Challenges for Japan

Week 10 Seminar

• Challenges for Japan• Exam Prep 2

The final exam date is May 26th 2015 0900-1200The exam will be held in the Goodwin Sports Hall

Last session:• Areas for revision• Exam format

This Session• Understanding/answering the questions• What is the marker looking for in your answer?• Submission of anonymous questions/topics not understood

Next Session:• Review of module (Lecture)• Planning and structuring your answer (advice + practice)• Further clarification/seminar slides about topics not understood

Exam Prep timetable

Calculating your mark…The exam is worth 60% of the module. The pass mark for the module is 40%

Essay Mark Exam mark - To pass (40%)

Exam mark -To get a 2:2 (50%)

Exam mark- To get a 2:1 (60%)

Exam mark -To get a 1st (70%)

50 34 50 67 84

55 30 47 64 80

60 27 44 60 77

65 24 40 57 74

70 20 37 54 70

75 17 34 50 67

Answering the exam questions: Planning

• When making a plan, you may find it useful to underline the key words in the question, or to break down the main question into sub-questions.

For example:In the post-Occupation period, Japan has played an indirect role in contributing to security in East Asia through the US-Japan security treaty. What norms help to explain the policies adopted? Illustrate your answer with examples.

Stay on topic!Time period: Post- occupationPol/Sec/Econ: SecurityArea: East Asia

Subquestions:1. How has Japan played an indirect role in contributing to security in East Asia?2. What is the role of the US-Japan security treaty in this?3. What policies have been adopted?4. What norms can help explain these policies?5. What examples can I give?

• In your introduction show how you understand the question (e.g. paraphrase) and outline how you will answer it

• Make one point, subpoint or argument per paragraph, give evidence/examples and summarise to show how it answers the question

• Shortish paragraphs with one or two pieces of evidence are sufficient• In your conclusion summarise the arguments you have made to show

that you have answered the question

• Don’t provide too much background, too much description, or other things that the question hasn’t asked for… You have limited time so keep a narrow focus and stay on topic.

Answering the exam questions: Writing your answer

What is the marker looking for?As well as you demonstrating that you have answered the question, the exam tests that you have met the learning outcomes of the module:

1) demonstrate knowledge of Japan's role in the world in the three dimensions of politics, economics and security in two key sites of international activity, the United States and East Asia

2) Apply conceptual tools to analyse how structure, agency and norms can be used to explain Japan's international relations

3) Demonstrate appropriate cognitive, communicative and transferable skills, including the ability to evaluate social scientific concepts and theories

4) Employ primary and secondary sources to present reasoned and effective arguments in written (and oral) form

5) Pursue independent learning 6) Show critical judgement

For the best exam marks, you should demonstrate your ability to do all of these in your answers

1) demonstrate knowledge of Japan's role in the world in the three dimensions of politics, economics and security in two key sites of international activity, the United States and East Asia Answer each question using the appropriate knowledge

2) Apply conceptual tools to analyse how structure, agency and norms can be used to explain Japan's international relations Use structure, agency in norms in your answers whenever relevant (not just when the question specifically asks you to)

3) Demonstrate appropriate cognitive, communicative and transferable skills, including the ability to evaluate social scientific concepts and theories form solid arguments in your questions, be aware of theories

4) Employ primary and secondary sources to present reasoned and effective arguments in written (and oral) form It is an exam, we don’t expect too many sources… using a couple for each question (e.g. Hook et al. 2012) should be doable, where you can use sources use examples.

5) Pursue independent learning demonstrate through your answer that you have an understanding of the relevant reading and maybe even beyond – what is happening now?

6) Show critical judgement engage with the question, show flexibility of thought

• Remember, we’re looking to see that you understand what has been taught in this module...

- If major aspects we have mentioned in class are missing in a relevant question, it won’t go unnoticed

- The main basis of this module is structure, agency and norms, so remember to use these where appropriate

Unit 10 seminar questionsQ1. How can Japan balance the pressure imposed by its relations with the US (and base issues) and China (and the ‘China threat’/’China rising’)?

Q2. What are the key challenges facing Japan in terms of its contemporary international relations? How can such challenges be understood in terms of structure agency and norms?

Q3. How has Japan instrumentalised its international relations in response to new challenges? Why?

Q4. What examples can you give of Japan’s proactive policy in dealing with international challenges?

Adapted seminar questions: Interrogating the challenges

• How can Japan balance its relationship with the US and its relationship with China/potential relationship with North Korea?

• Why have these challenges arisen (In terms of structure agency and norms)?

• How has Japan instrumentalised its international relations in response to these challenges?

• What examples can you give of Japan being proactive in dealing with these challenges?

• How do you think Japan could move forward with these challenges?

1. Overviews• Structure, agency and norms – Pinnacle

Islands• Structure, agency and norms – Futenma base

issue• Structure agency and norms – North Korea

2. Discussion of the adapted seminar questions, feedback from each group

Pinnacle Islands - Structure• 1970s – mid-late 1990s, China was in a weak position in the dispute.

– No territory– Inferior military– Needed Japan’s economic aid– Had a shared foe USSR

• US was neutral decision makers believed Senkaku was Japan’s but decided not to voice this due to vested interests in appearing to be amicable with PRC

• .• End of Cold War rise of China, stagnation of Japan

– Nationalism a crucial source of legitimacy for CCP.– China pushes the issue, Japan hols off US reluctant to get involved.

• Suspicions on China drilling for oil, led to a U-turn in policy.– Japan starts drilling the Chunxiao field between China’s undisputed zone and the disputed

maritime area in the belief that China is doing the same.

• US takes Japan’s side

Pinnacle Islands – Agency and Norms

• MOFA and politicians considered the islands of little value no political capital could be gained.– Right wing groups and politicians such as Ishihara and Nishimura were involved.

• Awareness grew in the 2000s and the new Koizumi administration brought it into the spotlight.– Seemingly helped by China’s growing presence and practical takeover of surrounding

waters

• 1990s Asianism, antimilitarism, economism… better to trade with China– Gain access to raw materials/labour etc.

• “China threat” new nationalists, revisionists… Strong Japan? Weak Japan?

Futenma Base Issue - Structure

• China pushing the US and Japan back together after shaky 1990s

• Senkaku effectively ended the DPJ Asianist push for good relations with China

• Division within Japan itself over the new Henoko base

Futenma Base Issue – Agency and Norms

• MOFA and MOD do not tamper with the alliance.

• Hatoyama tries to change the agreement – change the US-Japan relationship to more “equal”.– Media sabotage of Hatoyama– Abe’s ‘strong leadership’ appears to engender alignment with US and

perceived international community against external threats à la Koizumi in War on Terror.

• Protestors, local government, governors, mayors, allied in anti-Henoko stance. In Okinawa, majority are against.

• Bilateralism is so strong in the ministries that a middle ground is difficult to find in a prefecture which shows signs of disillusionment.

North Korea - Structure• Cold War Bipolarity – DPRK “hermit state” – isolationism.

– Ideological dispute between hegemons played a significant role in the Civil War.– DPRK a hermit state amidst two major powers.

• Legacy of colonialism and economic ascendance of Japan– Japan a key provider of ODA and then FDI. DPRK could at least benefit from

ODA.

• Post-Cold War economic stagnation, US domination, rise of China.– New concerns. US military industrial complex geared towards an enemy. DPRK

nuclearizing, rise of terrorism in Southeast Asia – Asian Financial Crisis, Japanese Stagnation, Global Economic Crisis – all presents new ‘challenges’.

– Japan’s renkei policy brings Japan into ROK-DPRK relations.– Rise of multilateral institutions allows for dialogue – but DPRK provocations,

while unpredictable, are constrained by tensions of alliances.

North Korea – Agency and Norms• Cold War Yoshida school politicians and bureaucrats, ministries and LDP

leaders. Japan in US camp but does not want to commit to combative security issues.– Missiles from DPRK are believed to target US bases in Japan and not (necessarily)

Japanese citizens.

• Post-Cold War: new MOD, Abduction Organizations, LDP, DPJ become huge players.– Media playing up of stories

• Could say Asianism, Economism and Developmentalism have played a part in attempted to normalize relations but they are trumped now by bilateralism.

• Bilateralism and antimilitarism now bilateralism is in the ascendency over antimilitarism. And the notion of internationalism?

Seminar questions (adapted)• How can Japan balance its relationship with the US and its

relationship with China/potential relationship with North Korea?• Why have these challenges arisen (In terms of structure agency

and norms)? • How has Japan instrumentalised its international relations in

response to these challenges?• What examples can you give of Japan being proactive in dealing

with these challenges?• How do you think Japan could move forward with these

challenges?

Remember to refer to structure, agency and norms, and to all three challenges

Conclusion• Same key factors in each dispute:

– Structure: Cold War bipolarity, Post-Cold War: Security Treaty, US Alliance, Bipolarity

– Agency: Maintain Alliance remains priority– Norms: Bilateralism trumps all others

• Inter-related nature of challenges: Inflation of DPRK risk/threat, Change of security focus from North (USSR) to Southwest (China), Futenma Base – Perceived need to keep US in Okinawa (2010 collision incident great timing!)

• Island dispute, DPRK, Futenma . . Also related to broader issue of “normalisation” or “remilitarisation”;

• Challenges: How to address? DPJ policy initially more balanced? DPJ policy failure – can Abe’s LDP succeed?