Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conceptualizing Japan’s Foreign Policy Trajectory Through Social Identity Theory

  • Published:
East Asia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Regional security studies of the Asia-Pacific commonly center upon China’s rise, leaving other actors underresearched. Among these is Japan, whose ongoing reinterpretation of its pacifist constitution may destabilize the region. This article employs Social Identity Theory, a social psychology theory of group behavior, to develop a unique framework that accounts for both the domestic and international constraints acting upon Japan’s foreign policy makers. By analyzing Japan’s foreign policy evolution through the lost decade of the 1990s into the changed landscape of the post-September 11th world, this article identifies a prevailing trend toward “normalization”. It is argued that Japan is on course to further distance itself from the pacifism embodied in Article 9 of its constitution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Interaction within the domestic identity hierarchy mirrors that of the other levels of analysis previously discussed. That is to say that domestic groups participate in forms of social mobility, social competition, and social creativity with one another. This line of reasoning holds tremendous potential and could be the basis of a follow-up article.

  2. Given the similarity between the more alarmist elements of the old “Japan rise” literature and the contemporary “China rise” literature—one could argued International Relations theory continues to fall short when accounting for this form of economic competition.

  3. It should be noted that considerable overlap can exist between groups. For instance, an individual could hold both normalist and nationalist sentiments. Nevertheless, the following sections will demonstrate how these norms converge into a limited set of policy options for Japanese leaders.

  4. The option for Japanese participation in multilateral organizations and the development of a comprehensive security agenda that accounts for human and environmental factors may offer one possibility for social creativity. However, there is no space to explore these factors in this article.

References

  1. Betts, R. K. (1993). Wealth, Power, and Instability: East Asia and the United States after the Cold War. International Security, 18(3), 34–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Friedberg, A. L. (1993). Ripe for Rivalry Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia. International Security, 18(3), 5–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kawasaki, T. (2001). Postclassical realism and Japanese security policy. [Article]. Pacific Review, 14(2), 221–240, doi:10.1080/09512740110037361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Green, M. J. (2001). Japan’s reluctant realism: foreign policy challenges in an era of uncertain power. New York: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Kliman, D. M. (2006). Japan’s Security Strategy in the Post-9/11 World: Embracing a New Realpolitik (Vol. 183, WASHINGTON PAPERS): United States, Praeger Publishers.

  6. Hughes, C. W. (2012). The Democratic Party of Japan’s New (but Failing) Grand Security Strategy: From “Reluctant Realism” to “Resentful Realism”? The Journal of Japanese Studies, 38(1), 109–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Izumikawa, Y. (2010). Explaining Japanese Antimilitarism: Normative and Realist Constraints on Japan’s Security Policy. International Security, 35(2), 123–160, doi:10.1162/ISEC_a_00020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Berger, T. (1996). Norms, Identity, and National Security in Germany and Japan. In P. J. Katzenstein (Ed.), The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Berger, T. (1998). Cultures of antimilitarism: national security in Germany and Japan. Baltimore, MD.: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Berger, T. (2004). Japan’s International Relations: The Political and Security Dimensions. In S. S. Kim (Ed.), The International Relations of Northeast Asia (pp. 135–170): Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

  11. Hideo, O. (1997). Cultural Norms and National Security: Police and Military in Postwar Japan by Peter J. Katzenstein Columbia University Press: New York, 1996. Journal of Japanese Studies, 23(2), 518–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hook, G. D. (2005). Japan’s International Relations: Politics, Economics and Security: Routledge.

  13. Katzenstein, P. J. (1996). The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Katzenstein, P. J. (2005). A world of regions: Asia and Europe in the American Imperium. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Katzenstein, P. J. (2008). Rethinking Japanese Security. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Oros, A. (2008). Normalizing Japan: politics, identity, and the evolution of security practice. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Dobson, H. (2003). Japan and United Nations peacekeeping: new pressures and new responses. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Ikenberry, G. J., & Inoguchi, T. (Eds.). (2007). The uses of institutions: the U.S., Japan, and governance in East Asia. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hemmer, C., & Katzenstein, P. J. (2002). Why is There No NATO in Asia? Collective Identity, Regionalism, and the Origins of Multilateralism. International Organization, 56(3), 575–607, doi:10.1162/002081802760199890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Krauss, E. S., & Christensen, T. J. (2004). Beyond bilateralism: U.S.-Japan relations in the new Asia-Pacific. Stanford, US: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hughes, C. W., & Fukushima, A. (2004). US-Japan Security Relations: Toward Bilateralism Plus? In E. S. K. T. J. Pempel (Ed.), Beyond bilateralism U.S.-Japan relations in the new Asia-Pacific (pp. 61–71). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Preble, C. (2006). Two Normal Countries Rethinking the U.S.-Japan Strategic Relationship. Policy Analysis(566), 1–25.

  23. Samuels, R. J. (2007). Securing Japan: Toyko’s Grand Strategy and the Future of East Asia. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hirata, K. (2008). Who Shapes the National Security Debate? Divergent Interpretations of Japan’s Security Role. Asian Affairs: An American Review, 35(3), 123–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Linus Hagström (2009). Normalizing Japan: Supporter, Nuisance, or Wielder of Power in the North Korean Nuclear Talks? Asian Survey, 49(5), 831–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An Integrative Theory Of Intergroup Conflict. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), The Social Psychology Of Intergroup Relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology: Cambridge University Press.

  28. Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (1982). Social Identity and Intergroup Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behaviour. In W. G. Austin, & S. Worchel (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Tajfel, H. (1982). Introduction. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (pp. 1–11). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mercer, J. (1995). Anarchy and Identity. International Organization, 49(02), 229–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Brown, R. J., & Ross, G. F. (1982). The Battle of Acceptance: An investigation into the Dynamics of Intergroup Behavior. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (pp. 155–178). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Nakane, C. (1970). Japanese society. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hornsey, M. J. (2008). Social Identity Theory and Self-categorization Theory: A Historical Review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 204–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a Cognitive Redefinition of the Social Group. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (pp. 15–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Leyens, J.-P., Yzerbyt, V., & Schadron, G. (1994). Sterotypes and Social Cognition. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Operario, D., & Fiske, S. T. (2003). Sterotypes: Content, Structures, Processes, and Context. In R. Brown, & S. Gaertner (Eds.), Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology: Intergroup Processes (pp. 22–44). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  38. Stangor, C., & Jost, J. T. (1997). Individual, Group, and System Levels of Analysis and their Relevance for Stereotyping and Intergroup Relations. In R. Spears, P. J. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life (pp. 336–358). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Haslam, S. A. (2004). Psychology in Organizations. London, UK: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  40. McGarty, C. (2001). Social Identity Theory does not Maintain that Identification Produces Bias. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 173–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Larson, D. W., & Shevchenko, A. (2010). Status Seekers: Chinese and Russian Responses to U.S. Primary. International Security, 34(4), 63–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Martorana, P. V., Galinsky, A. D., & Rao, H. (2005). From System Justification To System Condemnation: Antecedents Of Attempts To Change Power Hierarchies. In M. C. Thomas-Hunt (Ed.), Status and Groups (pp. 283–314). London: Elsevier Ltd.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  43. Hogg, M. A., & Abrams, D. (1988). Social identifications: a social psychology of intergroup relations and group processes. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Larson, D. W., & Shevchenko, A. (2003). Shortcut to Greatness: The New Thinking and the Revolution in Soviet Foreign Policy. International Organization, 57(01), doi:10.1017/s0020818303571028.

  45. Checkel, J. T. (1998). Review: The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory. International Relations, 50(2), 324–348.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Wendt, A. (1994). Collective Identity Formation and the International State. American Political Science Review, 88(2), 384–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Taliaferro, J. W., Lobell, S. E., & Ripsman, N. M. R. (2009). Introduction: Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy. In S. E. Lobell, N. M. R. Ripsman, & J. W. Taliaferro (Eds.), Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy (pp. 1–42). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  48. Barkin, J. S. (2003). Realist Constructivism. International Studies Review, 5(3), 325–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Gilpin, R. G. (1984). The Richness of the Tradition of Political Realism. International Organization, 38(02), 287–304, doi:10.1017/s0020818300026710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Wohlforth, W. C. (2012). Realism and Foreign Policy. In S. Smith, A. Hadfield, & T. Dunne (Eds.), Foreign Policy: Theories, Actors, Cases (pp. 35–53). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Taliaferro, J. W. (2006). Neoclassical Realism: The Psychology of Great Power Intervention. In J. Sterling-Folker (Ed.), Making Sense of International Relations Theory. Boulder, USA: Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: the social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Wilmer, F. (2002). The social construction of man, the state, and war identity, conflict, and violence in former Yugoslavia. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Strayer, R. W. (1998). Why Did the Soviet Union Collapse?: Understanding Historical Change: M.E. Sharpe.

  55. McCauley, M. (2008). The Rise and Fall of the Soviet Union: Longman.

  56. Arase, D. (2007). Japan, The Active State? Security Policy After 9/11. Asian Survey, 47(4), 560–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Grimes, W. W. (2004). Japan’s International Relations: The Economic Dimension. In S. S. Kim (Ed.), The International Relations of Northeast Asia (pp. 171–200): Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

  58. Terry, E. (2002). How Asia Got Rich: Japan, China and the Asian Miracle: M.E. Sharpe.

  59. Pyle, K. B. (2007). Japan Rising: The Resurgence of Japanese Power and Purpose (A Century Foundation Book). New York: Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Kennedy, P. (1987). The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Random House.

  61. Kristof, N. D. (1997). Japan’s Full Story: Inside and Outside of the Cabinet. Foreign Affairs, 76(6).

  62. Waltz, K. (1993). The emerging structure of international politics. International Security, 18(2), 44–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Gordon, A. (2003). A Modern History of Japan: From Tokugawa Times to the Present. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Cooney, K. J. (2002). Japan’s Foreign Policy Maturation: A Quest of Normalcy. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Jansen, M. B. (2002). The Making of Modern Japan. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Christensen, R. (2000). Ending the Ldp Hegemony: Party Cooperation in Japan: University of Hawai’i Press.

  67. Kwak, T.-H., & Joo, S.-H. (2003). The Korean Peace Process and the Four Powers: Ashgate.

  68. Tsuchiyama, J. (2007). War Renunciation, Article 9, and Security Policy. In T. U. Berger, M. Mochizuki, & J. Tsuchiyama (Eds.), Japan in International Politics: The Foreign Policies of an Adaptive State (pp. 47–74). Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Flath, D. (2000). The Japanese Economy: Oxford University Press.

  70. Vogel, S. K. (2002). U.S.-Japan Relations in a Changing World. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Goodman, C. F. (2008). The Rule of Law in Japan: A Comparative Analysis: Kluwer Law International.

  72. McDougall, D. (2007). Asia Pacific in world politics. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  73. U.S. Department of State (2005). Joint Statement U.S.-Japan Security Consultative Committee. In O. O. T. Spokesman (Ed.). Washington, DC: U.S Department of State.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Bisley, N. (2008). The Transformation of the US-Japan Alliance and East Asian Security. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 30(1), 73–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Hughes, C. W. (2004). Japan’s re-emergence as a “normal” military power. Oxford: Oxford University Press for the International Institute of Strategic Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Hughes, C. W. (2009). Japan’s Remilitarization: Routledge for International Institute for Strategic Studies.

  77. A Conversation With Shinzo Abe. (2007, April 22). The Washington Post.

  78. Shinoda, T. (2012). Japan’s Failed Experiment: The DPJ and Institutional Change for Political Leadership. Asian Survey,, 52(5), 799–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Kushida, K. E., & Lipscy, P. Y. (2013). Japan Under the DPJ: The Politics of Transition and Governance: Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center.

  80. Hagström, L. (2010). The Democratic Party of Japan’s security policy and Japanese politics of constitutional revision: a cloud over Article 9? Australian Journal of International Affairs, 64(5), 510–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Winkler, C. G. (2012). The Quest for Japan’s New Constitution: An Analysis of Visions and Constitutional Reform Proposals 1980–2009. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  82. SDF’s new anti-piracy base creates a dilemma. (2011, 05 August). The Asahi Shimbun.

  83. Shinoda, T. (2013). Contemporary Japanese Politics: Institutional Changes and Power Shifts: Columbia University Press.

  84. What Japan’s military shift means. (2014, 2 July). BBC News.

  85. Ministry of Defense of Japan (2014). Defense Programs and Budget of Japan: Overview of FY2014 Budget. Tokyo.

  86. Cabinet approval rating nose-dives after ruling camp rams through security bills. (18 July 2015, The Japan Times.

  87. Yoshihide, S. (2005). Nihon no “Midoru Pawa” Gaiko: Sengo Nihon no Sentaku to Koso (Japanese “Middle Power” Diplomacy: Choices and Plans in the Post-World War II Period): Chikuma Shinsho.

  88. Perlo-Freeman, S., & Solmirano, C. (2014). Trends in World Military Expenditure, 2013. SIPRI Fact Sheet: SIPRI.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, DC, USA

    Matthew P. Funaiole

Authors
  1. Matthew P. Funaiole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew P. Funaiole.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Funaiole, M.P. Conceptualizing Japan’s Foreign Policy Trajectory Through Social Identity Theory. East Asia 32, 361–383 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12140-015-9249-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12140-015-9249-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation