Australia should think twice before becoming friendly with Japan

Shinzo Abe wants to draw Australia into a much closer defence and strategic partnership with Japan. This is the key message in the Japanese Prime Minister’s visit to Canberra today. The big question for Australia is whether we should to agree to this. Mr Abbott seems to think we should, but he might well be wrong. 

We need to look at the context to see why. Last week, in a decisive shift from Japan’s unique brand of pacifism, Mr Abe removed key restrictions on Japanese military operations. In future, under a new policy of "collective self-defence", Japan’s armed forces will be able fight alongside allies against a common foe.

Now Mr Abe is looking for allies to fight alongside. He has already found the common foe. His historic and highly controversial step to collective self-defence has not been taken so that Japan can do more peacekeeping or disaster relief. It is in response to the rise of China. 

As China’s power grows it is becoming more threatening to Japan, and America appears more reluctant to confront China on Japan’s behalf. The Senkaku/Diaoyu crisis makes this very clear. Japan therefore fears that the old policy of relying on America to protect it from China won’t work as well in future.

Advertisement

That is why Mr Abe wants to expand Japan’s ability to defend itself, and recruit new partners to help. He has the Philippines, Vietnam and India in mind, and he wants Australia in there too. So let’s be quite clear what this week’s visit means, behind the diplomatic circumlocutions and the promises to help with things like submarines. Mr Abe wants Australia to become Japan’s ally against China.

Mr Abbott’s enthusiastic support for Mr Abe’s polices, and his eagerness to build closer defence links, suggests he wants the same thing. That is certainly how his words and actions will be read in Beijing, Tokyo and Washington.This is why we should be careful.

There is no doubt that China’s rise poses real security concerns for Japan, which require big policy changes. Certainly, Japan has a perfect right to do what is needed to protect its own security. And Mr Abbott is right to say that, 70 years after the war and with a record of good international citizenship, there is no reason to fear resurgent militarism despite Mr Abe’s desire to whitewash past misdeeds.

But that leaves two big questions to be answered. First, is it wise for Japan to seek security by trying to build a coalition of regional allies against China? Probably not: it is hard to see that the best way to build a stable future for Japan is to divide Asia into mutually-hostile armed blocs.      

Second, even if its works for Japan, would Abe’s plan work for us? One obvious problem is that it will damage our relations with China, which is not something we should do lightly. But fear of displeasing Beijing is not the only reason to be careful here. We need to ask: would Australia be more secure if it was tied more closely to Japan on strategic matters  as Japan’s relationship with China worsens? Will Australia be more secure is we see Asia divided into hostile blocs such as these? And how sure are we that our interests will always align with Japan’s over coming decades – especially if Japan’s alliance with America grows weaker?  

There is no sign that Mr Abbott has considered any of these questions. One reason might be that he simply does not understand what’s happening in Asia today, and so he doesn’t really understand what Mr Abe is after. This might seem hard to believe, but Mr Abbott often speaks as if he simply does not accept that strategic tensions are growing. For example he told a Washington audience recently that America should not worry about China’s rise because it is not a strategic rival. I doubt Mr Abe would agree.

A second possibility is that Mr Abbott is just pretending not to understand. He does understand what is going on in Asia, and has decided that, as regional strategic rivalries escalate, Australia’s best move is to spur them on – not just by strengthening our alliance with America, but by becoming Japan’s ally against China.

One wonders whether he could really have thought through what that would mean in practice. For example, has he considered how Australia would respond in the event of a China-Japan clash over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands? The government has refused to reply to recent awkward questions about this. But, while it is quite right not to comment on such things publicly, it would be extremely irresponsible not to have thought about it very carefully in private. After all, even the most sober analysts agree that a clash could break out at any time, that America would immediately be drawn in and that Australia would very quickly receive a request for help from Washington, and from Tokyo.   

Mr Abe of course hopes that Australia would say yes. Securing that kind of support from Australia is the whole point of his diplomacy this week. But what does Mr Abbott think? Would he really be willing to take Australia to war with China to defend Japan’s claim to these rocks? And if he wouldn’t, is he wise to talk and act as if he would?  Because that is what he’s doing with Mr Abe this week.         

Hugh White is an Age columnist and professor of strategic studies at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre, ANU.