Subscribe to The Informer for monthly expert analysis, and to Events for advance notice of visiting world leaders and distinguished guests.
You may unsubscribe from Lowy Institute newsletters at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
The most-pressing world events explained by Lowy Institute experts and global contributors, in your inbox, every Wednesday.
You may unsubscribe from The Interpreter at any time. For information on our privacy practices and how to unsubscribe, see our Privacy Policy.
Ukraine, explained.
Volodymyr Zelenskyy appears to be seeking further Japanese cooperation and support in the fight against Russia (Andrej Isakovic/AFP via Getty Images)
Continued Japanese aid will not change the trajectory of this war, but Tokyo can urge a peace to ensure Ukraine’s survival.
Tokyo’s carrot for Moscow, a nudge for KyivTokyo’s carrot for Moscow, a nudge for Kyiv
About the author
Kazuhiko Noguchi
Dr Kazuhiko Noguchi is a Professor of International Relations at Gunma Prefectural Women’s University, Japan.
Japan's Takaichi administration should nudge the Zelenskyy government toward an exit strategy for the war in Ukraine. “Nudging”, in this context, means quietly encouraging a specific course of action rather than dictating one.
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy appears to be seeking further Japanese cooperation and support (Opens in new window) in the fight against Russia, but Japan must harden its resolve and withhold further financial aid. There is no viable path to victory for Ukraine, even if such aid were provided. Continued Japanese assistance will not change the trajectory of this stalemated war of attrition – and it is the Ukrainian people who will ultimately pay the highest price as the fighting drags on.
In Japan, making such a proposal remains virtually taboo. The prevailing narrative – that Ukraine is the innocent victim of unprovoked Russian aggression and therefore deserves unconditional support – is deeply and widely held. While this view aligns with a sense of moral justice, rigidly pursuing justice in international politics does not always produce the best outcome. Painful compromises on moral principles are sometimes necessary to preserve a nation’s independence and sovereignty.
Leaders often find it impossible to end a war once casualties mount, haunted by the fear that stopping would render past sacrifices meaningless.
Although Russia occupies roughly one-fifth of Ukraine's territory, Ukraine has already demonstrated its capacity to endure and survive as a sovereign state. No one can predict Ukraine's future with certainty, but it has a real chance of surviving as a “hedgehog state” – small, but too costly to swallow. Recall the opening phase of the Russian invasion: Moscow failed to seize Kyiv, and the Ukrainian army pushed Russian forces back and preserved the country’s independence largely on its own.
The central fact of this war is that Ukraine has proven its capability to defend its independence and sovereignty, despite the Zelenskyy government having lost part of its territory.
Much of the conventional wisdom about this war is flawed. Drones have not proven to be decisive weapons on the battlefield (Opens in new window). Russian forces continue to advance, however gradually. Russian strikes on the port of Odesa have severely damaged Ukraine’s ability (Opens in new window) to generate foreign revenue – a critical blow for a country forced to allocate roughly 40% of its GDP to defence (Opens in new window) without sufficient tax revenue to cover it. Ukraine's air defences are reportedly weakening amid shortages of interceptor missiles (Opens in new window) such as the PAC-3, and draft evasion has become a serious problem, with some 200,000 Ukrainian soldiers listed as absent without leave (Opens in new window).
In short, the longer the war continues, the closer Ukraine edges toward becoming a failed state.
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's government has only limited leverage over Moscow (Kyodo News via Getty Images)
One might ask why Japan should not instead pressure Russia to halt its aggression. Now may in fact be the moment for the Putin government to end the war, because Moscow has essentially achieved one of its core objectives: preventing Ukraine from joining NATO (Opens in new window). Valery Zaluzhnyi, the Ukraine’s former military chief and now ambassador to the United Kingdom, recently acknowledged that NATO membership is no longer a realistic prospect for Ukraine (Opens in new window) – an important signal to President Vladimir Putin.
The Takaichi administration has only limited leverage over Moscow, since Japan is regarded by Russia as an unfriendly state and has imposed extensive economic and political sanctions on it. That does not mean Japan has no cards to play, however. Although many criticise Japan’s recent resumption of oil imports from Russia, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi could use this relationship as a “carrot” to encourage Putin to freeze the war in Ukraine.
States tend to reach for sticks over carrots in international politics, but more than four years of economic sanctions have failed to change Russian behaviour. Economic incentives or security assurances might succeed where sanctions have not, and are worth attempting as a way to shift Putin’s underlying hostility toward the West.
To preserve Ukraine as a functional state and avert this worst-case scenario, freezing the conflict along current lines is the most realistic option. Leaders often find it impossible to end a war once casualties mount, haunted by the fear that stopping would render past sacrifices meaningless. To help leaders escape this sunk-cost trap, Japan could encourage Zelenskyy to assess the opportunities of this moment.
Having already provided over 3 trillion yen (Opens in new window) (roughly US$20 billion) in assistance and resumed buying Russian oil, Japan is well placed to urge Ukraine to accept a difficult compromise for its survival, while working diplomatically to bring Russia around to a “land for peace” settlement.
