Description
-This study examines why Japan and the United States clashed during the 1980s over the establishment of a system to manage dual-use technologies for security purposes, focusing on the domestic political processes within both countries. The disagreement emerged during bilateral negotiations between 1987 and 1988, when Japan and the United States differed over whether to establish a system for controlling technologies with both civilian and military applications. The paper argues that Japan’s gradual understanding of U.S. intentions and its eventual acknowledgment of the need for government oversight in science and technology research and development became the foundation for subsequent bilateral cooperation in security-related science and technology policy.
-In the late 1970s, the United States began emphasizing the strategic importance of managing dual-use technologies as part of its containment policy toward the Soviet Union. It urged Japan to introduce government control mechanisms. Japan, however, regarded such control as incompatible with postwar norms that emphasized scientific freedom and limited state intervention in research and development. These norms, shaped by reflections on wartime experiences, had become deeply institutionalized in Japanese society and policy frameworks by the 1980s.
-When the United States pressed Japan to adopt stricter controls, Japan resisted, citing legal and societal constraints. At the same time, rising economic friction and the Toshiba–COCOM incident intensified U.S. criticism, while Japan faced domestic political instability over tax reforms. Both governments, therefore, operated under significant domestic constraints.
-Despite these challenges, the two nations concluded the U.S.–Japan Agreement on Cooperation in Science and Technology in Research and Development in 1988. This study contends that a confidential “Side Letter” (a confidential document) negotiated alongside the agreement played a crucial role in overcoming these constraints, enabling a mutual compromise that redefined the bilateral framework for science and technology cooperation.
