Frontflix

Abe’s Trump Challenge

And Japan's Foreign Policy Choices

Carlos Ramirez

March 07, 2017

Will Japan use Trump’s presidency as impetus to commit to a new Asian security architecture in the region?[1]



1997, Zbigniew Brzezinski, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor, wrote in Foreign Affairs that if Japan were caught between the United States and China without a certainty of allegiance and mission, it “would be like a beached whale, thrashing helplessly but dangerously.”[1]

According to Brzezinski, such a situation could spell the end to Japan’s peaceful political and economic development. Japan would be faced with the unpalatable choice of unilateral rearmament or a new submissive relationship with China.[1]

Brzezinski believed a Japan caught between China and the United States without clarity in its global role would undermine the emergence of a stable relationship among America, Japan, and China. [1]

It would lead, he thought, to insecurity and instability or, even worse, a conflict throughout Asia. Fast forward two decades and this scenario outlined by Brzezinski has become now plausible with the election of Donald Trump.[1]





WATCH LIVE:
President Trump
and Japanese Prime Minister Abe
joint news conference





The good news is Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe receives high marks in his dealings with Trump so far. The big question, however, is whether Abe can contain his inner conservatism and maintain a pragmatic path.[1]

This is an important question as war and peace in East Asia could be hanging in the balance. [1]

Ian Bremmer, the head of the political risk assessment firm Eurasia Group, recently opined on CNN that the previously unthinkable is now indeed possible – a great power war in the years of Trump’s presidency.[1]

The uncertain and unpredictable aims of the new president’s foreign policy worry leaders, diplomats and policymakers alike. [1]

Trump’s heated rhetoric toward China and seemingly friendly attitude toward Russia would suggest that Bremmer was referring to a confrontation between the United States and China.[1]

For Japan, such an event would be catastrophic as Japan would no doubt be expected to participate as an active combatant obliged by treaty, domestic guidelines, and loyalty.

The challenge for Abe is to finesse a role for Japan within this new and precarious security environment, and to mesh it with his own goal of a reinvigorated and globally relevant Japan.[1]

Before suggesting a strategy, it is important to consider some history. The early years of Abe’s current term resembled his turbulent stint as prime minister from 2006 to 2007.[1]

The first two years of this administration, like his first term, focused on returning Japan to a position of leadership in Asia, not only as an economic power, but also as a political and military one. [1]

Former British diplomat Hugh Cortazzi has fittingly described Abe’s aims as harboring “grand illusions of past history.”[1]



Source:

Abe’s Trump Challenge and Japan's Foreign Policy Choices

What To Expect

 

When Angela Merkel

Meets Donald Trump

Michael Knigge

Deutsche Welle (DW)

16.03.2017

When German Chancellor Angela Merkel meets new US President Donald Trump for the first time on Friday she faces her most difficult transatlantic challenge yet. Can they establish a solid working relationship? [2]

It would seem that when it comes to the transatlantic relationship and US presidents, Chancellor Merkel - who is currently campaigning for a fourth term in office - has seen it all.[2]

She hosted the deeply unpopular George W. Bush at a wild boar barbecue in her home state on the Baltic Sea coast and the wildly popular Barack Obama for a sausage and beer breakfast in the Bavarian Alps without ever becoming really chummy with either of them.[2]

During the tenure of both presidents, she weathered major shocks to the transatlantic system, like the aftermath of the Iraq War and the NSA affair, but despite those strains managed to establish such solid ties with the jovial Bush and the cerebral Obama that both eventually considered her the go-to person on most matters European.[2]





President Trump
& Chancellor Angela Merkel
Full Press Conference
3/17/17



But with Donald Trump now residing in the White House, Merkel faces her biggest transatlantic challenge so far. And it comes at a time when she is under increasing pressure at home, facing a resurgent rival Social Democrats in national elections that are a mere six months away. [2]

"Regarding American politics it has never been as complicated as it is now," said Josef Janning, who heads the Berlin office of the European Council on Foreign Relations.[2]

Merkel will have to take a new tack to try to establish a decent working relationship with the president, said John Harper, a US foreign policy professor at Johns Hopkins University in Bologna, since Trump is a "completely differently animal" than Obama or Bush.[2]

That is because, unlike his predecessors - and Merkel - Trump had no previous governmental experience before becoming president.[2]





US-Germany Relations: Merkel
due to visit President Trump
on Friday





Add to that that Trump's presidential demeanor - such as his tendency to expound quickly and aggressively on a myriad of topics, political or not, often via Twitter, or his ongoing and rather personal battle with the media - make him an outlier among recent White House occupant. [2]

He's also the polar opposite to Merkel's political style, which is routinely described as calm and collected - critics even call her bland. [2]

While their different backgrounds and governing styles are important, these pale in comparison to the pair's vastly divergent political worldviews.[2]

The German chancellor favors a cooperative and multilateral approach to global politics.[2]

While Trump - from what one can deduce so far - appears to favor a great power approach to international affairs, to disdain multilateral institutions and structures and to view politics essentially as a zero-sum game.[2]

That makes finding common ground between Merkel and Trump difficult and sets the bar of what to expect from their first meeting rather low, especially given the prior verbal tiffs between them and their different domestic audiences. [2]

That's why neither Janning nor Harper expected any tangible results from this first get-together. [2]




Source:
What to expect when Angela Merkel meets Donald Trump







'Might not be her type':
Merkel to meet with Trump
for 1st time





LINKS:





Trump Seemingly Ignores Angela Merkel's Handshake Request




Merkel critical of US immigration ban, spokesman tells Spiegel




Trump, Merkel try to sidestep differences in first meeting

MAJOR: President Trump
And Chancellor Angela Merkel
Meet with German Business Leaders
at White House

OFFICIALS:

UN  FAILS

To Implement Its Resolutions

On Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict

The UN Security Council resolutions on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict must be fulfilled, said Faisal al-Fayez, Chairman of the Jordanian Senate, on the sidelines of the 5th Global Baku Forum.Armenia has not yet implemented four UN Security Council resolutions on withdrawal of its armed forces from the Nagorno-Karabakh and surrounding districts.

Laman Ismayilova

17 March 2017

UN couldn’t take necessary steps to implement its resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, said Ali Ahmadov, Vice-Premier of Azerbaijan in Baku on March 16.[3]

“The Armenia-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a question under the mandate of the United Nations. Despite the UN Security Council’s relevant resolutions, this high organization doesn’t control implementation of these documents. Why are UNSC resolutions on Nagorno- Karabakh not implemented? It is impossible to reach any agreement without implementation of these resolutions,” he said.[3]

Ahmadov reminded that the UN Security Council has adopted four resolutions on withdrawal of the Armenian armed forces from the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.[3]

“Over 20 years have elapsed since these resolutions were adopted. The United Nations couldn’t take necessary steps to implement these documents. It is for over 20 years they are engaged in this question which is prolonged from year to year. Then, it was mandated to the OSCE as if to ‘to look and see’,” Ali Ahmadov emphasized.[3]

Karabakh Clashes:
Armenia-Azerbaijan tensions
flare up over disputed Karabakh

The OSCE Minsk Group, the activities of which have become known as the Minsk Process, works to find a peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict for over two decades, but in vain.[3]

The conflict between the two South Caucasus countries began in 1988 when Armenia made territorial claims against Azerbaijan. As a result of the ensuing war, in 1992 Armenian armed forces occupied 20 percent of Azerbaijan, including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts.[3]

The 1994 ceasefire agreement was followed by peace negotiations. Armenia has not yet implemented four UN Security Council resolutions on withdrawal of its armed forces from the Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding districts.[3]





President: Nagorno-Karabakh inseparable part of Azerbaijan,
April battles our internal affair




Ambassador: Germany recognizes territorial
integrity of Azerbaijan

Three killed
in recent violence
in Karabakh, Ali Mustafa
reports from Agdam, Karabakh

Nagorno Karabakh's Occupation By Armenia	About 20% of Azerbaijan's Territories Have Been Occupied By Armenia
The UN Security Council passed four resolutions:  Resolution 822 (30/4/93)  Resolution 853 (29/7/93)  Resolution 874 (14/10/93) Resolution 884 (12/11/93)	Resolutions 822 and 853 demanded the withdrawal of Armenian forces from occupied Azerbaijani region and further requested the cessation of all hostilities.
In 2006 the GA adopted Resolution A/RES/60/285 “The situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan”. The most recent resolution adopted by the General Assembly is A/RES/62/243 which was also titled “The situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan”, and demanded the immediate withdrawal of Armenian forces from all occupied Azerbaijani territories including the Nagorno-Karabakh region.	Because of this economic loss in the occupied regions, nearly 7000 establishments were closed.
RESOLUTION 822 (1993) Adopted by the Security Council at its 3205th meeting, on 30 April 1993.RESOLUTION 853 (1993) Adopted by the Security Council at its 3259th meeting, on 29 July 1993. RESOLUTION 874 (1993) Adopted by the Security Council at its 3292nd meeting, on 14 October 1993 & RESOLUTION 884 (1993) Adopted by the Security Council at its 3313th meeting, on 12 November 1993. Source: 1993 UN Security Council Resolutions on Nagorno-Karabakh	Shamkhal Abilov & Ismayil Isayev, :The Consequences of the Nagorno-Karabakh War for Azerbaijan and the Undeniable Reality of Khojaly Massacre." Polish Political Science Yearbook vol. 45 (2016), pp. 291–303. Russia wants “neither winners no losers” in this conflict (Minassion, 2008, p. 15). Russia wants “neither winners no losers” in this conflict (Minassion, 2008, p. 15) Vladimir V.  Putin On Armenian History Putin on Armenian History

Therefore, Russia was considered one of the main obstacles to the solution of the conflict that prevented any peace initiative by the Minsk Group from the outbreak of the conflict.



The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)  has called for “the withdrawal of Armenian armed forces  and other irregular armed forces from Nagorno-Karabakh   and the other occupied territories of Azerbaijan

The committee also called for "the convening of a plenary meeting of the Minsk Group to establish an interim status for Nagorno-Karabakh guaranteeing security and internal self-governance, with an agreed corridor linking Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh, and other confidence-building measures, including an access corridor to Nakhchivan".

Recalling that both Armenia and Azerbaijan committed themselves, when joining the Council of Europe in 2001, to use only peaceful means for settling their conflict over the Nagorno-Karabakh region, the committee urged both governments to refrain from using armed force.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has called for “the withdrawal of Armenian armed forces and other irregular armed forces from Nagorno-Karabakh  and the other occupied territories of Azerbaijan

The committee also called for the establishment by the OSCE of an international peacekeeping force to maintain security within Nagorno-Karabakh and the other occupied territories and to ensure the safe return and resettlement of displaced persons, as well as the creation of a mechanism to investigate ceasefire violations. The draft resolution, based on a report by Robert Walter (United Kingdom, EC), is due to be debated by the Assembly at its January 2016 session.

The Council of Europe (PACE) has called for “the withdrawal of Armenian armed forces and other irregular armed forces from Nagorno-Karabakh and the other occupied territories of Azerbaijan

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE)
has called for “the withdrawal of Armenian armed forces and other irregular armed forces from Nagorno-Karabakh
and the other occupied territories of Azerbaijan

Nagorno-Karabakh Isn't Disputed Territory—It's Occupied

Nagorno-Karabakh:Russia's Proxy War in the Caucasus
Russia Shows Its Hand On Karabakh


Source:

Russia shows its hand on Karabakh

Along with the territorial loss, Azerbaijan was a first former Soviet state encountering problems with refugees and IDPs. The deteriorating situation that triggered the tension between Azerbaijan and Armenia forced approximately one million Azerbaijanis to leave their homelands.

Source:

The Consequences of the Nagorno-Karabakh War for Azerbaijan and the Undeniable Reality of Khojaly Massacre:

The Unresolved Crisis:
Occupied Karabakh's displaced
hope to return

[1]
Abe’s Trump Challenge and Japan's Foreign Policy Choices

[2]
What to expect when Angela Merkel meets Donald Trump

[3]
Official: UN fails to implement its resolutions
on Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Large Visitor Globe