Global Perspective: As G7 chair, Japan should lead diversified support for Ukraine

By Makoto Iokibe, Chairman of the Asia Affairs Research Council

The Russian invasion of Ukraine, even a year after its start, shows no signs of ending, with destruction and killing continuing unabated. Still, every war comes to an end eventually. Let us examine three precedents for how that happens.

The first is the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931. “By conspiracy, we will create an opportunity and forcibly lead the country under military control.” These were the words of Kanji Ishiwara, a staff officer of the Kwantung Army, an Imperial Japanese Army corps then stationed in northeastern China. Ishiwara wrote this in his planning papers months before the Manchurian Incident, which triggered the invasion.

On September 18, 1931, the Japanese officer and others orchestrated the blowing up of the South Manchurian Railway near Mukden (now Shenyang), declared that the Chinese army had done it, and began their attack, capturing all of Manchuria in about four months. Six months after the railway attack ruse, they established a puppet state called “Manchukuo” and brought it under Japan’s control.

Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to have wanted the same scenario in the all-out invasion he launched in February 2022. But things haven’t turned out in his favor and unexpectedly stiff military resistance from Ukraine prevented him from even capturing the capital, Kyiv, let alone the entire country. He has been bogged down in battles mainly in the Donbass region in eastern Ukraine.

The second case to look back at is the Korean War. In June 1950, the North Korean army, with the support of Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin, crossed the 38th parallel and advanced south. But they collapsed after United Nations forces led by the United States counterattacked with a landing at Incheon in northwestern South Korea. The U.N. forces were met by the large-scale Chinese volunteer army, and the fighting over the 38th parallel became bogged down, making a military resolution difficult. Stalin died in 1953, and the U.S. also had a new leader, President Dwight Eisenhower. The political changes in both superpowers gave the Korean War a chance for a ceasefire.

Once wars begin, they do not stop until both sides give up on complete victory. As people get fed up with the growing toll of sacrifices, a political change can provide an opportunity for settling for a draw and signing a ceasefire. Will next year’s Russian presidential election be such an opportunity?

The third precedent is the Vietnam War, fought during the Cold War. A superpower, the U.S., intervened in what they simplistically thought was the communists’ southward advance, but it became a quagmire due to North Vietnam’s unexpected military determination. The antiwar movement in the U.S. grew, and the administration of President Richard Nixon withdrew, effectively acknowledging defeat.

While the U.S. was urged to end the war by popular will, Russians are very patriotic and have a tendency to endure hardships, and Putin still enjoys support as a strong president. He is moving towards declaring a “victory” limited to the Donbass region and a ceasefire. Ukraine would not accept it, but if Russia’s aging but plentiful military power remains superior to the Ukraine forces backed by North Atlantic Treaty Organization countries, Kyiv would be required to make a difficult choice.

Now, how should Japan respond to this situation? During the time of U.S. President Trump, the U.S. and Europe were often at odds. But with Trump gone, they came together to respond firmly when Russia invaded Ukraine, and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida joined them. This seems to be appropriate from the perspective of the order that Japan and the world should uphold.

Throughout human history, there has been no world government, and when countries are in conflict, war has been the only way to resolve it if negotiations fail. The law of the jungle, where the strong eat the weak, has long been a reality. However, after the two world wars in the 20th century, the means of war have developed to extreme levels, making the resultant destruction enormous. Therefore, the United Nations system was established to restrain the outbreak of war, and the U.N. Security Council, whose five permanent members are also known as the “five policemen,” was established in pursuit of global security management.

Seventy-seven years after the Security Council came into being, one of the five policemen is suddenly invading its neighbor, Ukraine. If aggression is left unchecked, the law of the jungle will return to the fore. Japan’s participation in strict economic sanctions against Russia also means that it is adhering to the principle of preserving international order. This is something that peaceful countries like Japan should value above all.

This year, Japan is the chair of the Group of Seven (G7) summit of seven major countries, and the gathering will be held in Hiroshima, the hometown of Prime Minister Kishida, in May. Can Japan play a positive role in this global crisis?

One of the problems is the dilemma between the hope for a “world without nuclear weapons” and the need for practical nuclear deterrence. There is not a single nuclear armed country in the world that agrees to abandon its atomic weapons, whether they are major nuclear powers like the U.S. and Russia, or a fledging one like North Korea. I do hope that the G7 leaders will lay flowers and offer prayers together at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park to mourn the past and think about a nuclear-free world in the far future, but that should be the end of it.

Among the G7 countries, only Japan is not providing weapons to Ukraine, and only Japan’s top leader has not visited Ukraine. Can such a country exercise leadership at the G7 summit?

I think Japan can. Japan, which has adhered to the principle of order, has no problem in playing a leading role with the U.S. and Europe in supporting Ukraine and imposing sanctions against Russia. Japan should show unwavering leadership as the chair of the summit.

However, for a country like Japan, an international environment where military activities and weapons assistance are the only things valued is undesirable. It goes without saying that these factors have a decisive meaning in combat situations, but Japan should also promote political and diplomatic measures with a focus on economic and social aspects.

For example, Japan has expertise and experience in landmine clearance. Japan also has an excellent track record in post-conflict reconstruction through its United Nations peacekeeping operations and official development assistance. In the aftermath of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia, Japan donated yellow buses for the restoration of public transportation, and locals greatly appreciated the assistance. On Mindanao Island in the Philippines, where the government and separatist forces fought for decades, Japan led the way in providing post-conflict reconstruction and peacebuilding measures even before the ceasefire. In Ukraine, too, Japan should rebuild hospitals, schools, and basic infrastructure while ensuring safety, and cultivate empathy with the local people.

As the chair of the G7 summit, Japan should be expected to play a role in bringing a broad political and diplomatic perspective to the world by emphasizing the importance of peacebuilding and postwar reconstruction for Ukraine, while acknowledging and encouraging NATO countries’ military support. In today’s world, diversity is advancing, and that a single value cannot rule all is evidenced by the prominence of the Global South. I expect Japan to lead with a flexible but robust approach while maintaining order.

Profile: Makoto Iokibe

Born in 1943, Iokibe graduated from Kyoto University, specializing in Japanese political and diplomatic history. After serving as a visiting scholar at Harvard University, a professor at Kobe University and president of the National Defense Academy, he has served as chancellor of the University of Hyogo since 2018. Iokibe also sits on the government’s reconstruction design council as its chair following the Great East Japan Earthquake. He is chairman of the Asia Pacific Prize selection committee.