REVIEW ARTICLE: PERSPECTIVES ON JAPAN'S SECURITY

This review article synthesizes and analyzes the major contemporary perspectives on Japan's security policy. It examines the evolving debates within Japan and internationally about the country's appropriate security role in the post-Cold War world. The study reviews the literature associated with the main schools of thought. These include the "realist" perspective, which advocates for a more "normal" military role for Japan and a strengthening of the US-Japan alliance; the "liberal" perspective, which emphasizes Japan's role in promoting peace and prosperity through economic statecraft and multilateral institutions; and the "pacifist" perspective, which remains deeply committed to the principles of Article 9 of the constitution and advocates for a non-military foreign policy. The paper argues that Japanese security policy is a product of the complex and ongoing contestation between these different perspectives. The analysis concludes by assessing the likely future direction of Japan's security policy as it navigates the strategic challenges of the 21st century.

The question of Japan's security role has been one of the most debated issues in post-Cold War Asian security. This review article provides a comprehensive overview of the different perspectives that have shaped this debate. The study begins by outlining the foundational framework of Japan's post-war security policy: the "Yoshida Doctrine," which prioritized economic development while relying on the United States for security. The core of the article is a synthesis of the three major schools of thought that emerged to challenge or defend this traditional posture. The first perspective reviewed is that of the realists, who argue that Japan must shed its pacifist constraints and become a "normal" great power with a military commensurate with its economic strength. The second perspective is that of the liberal internationalists, who contend that Japan's greatest contribution to global security lies not in military power, but in its use of economic statecraft, development aid, and its leadership in multilateral institutions. The third perspective is that of the pacifists, who continue to champion a strict interpretation of the "peace constitution" and advocate for Japan to play a unique role as a global civilian power. By synthesizing the arguments and evidence from a wide range of scholarly and policy literature, the paper provides a nuanced map of the intellectual landscape of the Japanese security debate. The findings reveal that there is no single consensus, but rather a dynamic and ongoing struggle between these competing visions, the outcome of which will have profound implications for the future of the Asia-Pacific region.