Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

Strategic hedging in Canberra (and Tokyo)

Reading Time: 2 mins

In Brief

Writing at The National Interest Online, the Cato Institute’s Ted Galen Carpenter points to a ‘dual uneasiness’ in Australia, that ‘is creating an incentive for Canberra to hedge its bets and become, ever so quietly, more independent regarding security issues and capabilities.’

Change a few of the proper nouns and this article could be a fair account of the direction that Japanese foreign policy will trend in the years to come.

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

As Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio wrote in an essay in the Japanese monthly VOICE, an essay that was translated into English (here) and syndicated in various American publications, ‘How can Japan, caught between an America struggling to remain a hegemon and a China wanting to be and planning to be a hegemon, maintain its political and economic autonomy and defend its national interests? The international environment is which Japan will be placed from now on is not straightforward.’

Both Japan and Australia — not to mention other countries in the region — are seeking alternatives to dependence on US power that may become more unreliable over time, but, at the same time, neither wants to be wholly dependent on the goodwill of China either. Developing independent capabilities is way to ensure autonomy, one that is more open to Australia than Japan, which has constitutional, political, and budgetary constraints on its ability to strengthen its armed forces (although Kamei Shizuka, a member of Hatoyama’s cabinet and head of one of the ruling DPJ’s coalition partners, said Thursday that Japan must think about developing its own deterrent capabilities). Deepening ties among the middle powers of Asia is another, something that the Rudd and Hatoyama governments are in the midst of doing despite their dispute over Japan’s whaling.

This article was first published here at the MacArthur Foundation’s Asia Security Initiative blog.

One response to “Strategic hedging in Canberra (and Tokyo)”

  1. Both Australia and Japan face a conundrum indeed.
    Australia now has to face its geographic and economic destiny by confronting its subliminal fear of Asia.
    Similar imperatives compel a debilitated Japan to return to Asia and confront its historical fears of potentially living in the shadow of a China Tributary System.

    The US is in denial and cannot reconcile Imperial Overstretch with an economy and civic culture that is notionally insolvent.
    The partially integrated European Union remains an experiment with uncertain outcomes.

    Australia’s present commodity export economy inhibits Canberra’s ability to determine outcomes in our national interests.
    The recent Rio – Chinalco debacle is a case in point.
    Our ability to convert economic heft in Asia is constrained because we have minimal commercial foot prints in the region resulting from a modest domestic manufacturing base.

    Australia needs convert our resource largesse into source of regional political influence to completed shared interests with industrialising Asian nations.
    We need to consider inter government commercial deals involving US, EU, Middle East and Asian interests to manufacture processed products using domestic energy and raw materials with tax incentives?

    The more multi region commercial interest invested the greater our ability to mitigate adverse impact on our national interests?

    History and China trajectory towards regional economic ascendancy appears very likely.

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.