Japan’s Defense Strategy Transformation in the Indo-Pacific: Relevance, Opportunities, and Challenges for Indonesia’s Defense Diplomacy
Article Sidebar
Page Numbers:
1527-1550
Digital Object Identifier:
10.58578/mikailalsys.v4i2.10300
Viewed: 104 times
Downloaded: 39 times
LYAS Publisher cordially invites qualified professionals to serve as Editors or Reviewers. Your expertise will make an important contribution to maintaining and strengthening the academic quality of our publications. Interested applicants are kindly requested to complete the application form at the following link: Editors & Reviewers
Please feel free to contact us if you need any further information about the submission process or if you have any additional questions.
Authors:Ita Nurjanah1*, Fauzia Gustarina Cempaka Timur2, Frega Wenas Inkiriwang3
Copyright :Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication.
Main Article Content
Google Scholar
ORCID
Abstract
Japan’s defense diplomacy in the Indo-Pacific has received increasing scholarly attention, particularly in relation to the evolution of the Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP) strategy and regional security dynamics. However, studies specifically examining the transformation of Japan’s defense diplomacy from FOIP 1.0 to FOIP 3.0 and its strategic implications for Indonesia remain limited. This study aims to analyze the transformation of Japan’s defense diplomacy in the Indo-Pacific and assess its strategic implications for Indonesia. Employing a qualitative case study design, this research examines Japan’s evolving defense diplomacy architecture in the Indo-Pacific region. Data were collected through document analysis of official government documents, defense white papers, policy reports, and relevant academic literature, and were analyzed using thematic and content analysis techniques. The findings indicate that Japan’s defense diplomacy has shifted from a traditionally reactive security posture toward a more proactive, multidomain, and technology-oriented strategy encompassing maritime security, cybersecurity, space cooperation, alliance interoperability, and Official Security Assistance (OSA). The findings further show that Japan increasingly functions as a proactive security provider through multidomain cooperation and institutionalized defense diplomacy mechanisms. This study contributes to the development of Neoclassical Realism and defense diplomacy literature by demonstrating how states adapt to systemic pressures through non-coercive security instruments and multidomain engagement. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of balanced and adaptive defense diplomacy for Indonesia in strengthening maritime security, cybersecurity, and strategic autonomy amid intensifying Indo-Pacific geopolitical competition. The study offers practical implications for policymakers in designing adaptive and balanced defense cooperation strategies and provides opportunities for further comparative research on defense diplomacy among Indo-Pacific middle powers.
Citation Metrics:
Downloads
Article Details
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
References
Acharya, A. (2014). Constructing a security community in Southeast Asia: ASEAN and the problem of regional order (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315796673
Agastia, I. G. B. D., & Perwita, A. A. B. (2016). Indonesia’s Maritime Axis and the security of sea lanes of communications (SLOCs) in the Indo-Pacific. Jurnal Hubungan Internasional, 5(1), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.18196/hi.2016.0081.10-21
Baker, D. P. (2023). Japan’s strategic evolution in the Indo-Pacific. Palgrave Macmillan.
Bayne, N., & Woolcock, S. (Eds.). (2011). The new economic diplomacy: Decision-making and negotiation in international economic relations (3rd ed.). Ashgate Publishing.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Chapnick, A. (1999). The middle power. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 7(2), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/11926422.1999.9673212
Cottey, A., & Forster, A. (2013). Reshaping defence diplomacy: New roles for military cooperation and assistance. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315000817
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Government of Japan. (2022). National security strategy of Japan. https://www.cas.go.jp/jp/siryou/221216anzenhoshou/nss-e.pdf
Hosoya, Y. (2019). FOIP 2.0: The evolution of Japan’s Free and Open Indo-Pacific strategy. Asia-Pacific Review, 26(1), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/13439006.2019.1622868
Hughes, C. W. (2009). Japan’s remilitarisation. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Japans-Remilitarisation/Hughes/p/book/9780415556927
ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute. (2024). The state of Southeast Asia: 2024 survey report. https://www.iseas.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/The-State-of-SEA-2024.pdf
Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (2012). Power and interdependence (4th ed.). Pearson.
Koga, K. (2019). Japan’s “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” strategy: Tokyo’s tactical hedging and the implications for ASEAN. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 41(2), 286–313. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26798855
Kuik, C.-C. (2008). The essence of hedging: Malaysia and Singapore’s response to a rising China. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 30(2), 159–185. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs30-2a
Lipscy, P. Y. (2023). Japan: The harbinger state. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 24(1), 80–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1468109922000329
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2016). Designing qualitative research (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Midford, P. (2011). Rethinking Japanese public opinion and security: From pacifism to realism? Stanford University Press.
Ripsman, N. M., Taliaferro, J. W., & Lobell, S. E. (2016). Neoclassical realist theory of international politics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199899234.001.0001
Rose, G. (1998). Neoclassical realism and theories of foreign policy. World Politics, 51(1), 144–172. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100007814
Scheffran, J. (2023). Limits to the Anthropocene: Geopolitical conflict or cooperative governance? Frontiers in Political Science, 5, Article 1190610. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2023.1190610
Soeya, Y. (2011). A “normal” middle power: Interpreting changes in Japanese security policy in the 1990s and after. In Y. Soeya, M. Tadokoro, & D. A. Welch (Eds.), Japan as a “normal country”?: A nation in search of its place in the world (pp. 72–97). University of Toronto Press. https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442694231-005
Tamaki, N. (2020). Japan’s quest for a rules-based international order: The Japan-US alliance and the decline of US liberal hegemony. Contemporary Politics, 26(4), 384–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2020.1777041
Winger, G. (2014). The velvet gauntlet: A theory of defense diplomacy. IWM Junior Visiting Fellows’ Conferences, 33. Institute for Human Sciences. https://www.iwm.at/publications/5-junior-visiting-fellows-conferences/vol-xxxiii/the-velvet-gauntlet
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Zacharias, G. (2020). The Japanese diplomacy in Asia: Evolution and challenges. Journal of Liberty and International Affairs, 6(2), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.47305/JLIA2020135z
Zulkifli, A., Wibisono, M., Perwita, A. A. B., & Mahroza, J. (2023). Foreign policy and defense diplomacy in ASEAN to maintain stability and security in the Indo-Pacific region. Publica: Jurnal Pemikiran Administrasi Negara, 15(1), 263–272. https://doi.org/10.15575/jpan.v15i1.25091