But in the same breath Abe has agreed to meet with Chinese top leaders in September to discuss a more open trade agreement so maybe he can achieve through diplomacy, what would seriously be almost impossible by strengthening his military. That feat would be in keeping with the Japanese doctrine as it is.

Perceived by who? Abe is widely popular, in particular for his nationalistic policies, because his 'Abenomics' (his other major policy) haven't had much success. He literally won his majority back in an election he called because the economy contracted when he said it would expand. Sure, there's a vocal minority of Japanese people who think the LDP is getting too aggressive with their foreign policy, but the Japanese public



They are bound by treaty to defend Japan, it's not about a mutual gain. Sure there is some degree of mutual gain but that is not why the US will defend Japan, they will defend Japan because they have to defend Japan. China is a major threat but only a threat insofar as they threaten Japanese power in East Asia. Japan has done well at asserting their sovereignty over disputed territories, and China hasn't pushed back yet.

The election late last year had incredibly poor turnout. He has been popular, and he's definitely the strongest Prime Minister in several decades. But that's not to say that what he's doing now is popular, it isn't. A majority of the population is against what he's doing right now, and his ratings have fallen.

Treaties can be broken. Nobody has a gun to the United States's head, if the population is widely against intervention the United States won't intercede. The Chinese are counting on this.

Turnout doesn't mean anything. Most people who don't vote aren't politically active, so it's not like there's a massive population of Japanese who didn't vote but don't like Abe. Japan has had two strong PMs since the LDP fractured in the 1990s, Abe and Koizumi. And I really don't get why people keep saying the nationalism policies aren't popular, they absolutely are. If Abe wasn't a nationalist the LDP would have suffered a huge loss in 2014. Just because there's a vocal minority who don't and in the west we have some sort of myth that Japan is pacifist doesn't mean what he's doing isn't popular.

Treaties can be broken lol? Not defense treaties. The U.S. can absolutely not break this treaty, it would devastate Americas reputation abroad, further isolate them from their European allies whom already butt heads with the U.S. Korea and Taiwan would feel abandoned because if the U.S. is going to break a defense treaty with Japan why wouldn't they break it for them? If America broke a defense treaty with Japan, the declining superpower status of the U.S. would fall off the proverbial cliff. Number one rule in international diplomacy is to never break treaties. The whole international system would disintegrate countries didn't honour their treaties.

These media outlets are pulling those numbers out of their ass. A left wing newspaper that is known for its criticism of the LDP and Abe seems to be the primary source for the polls saying support has dropped. Abe has made amending or loosening Article 9 a priority of his prime ministership, He won an election decisively with it as a primary component of his platform. It makes zero sense that eight months later the same people that voted him in are now protesting him following through on his campaign promise.

I would love it if Japan were footing the bill for their defense instead of us.

Support for the LDP is in the 30s. Abe capitalized on voter fatigue (the 2014 election was unexpectedly early) to expand LDP control. The opposition parties are a wreck and the LDP is well organized, but a majority is currently in opposition to his government.

Do you think that Americans are going to tolerate a government that sends Americans to their death in place of Japanese? They'd be tossed out. Treaties are honored by the technocrats and elites that run a country, but there needs to be explanation and assent on behalf of the people at large. The United States will not resist China in East Asia if the Japanese, Koreans, and Taiwanese are also willing to do it. There's no appetite for it domestically.

He won the election because turnout was at record lows and the opposition was disorganized (they had no time to organize candidates of any substance).

His central reelection theme was that he needed a new mandate for Abenomics, his nationalism has always been less mainstream.

You can't think of Japanese elections like Western ones. They've always had a lot of them, and voters expect leaders to call elections when they fail to meet expectations. So even though Abe had a majority, Japanese custom made it advisable to call an election due to the economy contracting. It wasn't to expand LDP control, there was almost no scenario where that election would increase LDP support. The election had to be called because Abe failed to meet expectations. Yes, there was tactics to it, the LDP was still extremely popular, and the DP still hadn't recovered from their colossal failure between 2009 and 2012. The rest of the parties are fringe parties. However, the DP should have garnered a greater victor given the failure of Abe to achieve his targets. But they didn't. The public still overwhelmingly supported Abe and gave him a vote of confidence.

The American public is irrelevant. The state department cannot hemorrhage the United States international reputation because the US has very high levels of war exhaustion. Treaties are honoured because that's how we do things in the international system. If a country like the US ignored or broke a treaty, not only would there be serious consequences. The US could try to amend their treaty so they're not obligated to come to Japan's aid, but they would never do that. Japan is one of the US' most powerful allies, and unlike Germany, France, Great Britain, they actually agree with US foreign policy for the most part. If Japan was attacked, it would be in the US' best interest to help.