In a multipolar world, trust, consistency, and diplomatic restraint are becoming increasingly important. In such circumstances, Japan’s historical pacifism, economic power, and strategic autonomy allow it to play the role of a “quiet broker” — a neutral mediator in international conflicts. Japan’s response to the escalation between Iran and Israel in 2024–2025, its humanitarian activities, and its desire to maintain balance in regions with high levels of tension are manifestations of the “quiet voice” strategy. This approach is an effective alternative to the use of force in 21st-century global diplomacy.
Read the article to find out how Tokyo is implementing this strategy.
In an era of growing instability and the erosion of the traditional bipolar system of international relations, new forms of influence are coming to the fore. The global order, which until recently was shaped by competition between major military-political blocs, is transforming into a multipolar world where not only power but also trust carries weight. Against this backdrop, attention is increasingly turning to states that do not display aggressive behavior and instead rely on soft power. Japan, with its unique foreign policy stance, historical restraint, and strong economy, is gradually carving out its own niche in global diplomacy as a “quiet broker”—a mediator capable of facilitating dialogue without imposing itself.
Japan’s diplomacy in the 21st century continues to embody the ideals of stability, mutual benefit, and non-military conflict resolution. Amidst new geopolitical upheavals, such as Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the rise of Chinese influence, instability in East Asia, and the escalation of conflicts in the Middle East, Tokyo is increasingly seen not only as a Western ally but also as an autonomous actor offering an alternative logic of engagement—based not on confrontation, but on balance.
Although Japan lacks political or military power to rival global centers of influence, its international image as a stable, reliable, and consistent state opens new avenues for impact. This “quiet strength” is increasingly evident in conflicts where the voice of a player with a relatively neutral stance and economic leverage is perceived as potentially constructive. The most telling example of this was Japan’s diplomatic conduct during the escalation of the Iran–Israel conflict in 2024–2025.
The escalation of the Iran–Israel confrontation in 2024 posed a critical test for the foreign policies of many countries, including Japan. In April 2024, following Iran’s massive missile strike on Israeli territory in response to the shelling of its consulate compound in Damascus, the region teetered on the brink of open war. At a time when the United States publicly reaffirmed its support for Israel and several European states adopted a more restrained position, Tokyo faced a difficult choice: to preserve balance in the region while safeguarding its own interests, or risk losing access to vital energy resources.
On April 14, 2024, Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued an official statement expressing “deep concern over further escalation” and “urging all parties to refrain from actions that could lead to further violence.” Notably, the statement did not directly criticize either side, highlighting Japan’s desire to maintain balance—not severing its partnership with Israel while also avoiding diplomatic confrontation with Iran, with which it has a long-standing energy relationship.
The government also referred to the “vital importance of Middle East stability for global energy security,” noting that over 90% of Japan’s imported oil comes from Persian Gulf countries. According to official METI statistics, in 2023 over 38% of Japan’s oil imports came from Saudi Arabia and another 8% from the United Arab Emirates, while Iran—despite ongoing sanctions—remained a subject of long-term interest as a potential source of supply diversification.
Japan’s diplomacy continued to engage with both sides of the conflict. In April 2024, Foreign Minister Yoko Kamikawa held phone talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, calling for restraint and stressing the importance of maintaining open communication channels.
This position remained consistent in the months that followed. On June 20, 2025, Japan’s State Minister for Foreign Affairs Takeshi Iwaya held a phone call with Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz. During the talks, the Japanese side expressed “grave concern” over the situation in Gaza and “urged the Israeli government to take all possible measures to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe and protect civilians.” At the same time, Iwaya reaffirmed Japan’s readiness to support diplomatic efforts to de-escalate regional tensions.
In addition to political statements, Japan continued humanitarian efforts in Iran in 2024 through MOFA and JICA, demonstrating a stable diplomatic presence despite regional tensions. In February, the Japanese Embassy in Tehran signed agreements worth over €350,000 under the Grassroots Grant Assistance Program (GGP), funding the purchase of mammography and endoscopy equipment, physical therapy devices, and vocational training tools. JICA also conducted various training programs for Iranian medical professionals in fields such as oncology, elderly care, and hospital management. Ongoing cooperation in water resource management, disaster response, and environmental protection further underscores Tokyo’s diplomatic autonomy in the region and its commitment to development rather than projecting power—even in states with strained relations with most G7 countries.
Thus, Tokyo demonstrates a strategic model of restrained but consistent diplomacy that combines economic interests with the country’s reputational capital as one that avoids taking hardline stances. While such behavior may be less visible amid the loud declarations of great powers, it often proves more effective in a multipolar world—especially when trust, not dominance, is paramount.
After the end of World War II, Japan found itself in deep political, economic, and moral crisis. Defeat in the conflict, occupation by the U.S., and a radical transformation of its political system became the basis for a new national identity. The adoption of Japan’s 1947 Constitution, particularly its landmark Article 9, laid the legal foundation for a pacifist approach to foreign policy. This document states that the Japanese people “forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation” and “the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.”
This pacifism was not merely declarative. It became a central pillar of Japan’s foreign policy for decades to come. In the early postwar years, Tokyo focused on economic recovery and integration into the Western world, primarily through its alliance with the U.S. At the same time, under Prime Ministers Fumimaro Konoe and later Shigeru Yoshida, the government actively shaped the image of a “peaceful nation” that would atone for its aggressive past through economic development and international aid. This policy became known as the “Yoshida Doctrine”—a strategy under which Japan concentrated on economic growth while leaving security matters to Washington.
Even within the framework of its alliance obligations with the U.S., Japan deliberately chose diplomacy by consensus. The country’s participation in peace processes, especially in Southeast Asia, the expansion of official development assistance (ODA), and support for UN reforms—all contributed to a new foreign policy brand: Japan as a stabilizer, not a hegemon. In the 1980s and 1990s, as Japan’s economy peaked, Tokyo invested billions of dollars in aid to countries in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America. JICA and MOFA reports emphasized that this aid policy was not only economic but carried a “deep moral dimension—promoting peace through development.”
The contrast between imperial, colonial Japan and the pacifist state after 1945 remains a powerful factor in how the country is perceived abroad. While China, Russia, and the U.S. are often associated with military influence or hegemony, Japan—despite its complex historical legacy—successfully transformed its image into that of a “quiet,” responsible power. Diplomatic restraint has become not a weakness but a trait that enhances legitimacy in the eyes of many countries, particularly in the Global South.
Japanese diplomacy was and remains shaped not solely by idealistic pacifism. Its restraint has largely developed in response to objective constraints—political, legal, economic, and geostrategic.
The first limiting factor is domestic political consensus focused on peaceful development. Although in the 2010s–2020s there have been gradual shifts toward rethinking the role of the Self-Defense Forces (especially after the 2015 security law packages), most of Japanese society continues to reject the idea of an aggressive foreign policy. According to a 2024 NHK poll, over 67% of Japanese oppose the country’s participation in combat operations abroad, even under international missions.
Legally, Article 9 of the Constitution remains the main constraint. Although the Abe and Kishida governments expanded the interpretation of “collective self-defense,” Japan still does not formally have an army—only Self-Defense Forces whose role is confined to territorial protection. That is why, even during Indo-Pacific tensions, Japan rarely makes forceful statements—unlike the U.S. or even South Korea.
The second factor is energy dependence. As noted earlier, Japan critically relies on imported energy, with over 90% of its crude oil coming from the Middle East. Any aggressive diplomatic rhetoric or action could jeopardize access to these resources. The “White Paper on Energy 2024” published by METI explicitly states that “Japan’s foreign policy must account for the strategic vulnerability of its energy infrastructure and supply.”
The third factor is balancing between allies. Japan remains the U.S.’s main strategic partner in Asia while also maintaining deep economic integration with China and Southeast Asia. Tokyo must therefore navigate between Washington’s expectations for firm support and the concerns of regional partners wary of confrontation. For example, Japan has not imposed unilateral sanctions on China or India, even amid trade and tech disputes.
The fourth factor is geostrategic location. Japan lies at the intersection of regional interests of China, Russia, Korea, the U.S., and ASEAN states. It is simultaneously at the epicenter of potential crises (South China Sea, Taiwan, Korean Peninsula), but not the source of any of them. This allows Japan to position itself as a country interested in stability, not dominance. Japan’s “National Security Strategy” (2022) notes that “Japan’s foreign policy must remain both active and cautious,” avoiding “categorical decisions that could destabilize the region.”
These factors—legal, political, resource-based, and geographic—are not Japan’s weaknesses. On the contrary, they create unique preconditions for forming a “quiet diplomacy” that seeks to balance rather than confront. Though understated, this strategy allows Tokyo to maintain a strong international presence rooted in trust, even as other countries lose legitimacy through aggression or inconsistency.
Unlike countries that actively intervene in external conflicts through displays of power, Japan has developed a more subtle but systematic role—that of a neutral mediator. This status is grounded not only in the pacifist Constitution but also in Japan’s deeply rooted image as a country unassociated with colonial violence, lacking regional expansionist ambitions, and acting as a source of long-term economic resources rather than geopolitical pressure.
Japan already commands a level of trust that enables it to engage in informal conflict resolution in regions such as Africa, South Asia, and Latin America. For example, during the years of instability in Sudan, the Japanese government maintained diplomatic contact with both sides and provided humanitarian assistance through JICA, even as other donors scaled back operations. According to JICA’s 2023 data, Japan continued implementing 14 development projects in East Africa under high-risk security conditions, focusing on “trust, stability, and long-term impact.”
In the Indo-Pacific, Japan formally participates in security initiatives such as the QUAD, but its rhetoric is significantly softer than that of the U.S. Tokyo avoids direct criticism of China in official statements, instead prioritizing investments, infrastructure support, and financial grants. Through these tools, Japan enhances its regional legitimacy without resorting to pressure. For instance, in Prime Minister Kishida’s official statement following the ASEAN summit in Jakarta in September 2023, he emphasized that “Japan views the Indo-Pacific as free and open, but multipolar—without dominance.”
Financial and economic resources remain key tools. Japan is the world’s third-largest economy by nominal GDP and one of the top donors of official development assistance (ODA). In 2023, its ODA exceeded $15 billion, making Tokyo one of the few players capable of combining military restraint with robust economic presence. This combination—neutrality with substantial resources—shapes perceptions of Japan as a “quiet broker,” especially in countries unwilling to choose between China and the West and instead seeking an alternative in the form of a stable, non-aggressive partner.
This became particularly evident in the context of the war in Ukraine. Japan firmly supported sanctions against Russia while remaining one of the few G7 countries that did not exaggerate its role in military support, focusing instead on financial, humanitarian, and reconstruction assistance. This allowed Tokyo to maintain its reputation as a principled yet measured state, acting within international law without escalating the conflict.
Thus, Japan’s potential as a neutral mediator is reinforced not only by diplomatic restraint but also by its deep resource base, networks of trust across the Global South, and reputation for stability. This unique combination allows it to remain influential without projecting power.
In a multipolar world where lines of influence are increasingly blurred and global powers lose their monopoly on legitimacy, Japan is gradually shaping a unique foreign policy model—that of the “quiet broker.” Its strength lies not in military dominance or high-profile initiatives but in consistent diplomacy built on trust, predictability, and economic support.
It is important to recognize that Japan’s history is not free of an aggressive colonial past. In the first half of the 20th century, it engaged in expansion on the Korean Peninsula, in China, Indochina, and across the Pacific Islands, leaving a complex legacy in the region. However, the profound transformation after 1945—from empire to pacifist democracy—enabled Japan to turn its foreign policy from an instrument of expansion into a mechanism of stabilization. The 1947 Constitution, constraints on the use of force, focus on development aid, and commitment to multilateralism all became the foundation of this new diplomatic behavior.
Unlike classical neutral countries like Switzerland, Japan combines its restraint with a powerful economic presence, innovation, and flexible diplomacy. It remains a U.S. ally, maintains economic engagement with China, participates in G7 summits, and actively works with Global South countries through JICA, ODA, and other formats. This allows Japan to avoid polarization and shape a third path—not a “middle line” between camps but a distinct model of influence through stability.
Against this backdrop, Japan’s “quiet voice,” grounded in authority rather than coercion, may become one of the most effective tools of diplomacy in the 21st century. Countries that distrust military blocs or seek to avoid being drawn into major geopolitical confrontations increasingly view Japan as a neutral, consistent, and predictable actor—not without historical shadows, but with a clear and modern position.
This strategy brings not only reputational dividends but also practical results: Japan is trusted in high-risk regions—for example, in the safe passage of its ships near the Horn of Africa, in implementing complex infrastructure projects, and in securing approval for post-conflict reconstruction. Built through diplomacy of trust, this reputation often allows Japan to gain advantages even over more economically assertive players like China.
In a world where demand for stability, credibility, and trust is rising—not just strength—this moderate, constrained, yet deep model may form the foundation of a new diplomacy. And within this configuration, Japan not only retains its voice but may make it one of the most persuasive.
© 2025 ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED
