Will Trump rip up the US-Japan security alliance?

Another day, another Trumpian bombshell, this one aimed at the country he says he loves: Japan. Trump told reporters this week that the US-Japan security alliance which has bound the two countries together militarily since 1952 and offered military guarantees to Japan since 1960 was “interesting” but unequal as it obliged the US to defend Japan but not vice-versa.

Trump added that the Japanese “make a fortune with us economically” a reference to Japan’s trade surplus with the US. Trump was speaking ahead of a visit by Japan’s trade minister who will reportedly ask (perhaps beg) for an exemption from pending US tariffs on steel and aluminum (25 percent due next week with “no exceptions”).

Trump’s comments have provoked a head in hands reaction from strung-out Japanese policy makers, who are already worried about his pick as undersecretary of defense for policy Eldridge Colby and his worryingly equivocal remarks about US obligations to Taiwan. At a time of international tension, the last thing anyone here in Tokyo wants is the prospect of the US snatching the comfort blanket away.

Was Trump right to grumble? He at least had a point when he said the security alliance was interesting. Imposed on the Japanese in 1952 as a condition of ending the US occupation, it certainly was, initially, unequal (in favor of the US). It had no end date, and allowed the US to put down “domestic protests” with no obligation to defend Japan in the event of a third-party attack. At the time, the US had over a quarter of a million men stationed in the country.

Constant entreaties by Japanese politicians led to a reduction in troop numbers and a renegotiation. With Japan finally losing its arch villain status and rejoining polite society, the new terms drawn up by Dwight D Eisenhower and Nobusuke Kishi (grandfather of Shinzo Abe) did oblige the US to defend Japan if attacked, imposed a ten-year renewable term and gave each side the right to abrogate with one year’s notice.

Nonetheless, protests against the seemingly endless shackling of Japan to the US, and the substantial US military presence in Okinawa particularly, provoked huge and violent protests (serious enough to force the cancellation of the presidential visit of Eisenhower and Kishi’s resignation). Since then, to avoid a repeat of the disorder, the alliance has been revised largely in secret. The American troop presence has shrunk to 54,000 but the strategically important bases are intact, and their upkeep subsidized by “sympathy payments” from Japan. Polling suggests it is popular with the Japanese people.

But can it survive Trump Mark II? To discern how much of what Trump says represents his true feelings and how much is “art of the deal” maneuvering, it helps to look at his history with Japan. His love for the country may well be true. He certainly gave that impression in his first term when he enjoyed a genuinely warm odd-couple relationship with Shinzo Abe, which he honored by inviting Abe’s widow Akie to Mar-a-Lago recently. He certainly seemed to enjoy his visits to Japan, which were almost entirely free of the sort of noisy protests he encountered elsewhere.

However, Trump has always been suspicious of Japanese trade policies towards the US. Since at least the 1980s Trump has been accusing the Japanese of unfair play and he even took out a full-page ad in the New York Times in 1987 accusing Japan of taking advantage of the US. The substance of the claim is that the Japanese have used non-tariff trade barriers and an artificially weakened Yen to produce their consistent surplus (68 billion dollars in 2022). There is probably a grain of truth in this allegation though the situation is complex.

But even if true, is that really enough to junk or downgrade a 75-year-old security guarantee with a close ally in a time of regional instability? Probably not. More likely Trump’s comments were prompted primarily by concerns about money, not defense. Had he been more focused on the latter, he probably wouldn’t have asked “Who makes these deals?” (referencing the security alliance) since the answer is General MacArthur. And Trump has been consistent in calling for allies to spend more in their own defense. In Taiwan’s case he wants a 10 percent increase.

It is hard to imagine Trump is seriously contemplating abandoning Japan to its very real and quite scary potential oppressors. The US has too much invested in the relationship and the region. And Trump gave verbal security guarantees to Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba at the White House meeting in February that the US would defend Japan against Chinese aggression. It would be a pretty brutal betrayal to go back on that.

The most plausible interpretation then is that Trump was getting in a preemptive strike on the trade negotiators before their meeting next week and putting what he sees as complacent allies on notice.

Still, with Trump, it is hard to be entirely sure, which is probably just as he likes it. Japanese policy makers, like their counterparts around the world, are learning the hard way that America is under new management and the old rules do not apply.