As Prime Minister Fumio Kishida met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Tuesday in a surprise visit to the war-torn country, a kind of reverse-mirror image summit — one involving the Chinese and Russian leaders on the conflict’s other side — was also unfolding more than 740 kilometers away in Moscow.
Although the two competing summits yielded few deliverables, their symbolism threw into fresh relief a growing divide between two blocs, especially as the Ukraine war continues to trigger concern among Japan and others that a similar crisis could erupt in the Indo-Pacific region.
Kishida, who will chair a Group of Seven (G7) summit in the city of Hiroshima in May, used the Kyiv meeting to not only spotlight Japan’s diplomatic chops as the sole Asian leader to visit Ukraine, but also to obliquely criticize and highlight China over its backing of Moscow and the regional consequences of that decision.
In his joint statement with Zelenskyy, the Japanese leader did not single out China by name, but repeatedly linked the Ukraine war to Asia, noting "the inseparability of Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific security" and calling the conflict “a direct threat to security, peace and stability not only in the Euro-Atlantic area but also in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond."
Pointedly, the statement also emphasized “the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait” — a now-common refrain from Tokyo, which is concerned that Beijing may take a page from Russia’s playbook and invade the self-ruled island, embroiling the United States and Japan in a potentially far more costly and bloody war.
China considers democratically ruled Taiwan to be one of its unassailable “core interests” that must be brought back into the fold, by force if necessary.
Fears that Japan could be unprepared for a crisis in its own backyard have prompted Tokyo to pursue a dramatic shift in defense policy and spending, as well as closer ties with its U.S. ally and other partners.
“Whether or not the contrast was deliberate or not on the part of Kishida, it's real,” Richard McGregor, a senior fellow with the Lowy Institute think tank, said of the concurrent summits. “Japan is happy to accentuate its differences with China, both to shore up its alliance with the U.S. and also to draw global attention to possible conflict closer to home.”
Kishida’s pledge to “keep aiding Ukraine with the greatest effort to regain peace” stood in stark contrast with the Xi-Putin statement on Tuesday that vowed to deepen the China-Russia strategic partnership, even as Beijing claims to take an “objective and impartial position on the Ukraine issue.”
China also pushed for a peace plan that remained short on details after two days of marathon talks that largely resulted in a rehash of the two leaders’ previous agreements.
Japan’s top government spokesman, Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno, said Wednesday that while Xi and Putin had reaffirmed the Chinese plan, there was no mention of the deal-breaking demand that Russia immediately withdraw its forces from Ukrainian territory — a stipulation also noted in the Kishida-Zelenskyy statement.
In addition to that, Matsuno said at a news conference that Putin “has also shown no signs of trying to move toward peace, stating that he will continue his aggression against Ukraine and that the annexed parts of Ukraine are not subject to negotiation.”
“We need to look at these realities first,” he said.
Matsuno’s remarks were indicative of both a larger game plan that Kishida has put in motion and his nearer-term goals, analysts say.
“Kishida's global diplomacy and the way it ties into Japan's interests in Asia has both short- and long-term goals,” said McGregor, the author of a book chronicling postwar China-Japan relations.
“The short-term is to create a sense of urgency about threats in the region, most obviously from China, but also China in partnership with Russia," he said. "Whether his efforts, and that of his predecessors pay off, however, will take much longer to judge.”
But experts say Japan isn't alone. Kishida has harnessed similar concerns among like-minded nations, building on his experience as the country’s longest-serving foreign minister and using the Ukraine trip — as well as a spate of other meetings — to attempt to burnish his international profile.
The prime minister’s intense activity on the diplomatic front — meeting with South Korean, German, Indian and Ukrainian leaders in less than a week — are cementing Japan’s position as a pillar of the Western-led democratic bloc.
But, considering Kishida was the final G7 leader to visit the war-torn country, his trip was unlikely to elevate his status to the rank of a skilled statesman, said Yukio Maeda, a political science professor at the University of Tokyo.
“(Kishida’s visit) will probably be widely reported around Asia, but I don’t think it will be at the center of attention internationally,” said Maeda, an expert on Japanese politics.
To date, Japan has offered a total of roughly $7.1 billion in humanitarian and financial aid to Kyiv. But legal constraints on the transfer of lethal defense equipment make it virtually impossible for the country to play a larger role in the conflict.
There is ongoing debate on a full-fledged overhaul of these regulations, with the ruling Liberal Democratic Party pushing for a fundamental revision, but it will likely be some time before Japan can play a role in external conflicts to the extent of its European or North American partners.
Geography remains another significant hurdle for Tokyo. As repeatedly mentioned by top government officials, Japan’s location at the eastern edge of the Asian continent stands in stark contrast with the geographical proximity of European G7 members.
“Japan is doing the best it can to support Ukraine,” Maeda said. “I don’t know how many people in European countries are aware of the fact that Japan cannot make military contributions due to its Constitution, but I think that, considering it’s very far geographically, expectations for Japan were low in the first place.”
On the domestic front, experts say it is premature to gauge how Kishida’s flurry of diplomatic activity — culminating in the Ukraine trip — will benefit the prime minister in terms of public support.
After Kishida’s summit with South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol last week saw the two leaders pledge to restore ties after years of tensions, opinion polls showed a bump in the prime minister’s support rate, with an Asahi Shimbun survey released Monday showing a 5 percentage point jump to 40%.
“It's been a good month for Kishida on the diplomatic scene,” said James D.J. Brown, a political science professor at Temple University Japan. “This is a strong buildup to the G7 summit in Hiroshima and should assist with the prime minister's support rate.”
But while Kishida’s visit to Kyiv might provide him with a slight boost, others caution that it may be too early to talk about the extent of the domestic impact.
“Certainly, it won't work as a minus for the administration,” said Maeda.
Compared with last week’s South Korea summit — which is already delivering tangible results in sectors such as trade, economic security and intelligence — the Ukraine meeting simply did not appear to offer any significant direct benefits to Tokyo, and is unlikely to be much of a factor in opinion polls.
Leaders worldwide often turn to the international stage as low-hanging fruit to boost sagging domestic popularity, according to Maeda. However, effectively using diplomacy to push up domestic support often depends on a government’s ability to meet the public’s expectations, as well as the country’s actual international visibility.
“In case of Kishida’s visit to Ukraine, the results were within expectations,” said Maeda. “If anything, the visit itself was significant.”
The late former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who visited over 80 countries during his nearly eight-year second term in office, put great focus on bolstering Japan’s international image, at the same time building up his own credentials as a seasoned statesman.
However, as he himself admitted during his final news conference before resigning, Abe failed to achieve some of his long-held diplomatic goals, including resolving Japan’s dispute with Russia over the Northern Territories, and the issue of Japanese nationals abducted by North Korea. On top of that, during Abe’s tenure, relations with Seoul deteriorated to an all-time-low.
Kishida seems to be building on the foundation laid by his predecessor, but with a keen eye toward avoiding the same mistakes, said Temple University’s Brown.
“Based on the evidence of the last few weeks, Kishida is shaping up to be a more impressive foreign policy leader than his late boss,” Brown said.
Ultimately, how this will translate inside Japan, however, remains to be seen.
With your current subscription plan you can comment on stories. However, before writing your first comment, please create a display name in the Profile section of your subscriber account page.