The article examines the case of Japan’s peacebuilding in South Sudan from 2011 to 2017 and asks how Japan’s shift towards a more proactive defence posture affects the place of human security in its foreign policy agenda. Using the framework of neoclassical realism, the article argues that human security remains a critical element of Japanese foreign policy despite changes in its strategic orientation because, international predicaments notwithstanding, Japan’s foreign policy decision making is still significantly constrained by domestic variables such as state–society relations, elite perceptions, elite consensus, and domestic institutional arrangements. Changes in Japan’s overall foreign and security policies do not diminish the importance of human security. Despite the shift to a more assertive foreign policy, Japan still retains the essential features of its diplomacy. External variables influence policymakers’ decision making, but domestic variables constrain policy choices and outcomes.
BergerT. U. (1993). From sword to Chrysanthemum: Japan’s culture of antimilitarism. International Security, 174, 119–150.
4.
BergerT. U. (1998). Cultures of antimilitarism: National security in Germany and Japan. The Johns Hopkins University Press.
5.
Cabinet Office, Japan. (2012). Secretariat of the International Peace Cooperation Headquarters—FAQ on Japan’s International Peace Cooperation Assignment in South Sudan. http://www.pko.go.jp/pko_e/faq/faq_s_sudan.html
6.
Da CostaD. F.de ConingC. (2015). United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan. In KoopsJ.MacQueenN.TardyT.WilliamsP. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of United Nations peacekeeping operations. Oxford University Press.
7.
DueckC. (2009). Neoclassical realism and the national interest: presidents, domestic politics, and major military interventions. In LobellS.RipsmanN.TaliaferroJ. (Eds.), Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy (pp. 139–169). Cambridge University Press.
8.
EdströmB. (2008). Japan and the challenge of human security: The founding of a new policy 1995-2003. Institute for Security and Development Policy.
9.
EdströmB. (2010). Japan’s foreign policy and human security. Japan Forum, 15(2), 209–225.
10.
Fisker-NielsenA. M. (2016). Has Kōmeitō abandoned its principles? Public perception of the party’s role in Japan’s security legislation debate. The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, 21(3), 1–28.
11.
FujiwaraK. (2013). Keizai-Kyoryoku: On the life and times of Japanese economic diplomacy. In TowW.WaltonD.KerstenR. (Eds.), New approaches to human security in the Asia Pacific: China, Japan, and Australia (pp. 93–106). Ashgate.
HirataK. (2008). Who shapes the national security debate? Divergent interpretations of Japan’s security role. Asian Affairs: An American Review, 35(3), 123–151.
14.
HookG. D. (1996). Militarization and demilitarization in contemporary Japan. Routledge.
15.
HughesC. (2004). Japan’s re-emergence as a “normal” military power. Oxford University Press.
16.
HughesC. (2015). Japan’s foreign and security policy under the “Abe doctrine”: New dynamism or a new dead end?Palgrave Macmillan.
KurusuK. (2011). Japan as an active agent for global norms: The political dynamism behind the acceptance and promotion of “Human Security.” Asia Pacific Review, 18(2), 115–137.
31.
LobellS. E.RipsmanN. M.TaliaferroJ. W. (Eds.). (2009). Neoclassical realism, the state, and foreign policy. Cambridge University Press.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan. (2011). Dispatch of the International Peace Cooperation corps members to the United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS) Headquarters. https://www.mofa.go.jp/announce/announce/2011/11/1115_01.html
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan. (2016). Japan’s legislation for peace and security: Seamless responses for peace and security of Japan and the international community. http://www.mofa.go.jp/files/000143304.pdf
41.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan. (2017). Japan’s basic thinking regarding the termination of operations of the engineering unit of the self defence force in the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS). http://www.ss.emb-japan.go.jp/files/000238944.pdf
OrosA. (2008). Normalizing Japan: Politics, identity, and the evolution of security practice. NUS Press.
44.
OrosA. (2015). International and Domestic Challenges to Japan’s Post-War Security Identity: “Norm Constructivism” and Japan’s New “Proactive Pacifism.” The Pacific Review, 28(1), 139–160.
45.
OrosA. (2017). Japan’s security renaissance: New policies and politics for the twenty-first century. Columbia University Press.
TaliaferroJ. W. (2006). State building for future wars: Neoclassical realism and the resource-extractive state. Security Studies, 16(3), 464–495.
56.
TeittS. (2016). Asia Pacific and South Asia. In BellamyA.DunneT. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the responsibility to protect. Oxford University Press.
