Few studies on international politics have examined people's values, especially through use of cross-national analysis, although a country's foreign policy may reflect the values held by the public. The present paper examines results of the Asia-Pacific Values Survey and analyzes Asia-Pacific people's attitudes and values regarding international politics. Our focus is on three sets of items regarding people's attitude toward Japan, confidence in the United Nations, and ideology. First, we analyze response data for those items separately. Then, by applying Hayashi's Quantification Method III, we show that countries/areas in the Asia-Pacific region may be classified into three clusters or cultural spheres. This result presents an illustration of cultural manifold analysis (CULMAN) of international politics.
Under what conditions would Japanese leaders visit the controversial Yasukuni Shrine and why? Previous studies have focused primarily on the domestic benefits and effects of such visits, claiming that leaders employ visits to follow their own conservative ideology and gain domestic political support. Given the harsh international criticism that tends to ensue, however, political leaders should also consider the cost and international effects of such visits. This study proposes three necessary conditions for such visits: a conservative ruling party, a government enjoying high popularity, and Japan's perception of a Chinese threat. With regard to the latter, a security threat from China has allowed Japan to use these visits as a credible signal of its resolve against China. Comparative analyses of Japanese cabinets after the mid-1980s support this argument.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.