Japan and the State of the Union

The word "Japan" wasn't used in President Obama's State of the Union address once. To the consummate followers of this blog, that may come as a surprise, easily explained by Obama's continual focus on domestic policy. Nope. Japan's neighbors made their way into the speech. "China" was used four times, "India" three, "South Korea" five times, "Korean Peninsula" once, and "North Korea" once. Obama didn't say "Japan." The closest he came was referencing that he "strengthened Asian alliances" over the past year. Perhaps that was a way of claiming victory in the Futenma dispute without having to discuss the gritty details.

Not much has been written on the non-mention of Japan. The simplest explanation for this is simply that the US and Japan have such a long lasting alliance, and Japan is such an assumed partner of the US, that a mention wasn't necessary. England wasn't mentioned either. (Along with the United Kingdom and Britain)

While Japanese officials' public reaction was calm, there are some reports of shock among the Japanese government at their non-mention.

As concerning as this may seem, it's important to note that Obama hasn't mentioned Japan in past States of the Union. Additionally, Obama's central message was about US competitiveness, especially against rising powers, and as much as 2011 resembles the 80s, Japan as a rising power isn't a hot idea right now.

The bottom line is that language matters. Which countries Obama mentions and how many times clearly indicate where the United States will expend its foreign energy in the coming year. In some cases, like North Korea, it's to counter a military threat. And in others, like India and China, it's to counter an economic threat. Still, from Japan's internal governmental perspective, it can't be good when the President of the United States mentions every country in the neighborhood except Japan. It's kind of like being one of the last chosen for a pick up game of basketball. Your welcome on the team, but you're not worth a high pick. You probably also won't get passed the ball too much.

Japan and Obama

Those of you unconcerned with international diplomacy, or, apparently, the budget might not have noticed that President Obama recently traveled all around Asia. He went to India, his childhood home in Indonesia, South Korea, and Japan. As Jay Leno joked on his show, Obama still hasn't found his birth certificate.

Obama did stop in Japan.

What Obama Did

Rather than deal with actual people due to the complexity of the issues he faces, Obama instead chose to meet with Giant Buddhas and robots.

It would appear he can't even figure the robot out, let alone Japan-US relations.

After he was done meeting with inanimate (no matter how lifelike) objects, the president also stopped over at the APEC economic summit on the sides of which he met with Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan, reassuring him of the US commitment to Japan and Northeast Asian security, especially relative to China, and inviting Kan to visit America in the spring all in the course of an hour.

Does it Matter?

If expectations were high running into the trip, it might've been overly optimistic given the current state of our economy and international standing. However, there is no doubt that failure to pass free trade agreements in South Korea, or make significant headway on Chinese currency issues, regional island disputes, or resolve accompanying tensions certainly prevent the trip from being labeled a success. However, expecting Obama to wave away all these complex issues with a magic wand is probably setting the (magical) bar too high.

There might've been a point where an American President could go overseas and have people tell if not give him whatever they wanted. However, as alluded to in the Stephen Walt post referenced above and here, that time has passed. Other nations are aware that America's time as a total superpower has passed, and, especially on regional issues involving players like China, other countries will become crucial and perhaps necessary to forging progress.

That means that even though conservative editorials in Japan will continue to herald the US-Japanese relationship, and although the relationship will probably remain strong, progress will be much slower than if the US could simply impose its will on the region.

Obama and Japan

Stephen Walt recently posted about President Obama's foreign policy successes, or lack thereof. His thesis relates to Obama's failing (to this point) to successfully address the main issues he set out to deal with, especially in light of mounting public dissatisfaction with the administration due to the economy. Moreover, Walt explores the idea that you don't get credit for preventing crises - like an economic collapse, Israeli strike of Iran, or global war. Obama's lack of success on big-ticket items- like Afghanistan, Middle East Peace, and Iran, also makes it harder for him to get credit with the public.

Walt doesn't mention Japan. When seen in light of two wars, a collapsing economy, and tanked soft power, Obama's inheritance in Japan doesn't seem too bad. The US has underwritten Japan's security, and that of the Northeast Asian region, since the end of World War II, and Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan and Obama recently reaffirmed the value of the alliance as a "cornerstone of security." It isn't that simple. A recent dispute over a set of islands between China and Japan actually may have provided an opportunity for the US to increase it's influence in the region, but at the same time the dispute may also be a prelude for an increasingly belligerent and assertive China, as it grows its sphere of influence. The US-Japan alliance will obviously need to adapt to or accommodate China's rise in some way, and therefore will become even more integral. Still, there are major issues like relocating the Marines stationed at Futenma that need to be resolved before the alliance can begin to deal with newer issues.

Here we come back to Walt. Although he never addresses the issue of Japan in his post, I think it would be interesting to apply his argument to our relations with that country. The exmaple supports his thesis. While Obama has made some progress in figuring out what to do with the Marines, his administration has already seen one prime minister resign over the issue, Congress threaten to defund relocation efforts, and now a reaffirmation of the original plan by the new administration. Obama definitely has an agenda, he's definitely been working on it. When it comes down to it, Obama has avoided a collapse in relations (however significant the risk of that ever was), but he hasn't really helped the cause.

To be fair, it's been a full 15 years since we first began discussing relocating Futenma, but a promise of change shouldn't translate to the continuation of a progress-less status quo.