NOTE: The original thesis file was damaged and only the first 9 pages of this document were available. In June 2020, the author supplied the full thesis on request. Because the front matter of the supplied version differs from the original file, the two have been combined so that no material is lost______________/Original abstract: This thesis examines Japan’s changing pacifism and its implications for Japan’s security identity from 1945 to the present. Existing literature overlooks a correlation between the shift in the nature of Japan’s pacifism and its changing security identity. Moreover, earlier scholarship tends to focus on a particular theoretical perspective, and, therefore, offers limited theoretical analyses. Accordingly, the main aim of the thesis is to contribute to filling this research gap by applying an alternative framework combined with an eclectic approach and offering a comprehensive analysis of Japan’s pacifism and security identity. To examine the shift in Japanese pacifism, the thesis employed the concept of ‘negative pacifism’ (Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution) and ‘positive pacifism’ (the Preamble of the Constitution) as an analytical framework. The conceptualisation is derived from a definition of ‘negative-positive peace’ (Galtung 1969). To analyse multiple factors which facilitated the shift in Japan’s pacifism, the thesis applied ‘analytical eclecticism’ (Katzenstein 2008) and integrated the analytical framework (negative-positive pacifism) with orthodox international relations theories and approach. In an application of analytical eclecticism, the thesis proposed four theoretical perspectives of Japan’s security identity (constructivism): (a) pacifist state (classical liberalism/negative pacifism); (b) UN peacekeeper (neo-liberalism/positive pacifism); (c) normal state (classical realism/domestic pressure); and (d) US ally (neorealism/ external-structural pressure). The main argument of the thesis is that there has been an incremental shift from negative pacifism to positive pacifism in response to domestic and external pressures and that this shift has influenced Japan’s security identity. The core questions asked were: 1) What factors caused the shifts from ‘negative pacifism’ to ‘positive pacifism’?; 2) Has Japan been ‘normalising’ its military power by participating in international peace operations?; and 3) How have the shifts to ‘positive pacifism’ influenced Japan’s ‘core security identity’ as a ‘global pacifist state’? In order to substantiate the main argument and examine the questions, the thesis investigated the following case studies: (a) Japan’s security policy from 1945-1990; (b) Japan’s contributions to UNPKO in Cambodia and East Timor; (c) Japan’s responses to the US-led War on Terror; (d) Japan’s security cooperation with Australia and its implications for regional security; and (e) the Japanese constitutional revision issue in relation to Japan’s core security identity as a global image. This study concluded that although Japan’s security identity is fluctuating between the four models above, its core security identity has become, and remains that of a ‘global pacifist state’. The findings of this research demonstrated that an analysis based on the concept of negative-positive pacifism as an analytical framework combined with analytical eclecticism as an alternative research method assists in a comprehensive understanding of Japan’s pacifism and security identity. In this way, the thesis made an important contribution to the study of Japanese pacifism, security policy and international relations theory
