Evolution of the Australia-Japan Security Partnership: Toward a Softer Triangle Alliance with the United States?
This paper examines how and why the Australia-Japan defense and security partnership has evolved, what policy implications this new partnership has for the U.S.-Japan alliance system, and what constraints the further advancement of trilateral security cooperation faces.
The U.S. strategic position and defense posture has catalyzed the evolution of the Australia-Japan security and defense partnership. This partnership has helped to sustain the U.S.-Japan alliance through, for instance, deepening Japan's involvement in defense and security arenas, as was seen in the protection of JSDFs in Iraq by Australian forces.
Still, the Australia-Japan security and defense partnership, a relatively new element in the bilateral relationship, is not based on an alliance system like Japan and the United States. It is still in a formative stage and thus requires strong shared strategic interests and common regional understandings to develop.
The convergent views and interests, especially over the approach to the rise of China as a military power, are helping the further development of the trilateral cooperation with the United States within a rapidly changing regional environment.
Download the full analysis
This page contains only a summary of our work. If you would like to have access to all the information from our research on the subject, you can download the full version in PDF format.
Evolution of the Australia-Japan Security Partnership: Toward a Softer Triangle Alliance with the United States?
Author(s)
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programs
Center for Asian Studies
Asia is a nerve center for multiple global economic, political and security challenges. The Center for Asian Studies provides documented expertise and a platform for discussion on Asian issues to accompany decision makers and explain and contextualize developments in the region for the sake of a larger public dialogue.
The Center's research is organized along two major axes: relations between Asia's major powers and the rest of the world; and internal economic and social dynamics of Asian countries. The Center's research focuses primarily on China, Japan, India, Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific, but also covers Southeast Asia, the Korean peninsula and the Pacific Islands.
The Centre for Asian Studies maintains close institutional links with counterpart research institutes in Europe and Asia, and its researchers regularly carry out fieldwork in the region.
The Center organizes closed-door roundtables, expert-level seminars and a number of public events, including an Annual Conference, that welcome experts from Asia, Europe and the United States. The work of Center’s researchers, as well as that of their partners, is regularly published in the Center’s electronic journal Asie.Visions.
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
India’s Green Hydrogen Strategy in Action: Policy Actions, Market Insights, and Global Opportunities
India is poised to remain the world’s fastest-growing major economy, and this rapid growth is driving a sharp rise in energy demand. As the most populous country on the planet, India urgently needs to decarbonize its energy systems.
RAMSES 2024. A World to Be Remade
For its 42nd edition, RAMSES 2024 identifies three major challenges for 2024.
France and the Philippines should anchor their maritime partnership
With shared interests in promoting international law and sustainable development, France and the Philippines should strengthen their maritime cooperation in the Indo-Pacific. Through bilateral agreements, expanded joint exercises and the exchange of best practices, both nations can enhance maritime domain awareness, counter security threats and develop blue economy initiatives. This deeper collaboration would reinforce stability and environmental stewardship across the region.
The China-led AIIB, a geopolitical tool?
The establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) in 2016, on a Chinese initiative, constituted an attempt to bridge the gap in infrastructure financing in Asia. However, it was also perceived in the West as a potential vehicle for China’s geostrategic agendas, fueling the suspicion that the institution might compete rather than align with existing multilateral development banks (MDBs) and impose its own standards.