President Trump Pressures Japan to Send Warships to Secure the Strait of Hormuz

President Donald Trump has placed Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in an extraordinarily difficult position by demanding that Japan dispatch naval vessels to assist in securing the Strait of Hormuz following the US-Israeli war against Iran.

“Click here and receive updates on WhatsApp”

Agenzia Nova

The three-day visit to Washington, originally intended to focus on trade and strengthening the US-Japanese alliance amid growing Chinese influence in Asia, has been completely overshadowed by the Middle East conflict.

AL-Monitor

Trump has publicly chided allies who have been reluctant to participate in his Gulf mission, specifically targeting Japan by pointing out its heavy reliance on Middle Eastern oil and suggesting Japan owes the United States for years of defense aid.

This high-stakes meeting represents a critical test of whether the US-Japan alliance can deliver in the Middle East and whether Takaichi can navigate the immense pressure while maintaining Japan's constitutional and political constraints.

Japan faces significant constitutional and legal barriers to complying with Trump's request due to its post-war pacifist constitution.

Under Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, armed force can be used only for self-defense, and the country explicitly renounces war as a means of settling international disputes.

AL-Monitor

While Japan passed security laws in 2015 that allowed limited collective self-defense under specific circumstances, these require a 'survival-threatening situation' and cannot be used to support what legal experts might deem unlawful military action.

Defense Minister Shinjiro Koizumi has indicated that applying maritime security operations would be legally difficult since police authority does not extend to state actors like Iran.

The government has consistently maintained that Japan cannot use force in support of illegal military action, as emphasized by former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in 2015.

Prime Minister Takaichi is navigating a delicate diplomatic landscape as she prepares for her 'extremely difficult' meeting with Trump.

The Japanese government has been examining various options within constitutional boundaries, including 'research and survey' missions and maritime security operations, though both face significant legal challenges.

Takaichi has emphasized that any military deployment would require a ceasefire halting combat with Iran as a precondition, and she has stated 'What cannot be done, I will say cannot be done.'

Domestically, she faces strong opposition - an Asahi poll showed 82 percent of Japanese voters oppose the US war on Iran - while internationally, she must balance Japan's security dependence on the US against its diplomatic and economic interests.

Tokyo has maintained contact with Iranian officials throughout the conflict, with Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi speaking to his Iranian counterpart on March 17, underscoring Japan's desire to preserve its relationship with Tehran.

The broader implications of this crisis extend far beyond the immediate Hormuz request, potentially reshaping US-Japan relations and Japan's regional security posture.

Trump has already expressed frustration with what he perceives as ungrateful allies, venting that 'They weren't that enthusiastic. And the level of enthusiasm matters to me,' and suggesting that his endorsement contributed to Takaichi's landslide election victory.

AsiaOne

The timing could scarcely be worse, with Takaichi meeting Trump at the moment when his anger at ally 'ingratitude' is at its peak.

Meanwhile, Japan's principled opposition to changes to the international status quo by force has been seriously weakened by its closest ally launching its own 'special military operation,' undermining Tokyo's previous condemnation of Russia's invasion of Ukraine on similar grounds.

This crisis forces Japan to confront the uncomfortable reality that as long as it remains dependent on US security guarantees, it may have limited ability to resist American demands that conflict with its constitutional principles and national interests.