In a move that the Biden administration did not anticipate, Shigeru Ishiba, after being elected as Japan's Prime Minister, issued a first challenge to the United States, drawing widespread attention.
This shift in the situation not only has profound implications for US-Japan relations but also reflects a new stance for Japan in international affairs.
After intense competition within the party, Ishiba successfully became the president of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and will officially take office after the current Prime Minister Fumio Kishida steps down, marking the beginning of the "Ishiba era" in Japan.
Compared to Kishida, who has a background as a "civil servant," Ishiba, as a former Japanese Defense Minister, has a more distinct "military leader" background.
His experience as Defense Minister during the Koizumi era has provided him with rich experience in security affairs.
However, as the relationship between Ishiba and Shinzo Abe deteriorated during Abe's administration, Ishiba gradually lost his voice within the upper ranks of the LDP, only to become active again after Kishida's government took office.
It can be said that Ishiba's rise is a result of his keen grasp of changing circumstances and his effective utilization of resources within the LDP.
Upon confirming that Kishida would not seek reelection, Ishiba swiftly mobilized the resources he had accumulated over time, garnering support from multiple LDP lawmakers, ultimately emerging victorious in the election and becoming the "leader" of the world's fourth-largest economy.
However, what attracts more attention is that before taking office, he presented a "challenge" to the Biden administration.
He submitted a reform plan to the Hudson Institute, which mentioned incorporating the US into an "Asia-Pacific version of NATO," forming a military alliance of the US, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, and hoping that the US would allow Japan to deploy its Self-Defense Forces on its territory.
Clearly, this plan aims to reshape the US-Japan alliance and deepen cooperation between the two countries in the security field.
In Ishiba's view, as the comprehensive power of the US declines, the alliance between the US and Japan needs to be adjusted and revised.
The ultimate goal of these changes is to curb China's increasingly expanding military power in the Asia-Pacific region.
However, the proposal also lays a time bomb for the development of US-Japan relations, presenting new challenges to the Biden administration.
After all, it has always been the case that the US stationed troops in Japan to fulfill its security defense commitments to Japan, including its nuclear umbrella.
It can be said that it is precisely because of the US military presence in Japan that the US-Japan alliance has been able to develop stably.
Through this military deployment, the US achieves comprehensive control over Japan's politics, economy, and military, and it is almost no exaggeration to say that Japan, to some extent, is a "puppet" of the US, not daring to show any signs of dissent.
However, the plan currently proposed by Ishiba clearly challenges the "dominance" of the US.
Globally, no country dares to proactively request to station troops in the US, not even the closest allies like the UK and Germany.
In many cases, their military forces only go to the US for joint exercises, while France conducts more training on US aircraft carriers and does not dare to suggest the idea of troop deployment.
Therefore, in a sense, Ishiba's proposal, while seemingly aimed at strengthening the US-Japan alliance, actually intends to change the unequal status relationship between the two countries and seek a more equitable partnership.
Although Ishiba's plan initially seems to deepen the US-Japan alliance, it actually contains the intent to reassess and revise the relationship between the two countries.
He hopes to adjust the relationship to encourage the US to adopt a "correct" attitude towards US-Japan relations, particularly achieving genuine equality in various fields such as economy, politics, and military.
However, the current reality indicates that Ishiba's pursuit of a fully equal relationship is unrealistic.
Firstly, the inequality in US-Japan relations has persisted for nearly 80 years, and changing this status cannot be achieved merely through a single plan.
Secondly, as we have observed, the US is gradually strengthening its military deployment in the Asia-Pacific region, in which Japan plays a crucial role.
It can be said that in the US's strategic layout, Japan essentially serves as a "scapegoat"; regardless of how the situation develops, the US can minimize its own losses without being significantly impacted.
Although the comprehensive power of the US is gradually declining, its influence in the Asia-Pacific region cannot be underestimated.
The US military presence in Japan profoundly affects Japan's politics and economy.
Therefore, Ishiba's plan reflects more of an ideal rather than a concrete policy goal.
In summary, Ishiba's new proposal challenges the current state of affairs while also prompting a rethinking of the future trajectory of US-Japan relations.
Despite the gradual weakening of US influence, the US-Japan alliance will continue to be influenced by US dominance for a long time to come.
While Ishiba's plan possesses a degree of foresight, its feasibility still faces many uncertainties, and the future direction of US-Japan relations requires close observation.
With changes in the international situation, the US-Japan alliance will face more challenges and opportunities.
Ishiba's ascent may signify that Japan will play a more proactive role on the international stage, but how to balance its relationship with the US, particularly in security and economic cooperation, will be a significant issue he must confront.
Maintaining a close relationship with the US while safeguarding national interests is undoubtedly a complex and delicate challenge.
Comments