EDITORIAL: G-20 summit exposed limits of Abe’s diplomatic prowess

A rigorous postmortem is in order on Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s stewardship as the chair of the Group of 20 summit in Osaka, which brought together the leaders of 19 major countries and the European Union, and ended on June 29.

Without being fooled by the pomp and pageantry, we need to scrutinize carefully the results of the high-profile diplomatic event involving the movers and shakers of world politics from the viewpoint of whether it has offered answers to major challenges facing the world.

The G-20 Osaka declaration adopted by the leaders as they wrapped up the event omitted a pledge to “fight protectionism.”

This is the second G-20 summit declaration that does not include a reference to the anti-protectionism principle, which had been consistently upheld since the G-20 powwow of leaders started in 2008, until it was dropped from the joint statement adopted at the event last year, held in Argentina.

Instead, this year’s G-20 declaration commits the leaders to “strive to realize a free, fair, non-discriminatory, transparent, predictable and stable trade and investment environment.”

In a news conference after the summit, Abe stressed that the G-20 leaders have “clearly confirmed basic principles of free trade.” But the lack of a reference to the problem of protectionism clearly reflects consideration to the trade policy of the United States.

Abe probably made no attempt to persuade U.S. President Donald Trump to accept the anti-protectionism vow, which would be at odds with his “America First” agenda, under which he has continued taking actions that rock the world order.

Abe’s strenuous efforts to develop and maintain a close personal relationship with Trump are meaningful only if they help tackle specific policy challenges.

No signs have emerged from the meetings of world leaders in Osaka that they had in-depth discussions on such key international issues as the current confrontation between the United States and Iran, which Abe has tried unsuccessfully to defuse, and the murder of a prominent Saudi journalist in Turkey, which is suspected to have been perpetrated by the Saudi government.

This can only be interpreted as a sign that such sensitive issues were eschewed altogether to ensure the success of the summit.

Bilateral summits held on the sidelines of the G-20 conference also underscored the limits to Abe’s diplomatic approach.

During his meeting with Trump held immediately after the U.S. president expressed dissatisfaction with the unfair nature of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty in an interview with Fox Business, Abe did not ask Trump about the remarks. The two leaders reconfirmed the importance of the bilateral security alliance as if nothing had happened.

In a June 29 news conference, however, Trump said he had told Abe that the security treaty between their countries must be changed, reiterating his criticism of the pact as “unfair.”

Since he denied any intention to scrap the treaty, it seems Trump is trying to put pressure on Japan to extract concessions in bilateral talks over trade and other issues. But what he has said about the security pact could affect the mutual trust between the two countries on which the alliance is based.

How would Abe explain the fact that he has been at the mercy of Trump’s whim while failing to parlay his close personal ties with the U.S. president into specific and tangible diplomatic achievements?

On the other hand, Abe did not bother to hold talks with South Korean President Moon Jae-in. While seeking to enhance his relationship with Chinese President Xi Jinping by calling the two nations “eternal neighbors,” Abe gave a diplomatic snub to the leader of South Korea, which is also an important neighbor for Japan.

This cannot be described as a prudent way of handing relations with neighboring countries.

The Abe administration has shown a distinctive tendency to focus on actions that would go down well with the public.

Traditionally, the annual G-20 summit has been held after the year’s Group of Seven summit.

Japan, which chaired the G-20 event, broke with tradition by scheduling the G-20 summit before the meeting of the G-7 leaders. The move is seen by many political pundits as Abe’s ploy to demonstrate his “diplomatic prowess” to the public shortly before the Upper House election.

We cannot help but wonder what his diplomacy is all about. If his foreign policy agenda is aimed more at bolstering his political standing than pursuing a long-term national strategy, it could lead to dangerous situations for the nation.

--The Asahi Shimbun, June 30