An international team of ten specialists in Japanese and American foreign relations address the crucial question: what role should Japan play in international affairs? They try to find a satisfactory answer to a concern which was first raised in the mid-19th century.

An international team of ten specialists in Japanese and American foreign relations address the crucial question: what role should Japan play in international affairs? This question has not found a fully satisfactory answer since the forced opening to foreign contacts in the mid-nineteenth century. Having copied foreign models and achieved a series of stunning successes -- and some failures -- in many aspects of private and public life, Japan today stands at a pinnacle of economic power and affluence. Despite this, both economics and politics are undergoing major strains and changes during the 1990s, and the quest for true internationalization is fraught with problems and only partially fulfilled. This book is a joint project of the American University in Washington and Ritsumeikan University in Kyoto.

This paper presents a study of Japan's international role with a special focus on its historical evolution. To that end, the following three pillars lay the necessary theoretical foundations: one, the notions of historical and political identity and a discussion of the ambivalent shapes they have taken in Japan; two, the regional context, an examination of Japan's situation with respect to Asian history as a whole, and finally, the "civilian power" concept as defined by Hanns W. Maull.

This is an in-depth analysis of the U.S.-Japan security alliance and its implications for Japan and the Asia-Pacific region. It moves away from the official line that the alliance is a vital aspect of Japan's security policy and introduces issues and arguments that are often overlooked: American security policy has failed to achieve its goals; Japan's interests are not fully served by the alliance; the alliance itself is a source of instability in the region; and the arrangement has placed constraints on Japan's own political development. The author measures current developments in U.S. foreign policy against Japan's role in the region and Japan's own political development. He assesses the consequences of the alliance for the current regional situation in Northeast Asia, looks at future policy options for Japan, and makes the case for a neutralist security policy.

This is an in-depth analysis of the U.S.-Japan security alliance and its implications for Japan and the Asia-Pacific region. It moves away from the official line that the alliance is a vital aspect of Japan's security policy and introduces issues and arguments that are often overlooked: American security policy has failed to achieve its goals; Japan's interests are not fully served by the alliance; the alliance itself is a source of instability in the region; and the arrangement has placed constraints on Japan's own political development. The author measures current developments in U.S. foreign policy against Japan's role in the region and Japan's own political development. He assesses the consequences of the alliance for the current regional situation in Northeast Asia, looks at future policy options for Japan, and makes the case for a neutralist security policy.

On November 9, 1989, a mob of jubilant Berliners dismantled the wall that had divided their city for nearly forty years; this act of destruction anticipated the momentous demolition of the European communist system. Within two years, the nations of the former Eastern Bloc toppled their authoritarian regimes, and the Soviet Union ceased to exist, fading quietly into the shadows of twentieth century history and memory. By the end of 1991, the United States and other Western nations celebrated the demise of their most feared enemy and reveled in the ideological vindication of capitalism and liberal democracy. As author Hal Brands compellingly demonstrates, however, many American diplomats and politicians viewed the fall of the Soviet empire as a mixed blessing. For more than four decades, containment of communism provided the overriding goal of American foreign policy, allowing generations of political leaders to build domestic consensus on this steady, reliable foundation. From Berlin to Baghdad incisively dissects the numerous unsuccessful attempts to devise a new grand foreign policy strategy that could match the moral clarity and political efficacy of containment. Brands takes a fresh look at the key events and players in recent American history. In the 1990s, George H. W. Bush envisioned the United States as the guardian of a "new world order," and the Clinton administration sought the "enlargement" of America's political and economic influence. However, both presidents eventually came to accept, albeit grudgingly, that America's multifaceted roles, responsibilities, and objectives could not be reduced to a single fundamental principle. During the early years of the George W. Bush administration, it appeared that the tragedies of 9/11 and the subsequent "war on terror" would provide the organizing principle lacking in U.S. foreign policy since the containment of communism became an outdated notion. For a time, most Americans were united in support of Bush's foreign policies and the military incursions into Afghanistan and Iraq. As the swift invasions became grinding occupations, however, popular support for Bush's policies waned, and the rubric of the war on terror lost much of its political and rhetorical cachet. From Berlin to Baghdad charts the often onerous course of recent American foreign policy, from the triumph of the fall of the Berlin Wall to the tragedies of 9/11 and beyond, analyzing the nation's search for purpose in the face of the daunting complexities of the post–Cold War world.

As the world's economic and political centre of gravity moves increasingly towards East and South Asia, we can expect a number of countries in these regions to devote more attention to the Middle East. The relations between East and South Asia and the Middle East have significantly expanded as a result of the global rise of Asian economic powers, particularly China, India, Japan and South Korea. Not only oil but also trade, investment, infrastructure, and tourism is the name of the business with the MENA region. Beyond energy and economic interests, questions arise about the potential geopolitical dimension of these evolving ties. What are the strategic implications of the projection of Asian countries in an unstable, fragmented and volatile region? How do they interact with each other and with other international players? Last but not least, will the Covid-19 pandemic be a game changer in (re)shaping relations in the future?