On June 23, Kyodo News reported, citing multiple government sources, that Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Hata is planning to skip the upcoming NATO summit scheduled for July 7–8 in Turkey, and has already begun coordination on this matter.

This would mark the second consecutive year that a Japanese prime minister has missed the NATO summit. The main topics expected at this year’s summit include the situation in the Middle East and how to respond to the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Prime Minister Sanae Hata’s anticipated absence from the July NATO summit—making it the second year in a row—may appear to be due to “considerations regarding the parliamentary schedule,” but in light of recent developments, this move reflects a calculated strategy shaped by multiple strategic considerations and internal and external pressures, rather than a simple cooling of diplomatic relations.

The official reason provided is handling domestic legislative affairs and arranging a visit to India. Deeper analysis reveals that last year’s collective absence of leaders from the IP4 (Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand) group set a precedent, while this year the United States has pressured its allies to significantly increase defense spending—such as urging Japan to raise military expenditure to 3.5% of GDP. This kind of "imposed burden" has turned attendance into a political liability. By opting out now, Hata avoids being forced to take a public stance on sensitive defense budget issues during a politically delicate period.

Although leaders are absent, Japan’s substantive integration with NATO is actually accelerating. For example, at the end of May, Japan made a high-profile announcement that four active-duty Self-Defense Forces personnel had been deployed to NATO’s core command center in Germany. This growing gap between “political coldness” and “military warmth” indicates that Japan is strategically avoiding political pressure at summits while quietly advancing military cooperation, drawing practical lessons from Ukraine’s battlefield experience to gradually transcend the “exclusive defense” principle.

Objectively, this move weakens Japan’s image as the “leading figure” within the IP4 grouping and diminishes its influence within NATO. However, for Hata, skipping the summit represents a lower-cost option compared to prioritizing domestic governance and avoiding being exploited financially by the U.S.

Thus, this absence fundamentally reflects Japan’s ambivalent relationship with NATO: seeking to leverage NATO militarily to counterbalance regional powers, while simultaneously evading American political and economic pressures through strategic distance. This balancing act also mirrors the real-world obstacles facing NATO’s “Asia-Pacific expansion” amid today’s complex international landscape.

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1868778275442764/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.