Europe moved swiftly after the summit’s collapse. Within 12 hours, Ukrainian President Zelensky arrived in London to meet with Prime Minister Keir Starmer. By March 2, 18 leaders from Europe and Canada, joined by NATO’s Secretary-General and the President of the European Council, met in London outlining a unified approach toward supporting Ukraine and strengthening European security. The resulting framework reaffirmed four key principles: ongoing military aid to Ukraine, sustained economic pressure on Russia, ensuring any lasting peace includes guarantees for Ukraine’s sovereignty and security, and formation of a “coalition of the willing” to uphold any future peace agreement
As European and Canadian leaders moved quickly to offer their support for Ukraine, Prime Minister Ishiba adopted a more measured tone. Expressing concern over the summit’s outcome, Ishiba reiterated the importance of diplomacy “backed by compassion and perseverance.” He also affirmed Japan’s commitment to working closely with the United States, Ukraine, and G7 partners to support ongoing efforts for peace. Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya echoed these sentiments, noting Japan would continue to “monitor with great concern”.
Ishiba’s initial reaction is in stark contrast with that of his predecessors. When Russia annexed Crimea in 2014, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe condemned the move, stating that “resorting to force to change the status quo absolutely should not be allowed.” Similarly, when Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022, Prime Minister Kishida condemned Russia’s action, stating it was “a clear violation of international law” and urged Southeast Asian countries to recognize that “Ukraine today could be East Asia tomorrow.”
Looking Ahead
Ishiba’s cautious response likely reflects a desire to preserve stable relations with the Trump administration at a sensitive time. Despite their successful first in-person meeting, Japan still faces new U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum imports set to take effect on March 12, followed by more tariffs in April, and is still in negotiations over the Nippon Steel – US Steel deal. Japan could also face U.S. pressure to increase its defense spending, particularly in light of regional security challenges.
However, Ishiba could have demonstrated Japan’s support for Ukraine without directly contradicting the Trump administration. Ishiba could have endorsed European efforts to bring an end to the Russia-Ukraine War and signaled Japan’s willingness to take part in the “coalition of willing”. Additionally, he could have announced Japan’s commitment to expand its humanitarian and reconstruction assistance to Ukraine and to the Eastern European countries that accepts refugees from Ukraine. Simply put, Ishiba could have simply focused on Japan’s commitment to international stability, human security and the post-conflict reconstruction efforts to come, articulating the role it would be willing to play.
Ishiba’s predecessor Fumio Kishida spoke in front of U.S. Congress in 2024 pleading for their continued support for Ukraine, arguing that defending freedom, democracy, and rule of law is in Japan’s own national interest, pledging that Japan would share the responsibility “side-by-side”. Ishiba’s response to this early test will shape perceptions of Japan’s foreign policy principles and trajectory – both among international partners and at home. Upholding Japan’s traditional commitment would have been essential for Ishiba to demonstrate effective leadership on the global stage. His indecisive response raises questions about his ability to do so.
During his address to the U.S. Congress, President Trump revealed that he received a letter from President Zelensky in which he said he was ready to begin peace talks and sign the critical mineral development deal with the United States. As the U.S., Ukraine and Western Europe move quickly to reconsider their next steps, Ishiba’s ability to navigate these shifting dynamics will shape Japan’s credibility as a reliable, values-driven leading power in the Indo-Pacific and beyond.