论文部分内容阅读
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was finally invited to the White House in late February. But his long-awaited Washington trip did not culminate with a satisfying souvenir to take home. He failed to get what he wanted from the United States on the Diaoyu Islands issue， but promised to sign the Trans-Pacific Partnership （TPP） agreement， which is still controversial in Japan.
The United States is aware that its current interest is not to be whirled into a dispute over which it is not directly concerned， but to realize instead the practical benefit of economic cooperation in a peaceful regional environment. If Tokyo understands the principle as Washington does， it will return to the track of reviving the country’s economy through active and peaceful regional cooperation and cease making a scene over territorial disputes with its neighbors.
Limited outcomes
Abe’s three-day visit to the United States took place in late February. The Japanese prime minister and reelected U.S. President Barack Obama met on February 22 to discuss a wide range of security and economic issues in their first meeting after each assumed office. Previously， Abe planned to visit the United States right after he took office in late December 2012， but the meeting was turned down.
Abe’s Washington trip was more about symbolic meaning than practical outcomes， said Pang Zhongpeng， a researcher on Japanese studies with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences （CASS）.
The two leaders spoke about the U.S.-Japan alliance， the TPP and the nuclear program on the Korean Peninsula. However， at a press conference following their meeting， Obama avoided the Diaoyu Islands issue， which Abe considered the top agenda item of his visit.
Obama did reiterate that the U.S.-Japan alliance was the “central foundation for our regional security and so much of what we do in the Pacific region，” but stopped short of mentioning the Japan-China dispute over the Diaoyu Islands in his brief remarks after his meeting with Abe. Obama highlighted the two countries’concerns on the “provocative actions” taken by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea， namely Pyongyang’s recent nuclear test， vowing to take “strong actions.”
“Obama’s remarks were more like facegiving comfort than steady support，” said Pang. He explained that the U.S. side didn’t make firm promises on either the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula， nor the U.S. military presence in Futenma， which has been a problem between Tokyo and Washington for many years. Before his visit， Abe stressed that he intended to show Asian countries the rebounded close ties between Japan and the United States. For Abe， the U.S. attitude on the alliance has at least fulfilled one of Japan’s targets. “As a result of our discussion， we were able to share our understanding on not just concrete policy， but on the direction in which our alliance is headed，” said Abe after meeting with Obama， claiming that “the trust and the bond” in the U.S.-Japan alliance are “back.” Abe added that“one big theme” of the meeting was to discuss“strengthening the alliance between Japan and the United States.”
Abe’s meeting with Obama was an important part of Abe’s diplomatic design， said Gao Hong， another CASS researcher on Japanese studies. Gao pointed out that Abe tried to persuade Japanese people that his government can do better than the previous administration under the Democratic Party of Japan. Moreover， Abe aimed to win Washington at his side in order to gain support to cope with Japan’s current diplomatic dilemma. For the U.S. side， it needs Japan’s assistance in East Asia to implement its AsiaPacific policy. But it doesn’t want to sabotage the China-U.S. relationship when Japan crosses the line for being too self-assured of the Japan-U.S. alliance. This was the reason why Washington refused Abe’s visit request when he expressed an aggressive attitude on the territorial dispute in January， and also the reason why Washington avoided talking about the Diaoyu Island issue openly during Abe’s visit.
Future TPP
Unlike security issues， the two sides made some progress on the economic front. Obama said the two agreed that the “number one priority” must be increasing growth and making sure people of both countries can prosper. Washington wants Tokyo to join negotiations for the TPP， a region-wide free trade pact advocated by the United States. The two clearly reached consensus on this matter. In a joint statement issued after the meeting， the two countries confirmed that should Japan join the negotiations， “all goods would be subject to negotiation.”
“The economy is an area in which both Japan and the United States need to make some efforts. The U.S. side hopes to recover from the financial crisis， while Tokyo must revive its economy to solve its domestic problems，”Pang said.
Pang stressed that Japan and the United States made compromises in signing the joint statement. “Their compromises indicate the two countries’ common urgent demand of stepping out of the current economic difficulties，” Pang said. He explained that the U.S. side needs to drive deeper into the Asia-Pacific region， which is considered the driving engine of the world economy， and dragging Japan into the TPP is a U.S. tactic to guide the economic development in the region in a U.S. style. It also seeks to balance growing Chinese influence in the region， he added. For Japan， joining the U.S.-headed TPP can take part in the profit of the partnership， so as to introduce external momentum to pull the Japanese economy out of recession， Pang said. The two sides will face obstacles in following negotiations. For example， Japan will have to open its domestic markets that have been highly protected， such as the agricultural industry， to get investment， cheaper food and energy. Therefore， the agreement will also cause disagreements inside Japan， said Pang.
Jia Xiudong， a researcher with the China Institute of International Studies， said，“Washington and Tokyo have different demands on each other， so they are choosing to use each other by boosting their alliance.”Japan needs the alliance to pose an influential force in Asia， and the United States needs Japan to complete its regional strategy. Washington considers the alliance as a cornerstone of its Asia-Pacific security strategy. But its precondition is that Japan must obey and serve U.S. global strategy and practical interests.
Jia pointed out that Washington consistently takes a dual-edge strategy on Japan， both utilizing and restraining it. And the strategy becomes obvious especially on issues concerning China. If Japan wants U.S. support， it must pay—just like Japan’s compromise on the TPP agreement.
In matters concerning diplomatic relationships， it is always a country’s interest that leads. Washington knows that. But does Japan？ If Japan does， it will choose to deal with territorial disputes with its neighbors in a “calm manner” as it promised during Abe’s visit to the United States. Conducting active， peaceful and practical cooperation in the region will surely be much more rational and comfortable than swallowing sugar-coated empty promises from the United States.
The United States is aware that its current interest is not to be whirled into a dispute over which it is not directly concerned， but to realize instead the practical benefit of economic cooperation in a peaceful regional environment. If Tokyo understands the principle as Washington does， it will return to the track of reviving the country’s economy through active and peaceful regional cooperation and cease making a scene over territorial disputes with its neighbors.
Limited outcomes
Abe’s three-day visit to the United States took place in late February. The Japanese prime minister and reelected U.S. President Barack Obama met on February 22 to discuss a wide range of security and economic issues in their first meeting after each assumed office. Previously， Abe planned to visit the United States right after he took office in late December 2012， but the meeting was turned down.
Abe’s Washington trip was more about symbolic meaning than practical outcomes， said Pang Zhongpeng， a researcher on Japanese studies with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences （CASS）.
The two leaders spoke about the U.S.-Japan alliance， the TPP and the nuclear program on the Korean Peninsula. However， at a press conference following their meeting， Obama avoided the Diaoyu Islands issue， which Abe considered the top agenda item of his visit.
Obama did reiterate that the U.S.-Japan alliance was the “central foundation for our regional security and so much of what we do in the Pacific region，” but stopped short of mentioning the Japan-China dispute over the Diaoyu Islands in his brief remarks after his meeting with Abe. Obama highlighted the two countries’concerns on the “provocative actions” taken by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea， namely Pyongyang’s recent nuclear test， vowing to take “strong actions.”
“Obama’s remarks were more like facegiving comfort than steady support，” said Pang. He explained that the U.S. side didn’t make firm promises on either the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula， nor the U.S. military presence in Futenma， which has been a problem between Tokyo and Washington for many years. Before his visit， Abe stressed that he intended to show Asian countries the rebounded close ties between Japan and the United States. For Abe， the U.S. attitude on the alliance has at least fulfilled one of Japan’s targets. “As a result of our discussion， we were able to share our understanding on not just concrete policy， but on the direction in which our alliance is headed，” said Abe after meeting with Obama， claiming that “the trust and the bond” in the U.S.-Japan alliance are “back.” Abe added that“one big theme” of the meeting was to discuss“strengthening the alliance between Japan and the United States.”
Abe’s meeting with Obama was an important part of Abe’s diplomatic design， said Gao Hong， another CASS researcher on Japanese studies. Gao pointed out that Abe tried to persuade Japanese people that his government can do better than the previous administration under the Democratic Party of Japan. Moreover， Abe aimed to win Washington at his side in order to gain support to cope with Japan’s current diplomatic dilemma. For the U.S. side， it needs Japan’s assistance in East Asia to implement its AsiaPacific policy. But it doesn’t want to sabotage the China-U.S. relationship when Japan crosses the line for being too self-assured of the Japan-U.S. alliance. This was the reason why Washington refused Abe’s visit request when he expressed an aggressive attitude on the territorial dispute in January， and also the reason why Washington avoided talking about the Diaoyu Island issue openly during Abe’s visit.
Future TPP
Unlike security issues， the two sides made some progress on the economic front. Obama said the two agreed that the “number one priority” must be increasing growth and making sure people of both countries can prosper. Washington wants Tokyo to join negotiations for the TPP， a region-wide free trade pact advocated by the United States. The two clearly reached consensus on this matter. In a joint statement issued after the meeting， the two countries confirmed that should Japan join the negotiations， “all goods would be subject to negotiation.”
“The economy is an area in which both Japan and the United States need to make some efforts. The U.S. side hopes to recover from the financial crisis， while Tokyo must revive its economy to solve its domestic problems，”Pang said.
Pang stressed that Japan and the United States made compromises in signing the joint statement. “Their compromises indicate the two countries’ common urgent demand of stepping out of the current economic difficulties，” Pang said. He explained that the U.S. side needs to drive deeper into the Asia-Pacific region， which is considered the driving engine of the world economy， and dragging Japan into the TPP is a U.S. tactic to guide the economic development in the region in a U.S. style. It also seeks to balance growing Chinese influence in the region， he added. For Japan， joining the U.S.-headed TPP can take part in the profit of the partnership， so as to introduce external momentum to pull the Japanese economy out of recession， Pang said. The two sides will face obstacles in following negotiations. For example， Japan will have to open its domestic markets that have been highly protected， such as the agricultural industry， to get investment， cheaper food and energy. Therefore， the agreement will also cause disagreements inside Japan， said Pang.
Jia Xiudong， a researcher with the China Institute of International Studies， said，“Washington and Tokyo have different demands on each other， so they are choosing to use each other by boosting their alliance.”Japan needs the alliance to pose an influential force in Asia， and the United States needs Japan to complete its regional strategy. Washington considers the alliance as a cornerstone of its Asia-Pacific security strategy. But its precondition is that Japan must obey and serve U.S. global strategy and practical interests.
Jia pointed out that Washington consistently takes a dual-edge strategy on Japan， both utilizing and restraining it. And the strategy becomes obvious especially on issues concerning China. If Japan wants U.S. support， it must pay—just like Japan’s compromise on the TPP agreement.
In matters concerning diplomatic relationships， it is always a country’s interest that leads. Washington knows that. But does Japan？ If Japan does， it will choose to deal with territorial disputes with its neighbors in a “calm manner” as it promised during Abe’s visit to the United States. Conducting active， peaceful and practical cooperation in the region will surely be much more rational and comfortable than swallowing sugar-coated empty promises from the United States.