Reputation & Interdependence: How Japan Perceives US Resolve in Distant Regions

• In Event: Security Dynamics in East Asia

Abstract

How do allies perceive the US resolve based on its actions in regions distant from them? During the last decade, the US credibility of its commitments abroad was shaken, tested, or put into question altogether as it was accused of lacking resolve in crises. While there is a vast literature on how adversaries can be deterred best, there is disproportionally less research regarding how US allies perceive their defender’s actions – or non-actions. This paper aims to contribute to the literature on interdependence, reputation, and credibility. It examines why Japan seems to have perceived the US credibility in other regions differently over time, adding to the literature by examining the case of the Kurdish crisis of 2019. While during the annexation of Crimea in 2014 Japanese sources showed concern regarding the US policy choices, during the US withdrawal from Syria in 2019, the Japanese reactions were mostly silent. While reputational links seem to have been created, as Japan was indeed monitoring the crises and the US behavior, in the first case, the ally was much more worried than during the second one. After examining secondary sources from previous research and using data from interviews with Japan experts, findings show that Japan was much more concerned about its defender’s allocation of resources and whether interests align rather than blindly creating reputational links between arguably interdependent cases.

Author

• Georgios Zacharias, George Mason University