係、北朝鮮、イランの核、インド・パキスタン対立など複雑、多岐にわたる。新政権は金融危機の拡大、失業の増大、自動車業界の救済など緊急の経済問題の処理が最優先となるはず。外交問題で国際協調路線の成果が実感されるまでには相当の時間を要するのではないか。日本は『チェンジ』に沿った日米関係強化の道を探り、米国に示すことが重要だ。
米外交の変化について日本でよく話題になるのは、アジアでの米国の関心は台頭著しい中国に傾き、日本は軽視されるのでは、との懸念だ。北朝鮮の核をめぐる六者協議の場で「拉致問題の前進なしに米国は北朝鮮のテロ国家指定を解除すべきでない」という日本の要請は結局認められなかった。
クリントン氏は上院の公聴会で、日本の疑念を払うように「日米同盟は米国のアジア政策の要石であり、アジア太平洋地域の平和と繁栄に必要不可欠」と明言した。同時に中国については「世界の展望を変化させて行く役割を担うとても重要な国」「積極的、肯定的な関係を築きたい」と述べている。
米中関係が各分野にわたって広く、深く発展している。この１月、両国は国交樹立30周年を記念してブッシュ大統領、胡錦涛主席が祝辞を交換し、北京ではカーター元大統領夫妻やキッシンジャー、ブレジンスキー各氏ら米中接近の推進者たちが集まって、米中“相互依存”の進展をたたえ、米中協力の一層の発展へエールを交換した。両国は互いに第二の貿易相手国になり、中国は膨大な貿易黒字を米国債の購入に充てて米国の財政赤字を支えてきた。しかしこの関係は金融危機で双方ともに大打撃を受け、今後の展望は不透明だ。中国の軍備増強、チベット、人権問題などに対する米国の疑惑、不信は根強いし、同時に北朝鮮、台湾など米中を戦争に巻き込みかねない重大な問題を協力して封じ込める仕事では相当な実績を積み、共通の利益を確認し合っている。これもスマートパワー外交の一例だろう。
アジアの紛争を抑制する米中協議の進展を日本が気に病む必要はない。幸い日中関係も小泉元首相の退陣後は安倍、福田、麻生の歴代政権の努力で著しく改善されている。日中韓、日米中、日米韓など日本の加わる多彩な協議の枠組みも育ちつつある。結びつけてアジアの枠組みとする試みもよかろう。
北朝鮮の核をめぐる六者協議は、結局ブッシュ政権下の合意はならず、オバマ政権に持ち越された。オバマ就任演説には，イラク，アフガニスタン問題に続いて「古くからの友好国とかつての敵対国とともに，核の脅威を減らし地球温暖化の恐れを巻き戻す不断の努力を行う」の一節がある。北朝鮮の核を念頭に米国が北との協議を極めて重視していることをうかがわせるが、六者協議に対する日本の方針もいま一度、検討を促されたようにみえる。
（筆者は元共同通信論説委員。）
一般社団法人 日本英語交流連盟