Follow us on social

20220523_fumio_kishida_and_joe_biden_24

Japan's Kishida comes to town with emboldened defense strategy

Hopefully, more than just Tokyo's massive new military spending will be on the agenda when the PM meets with Biden on Friday.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific

When Japan’s Prime Minister Fumio Kishida meets with President Biden in Washington this week, he will no doubt emphasize his efforts to bolster Japanese defense capabilities and tighten the U.S.-Japan alliance. 

Kishida, who will be meeting with Biden on Friday after a whirlwind trip through Europe and Canada, will report on how he expects Japan to improve the mobility and resilience of its defense forces, and how its military will acquire counterstrike capabilities to complement U.S. military power. 

In addition, the prime minister will confirm his decision to increase spending to about 43 trillion yen (about $326 billion) under the new defense build-up program during fiscal years 2023-2027 —which is more than a 56 percent jump over the previous five-year period for 2019-2023. 

President Biden will of course welcome these transformative changes in Japan’s defense policy.

But Kishida should also use the upcoming bilateral summit to hold a frank and substantive discussion about the role of diplomacy in dealing with critical security issues in the Asia-Pacific region. Although Japan’s National Security Strategy released in December mentions China as “the greatest strategic challenge in ensuring the peace and security of Japan and the peace and stability of the international community,” what is missing in this document is a concrete diplomatic strategy to address one of the greatest security challenges in the region: the danger of military conflict across the Taiwan Strait. 

Japan’s new National Security Strategy only vaguely states that “Japan will continue to make various efforts based on its position that cross-strait issues are expected to be resolved peacefully.”

Given the geographic proximity of Japan to Taiwan, Japan’s acquisition of new stand-off counter-strike missile capabilities, as well as the enhanced mobility and resilience of its defense forces, will complicate Chinese military planning and encourage Beijing to be more hesitant about using military force to reunify Taiwan with China.

Although military deterrence is essential, it is by no means sufficient to reduce the risk of war over Taiwan. Unless accompanied by an effective diplomatic strategy, the enhancement of military deterrence could exacerbate cross-strait tensions by provoking further threatening responses from China and convincing the Chinese leadership that the only way to resolve the Taiwan issue is through military force.

In order to prevent a war over Taiwan, therefore, one must distinguish between Chinese motives and intentions.

China’s motives in preventing the permanent separation of Taiwan from China and reunifying Taiwan with China are immutable. They are the core interests of both China’s leadership and people. But there is room for flexibility regarding China’s intentions when it comes to the timing of Taiwan’s reunification with China and the use of military force. 

The goal of U.S. and Japanese policy should be to encourage China’s patience regarding Taiwan and its pursuit of peaceful means for resolving the Taiwan issue. To do so, Kishida should ask Biden to work together on the following three points. First, Tokyo and Washington should give Beijing credible reassurances about their Taiwan policies as well as buttressing their deterrence capabilities. The U.S. National Security Strategy released in October began to move in this direction when it stated that the United States does not support Taiwan independence. But Japan’s National Security Strategy was much less explicit by only noting that “Japan’s basic position regarding Taiwan remains unchanged.” 

To reassure Beijing that Tokyo and Washington remain committed to their One China policies, Kishida and Biden should issue a joint statement that neither Japan nor the United States supports Taiwan's independence in addition to reasserting that they welcome a peaceful resolution to cross-strait differences and oppose unilateral changes to the status quo by either side of the Taiwan Strait. And Japanese and American leaders should remind their counterparts in Taiwan that the best way for Taipei to protect its diplomatic space and expand its participation in international bodies is to mitigate tensions between itself and China.

Second, both Japan and the United States should devote more energy to stabilizing and improving their respective bilateral relationships with China. Both countries should seize opportunities for cooperation with China to deal with the critical global challenges of climate change and public health, as well as to address North Korea’s alarming missile tests and nuclear programs. Kishida should also express to Biden his reservations about simplistically dividing the world into two opposing camps of democracies versus autocracies. 

In the long run, such a Manichean approach to foreign policy will undermine the international expansion of universal values of freedom, democracy, and fundamental human rights. 

Third, while continuing to promote a free and open Indo-Pacific maritime region, Japan and the United States should revive their vision of an open and inclusive Asia-Pacific region. Kishida should emphasize to Biden that the countries of Asia want to avoid having to choose between the United States and China and that they prefer a more moderate U.S.-China strategic competition.

In the spirit of open and prosperous regionalism, Kishida should convey his hope that China as well as Taiwan will meet the high standards of accession to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. By building on the legacy of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum whereby Beijing accepted Taiwan’s membership in APEC as an economic region under the name China-Taipei, such a development would contribute to improving cross-strait relations. 

Given Tokyo’s habit of deferring to Washington on important security issues because of Japan’s dependence on the U.S. defense commitment, Kishida might feel uncomfortable about raising the above points with Biden — especially in light of the strong anti-China sentiment now prevalent in Washington. But he must muster the courage to engage in such straight talk with Biden because the stakes are so especially high for Japan.

A war over Taiwan would engulf Japan with devastating consequences. Moreover, Kishida has earned the right to voice his concerns about U.S. policy toward China because of the tough decisions he has made to strengthen Japan’s defense capabilities and U.S.-Japan alliance coordination. Biden might even welcome this candid advice from a trusted and indispensable ally because it could increase his leverage to resist those in the United States pushing for even more hostile and indeed more reckless policies toward China.


Prime Minister Kishida held a summit meeting and other events with President Biden of the United States at the Akasaka Palace State Guest House. (May 23, 2022) (Government of Japan/Wikimedia Commons)
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.