Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

This study compares the implementation of the so-called "unequal treaties" with that of the U.S.–Japan Security Treaty and the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), based on domestic and foreign diplomatic archives and focusing techniques of consensus building and their consequences.

Paper long abstract

This study compares the implementation of the so-called "unequal treaties" with that of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA). The objective is to deepen our understanding of how treaties that constrain sovereignty—or the exercise thereof—have been managed in Japan. No nation exercises its sovereignty with 100% autonomy; indeed, the United States, in its current desire for such absolute control, has begun withdrawing from numerous international organizations and treaties. Such a trend likely does not contribute to global peace. Learning how to coexist with constraints on sovereignty may, perhaps, offer a way to help reconstruct the international order.

While research on the "unequal treaties" tends to focus on the history of treaty revision (explaining how they were eventually abolished), the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty has persisted to this day despite undergoing revisions, making a direct comparison difficult. However, the "unequal treaties" remained in effect for nearly forty years and thus possess a long history of practical implementation.

Therefore, this report utilizes domestic and foreign diplomatic archives to compare the styles of implementation between the two. A commonality is that in both cases, there are numerous instances where Japan successfully persuaded its counterparts to accept its positions. A point of divergence is that while disputes over the implementation of the "unequal treaties" resulted in relatively clear "wins" and "losses," the management of the Security Treaty involves a sophisticated layering of agreements at various levels to ensure that the interests of both Japan and the U.S. are reflected. While the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty system could be described as more refined than its Meiji-era predecessor, the accumulation of these agreements has become so complex that it is now nearly impossible to grasp the full picture, making its practical management increasingly difficult.