How Japan affects the international system

Abstract

To cope with more than incremental change in the international system, the neorealist concept of structure and the neoliberal concept of process must be complemented by a third analytically distinguished element: the concept of action. All three concepts can be used on the systemic level of analysis of international relations theory. Their obvious differentiation is the degree of systemic consolidation, with structure at the highest, action at the lowest, and process at unstable intermediate degrees. Without analyzing prevailing models of action of important units of the international system, it is impossible to predict the possible range of outcomes of processes and structural changes in the international system.This article offers Japan's “strategic pragmatism” as a model of action. The model, representing a functional cut across contending economic doctrines, combines relative fiscal conservatism with “progressive” provision of credit, dynamic capitalism with public policy activism, and critical rationalism with philosophical pragmatism. Japan's strategic pragmatism has not only enabled its government and enterprises to cope with uncertainty and change in their domestic and international environment but has also increased global welfare and changed the balance of strategic components of power in the international system. The spread of this model of action both within and beyond Japan's control points to a paradigm change in economic and international relations theory—that is, to the most pervasive form of systemic consolidation.

The Politics of Leverage in International Relations

“…Studies of the economic sources of political leverage discuss how states can structure trade, foreign aid, and other economic ties in ways that enable them to manipulate the behavior of other states (e.g., Cohen 2008;Hirschman 1945Hirschman [1980; Knorr 1977aKnorr , 1977bMiller 1974;Schmiegelow and Schmiegelow 1990;Stallings 1992;Walt 1987, 41-46). 5 Explorations of bargaining leverage emphasize the capabilities and vulnerabilities of each side in ongoing deliberations and ways in which bargaining strategies, including efforts to alter the domestic political landscape of one's adversaries, can enhance present or future advantage (e.g., Evans et al 1993;Fearon 1995;Putnam 1988;Snyder 1989).…”

The International History of the Strategic Defense Initiative: American Influence and Economic Competition in the Late Cold War

“…Europeans themselves viewed their industries as lagging the US technologically, especially in microelectronics, computers and lasers; hence their interest in using SDI to boost their high‐tech capabilities (Bluth, 1986, p. 262). With Japan's perceived technological lead, the US had relatively more interest in Japanese technology (Schmiegelow and Schmiegelow, 1990, p. 583). In other words, the US acted as a supplicant as well as a hegemon; it was hard to view the US at the time as completely dominant, with Japanese consumer technologies invading the US market, Japanese finance flooding Wall Street, and Japan replacing the US as the world's leading creditor (Scolinos, 1988).…”