Font size: 
It is true that nationalistic politics have drawn public support for the Liberal Democratic Party and had some degree of positive effect in domestic politics. That support led Koizumi and the LDP to a remarkable victory in the general election of September 2005.
However, as a consequence of Japanese nationalism, the post-Koizumi era in Japan has to face a potential political crisis of deteriorating relations with the United States and its Asian neighbors. Problems between Japan and the United States have not surfaced for a while, but it seems that cracks in their traditionally strong alliance could threaten their future solidarity. How can Japan handle this potential crisis that now faces Yasuo Fukuda, the new prime minister of Japan?
Japanese political leaders might have thought that any risks incurred by mixing nationalism with politics would be manageable, but it seems this is not the case. The formidable political challenge that Japan is now confronting could shape the future of its political status in Asia and even its relations with the United States.
Koizumi's tactic of appealing to his peoples' nationalistic feelings in effect soothed public unrest over Japan's chronic economic stagnation. Admittedly, his privatization and deregulation policies restored public confidence and support, but they do not seem to be the primary factor. The politics of nationalism were more critical. In addition to this attractive effect, what further encouraged the Japanese nationalists was the consciousness that Japan's alliance with the United States could provide leverage to handle whatever backlash arose in response to their increasingly nationalistic stance.
That expectation collapsed when Japan failed in its bid to become a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council and when the U.S. Congress passed a resolution criticizing Japan's attitude toward controversial past issues, despite the fact that Japan threatened the United States by maintaining that such a resolution could undermine their alliance. Japan must have felt sorry for the United States and has since been eager to raise the issue of their alliance.
However, Japan's isolation in Asia, brought about by its nationalism, has caused Japan to lose its strategic value in this area and become a less attractive strategic partner for the United States. Washington's primary concern in Northeast Asia is North Korea. It has devoted all of its energy and time to solving the nuclear issue through the six-party talks. Noticeable progress has been made this year toward denuclearization.
Japan's persistence in placing priority on the issue of the abduction of Japanese people in the 1970s and 1980s by North Korea caused it to be marginalized in the negotiations with the North, impeding the efforts for denuclearization within the six-party talks. It seems increasingly clear that Japan's political isolation does not serve U.S. interests in the long term.
By contrast, South Korea has been upgrading its economic and political strategic value in Asia through its Free Trade Agreement with the United States and its breakthrough efforts to hold the second summit meeting with North Korea, which could be conducive to the six-party talks. Intended or not, South Korea has most likely positioned itself to be a more attractive partner for the United States.
Richard L. Armitage, the former U.S. deputy secretary of state, and Joseph S. Nye, a professor at the Kennedy School of Government, earlier this year presented a report called "The U.S.-Japan Alliance; Getting Asia Right through 2020." In this report, they stressed that Japan's alliance with the United States would continue to shape Asia's future, as it has done. But they acknowledged that the success of the alliance depends on common interests and values.
Japan's nationalistic politics and the country's resulting isolation seem to be inconsistent with the interests and values of the United States. Is there any factor that can block such divergence in their values and interests and prevent further cracks in their relationship?
A careful review of the results of Japan's dependence on nationalism in its foreign policy reveals more than the political burden of backlash from its neighboring countries; more seriously, it brings about the possibility that the U.S.-Japan alliance could be unsettled.
After Shinzo Abe's failure as the leader of post-Koizumi Japan, Yasuo Fukuda was chosen as an urgent solution. The new prime minister has been known for his support of friendly ties with Asian neighbors, even China. This is a very positive sign, but Fukuda still seems to be adhering to one seriously flawed strategy: his insistence on confronting North Korea over the abduction issue has cast a dark cloud over the denuclearization negotiations. This approach may undermine the expected positive effects of his otherwise flawless strategies.
In view of Japan's weakened strategic value as a result of its isolation in the denuclearization negotiations, it is highly unfortunate for Fukuda to inherit the abduction issue priority from his predecessors. Though it is necessary for him to handle public emotions related to the abduction issue, it is more critical for him to find a way to maintain Japan's political status and its future in Asia. All these challenges come down to a single question: as the new leader of Japan, is Fukuda prepared to manage the Japanese alliance with the United States?
--
(Lee Jae Young is a freelance writer and citizen reporter for Ohmynews International. He is currently also studying for a master's degree in Seoul, South Korea. ©Copyright Lee Jae Young.)
