Examining U.S. Alliances from Multiple Perspectives

About two years ago, I took a one-year leave of absence from the university to work as a research intern at the Sasakawa Peace Foundation USA in Washington, D.C. As I began my graduation project, which serves as the culmination of my university life, I wanted to create something that fully incorporated my five years of study, including the results of this valuable overseas internship. This was perhaps partly based on what many of my professors used to say: "Create a research project you can be proud of as the best at SFC."

Looking back, Professor Ken Jimbo's class "Security and International Conflict" sparked my desire to delve into the complexities of security. In my research group, I analyzed the "European refugee crisis" from Turkey's perspective, which led to my interest in Turkish security. Then, through my research at a U.S. think tank, I believe I developed the ability to examine the Japan-U.S. alliance from an American perspective. Therefore, I decided to combine my academic learning from my research group with my practical experience in the U.S.—blending "academics" and "practical experience"—to research the changes in the security policy of Turkey, a U.S. ally. I am advancing my research by conducting interviews with experts on U.S. and Middle Eastern security policy, carefully reading diplomatic documents from various countries, and analyzing numerical data published by think tanks and international organizations.

In this research, I analyze the alliance between Turkey and the United States, using the Japan-U.S. alliance as a reference. There are two main perspectives from which I reference the Japan-U.S. alliance. The first is the difference in the foundation of the alliances. The relationship between the United States and Turkey is based on the principle of "defending allies" under Article 5 of the collective defense of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization), a multilateral security organization. In contrast, the Japan-U.S. alliance is fundamentally a bilateral alliance, so the nature of the alliance itself is one point of comparison.

The second is the perspective of values and a sense of values. When examining diplomatic documents on various countries' websites, phrases like "sharing values" and "with common values" appear. So, what do the values shared by Turkey and the United States signify? What are values in the first place? To clarify these questions, I am investigating this by referencing the Japan-U.S. alliance, which is said to be based on shared bilateral values.

During my stay in Washington, I commuted five days a week to an office located near the White House. Since few staff members were proficient in Japanese, I was able to leverage my strength in "being able to speak Japanese" to gain experience in various departments. I believe I was able to participate in numerous projects in the way I wanted because I earned the trust of those around me by diligently completing each task.

I was always conscious of the balance between "input" and "output." Internships often involve many "input" opportunities, such as passively listening to talks. I also valued "output," such as voluntarily participating in various events, writing columns in English, and contributing to a blog run by Japanese students.

I strongly feel that being in a challenging environment with meetings conducted in English and documents written in English was an irreplaceable experience.

As another part of my research, I am working as a policy simulation assistant at The Canon Institute for Global Studies (CIGS). A policy simulation is where many experts gather and role-play assigned positions, such as the U.S. Secretary of State or the Prime Minister of Japan, within a given scenario. I support the creation of the scenarios and related news videos. I also actively utilize the latest technologies I learned at SFC to make the simulation more realistic and run smoothly on the day.

My experience as a research intern at a U.S. think tank has been very helpful in creating these scenarios. This is because scenarios require both current factual information and elements of future prediction. I believe I am able to apply the knowledge I gained from being exposed to cutting-edge policy research in the United States.

Since SFC has very few required courses, connections are formed between first- to fourth-year students, and sometimes even with graduate students. I believe this expansion of vertical networks is a significant advantage unique to SFC when considering what you want to do and who you want to become.

This is perhaps best exemplified by the research groups. At SFC, you can join a research group from an early stage. I, too, have been engaging in many discussions with members who share similar interests in my research group since the spring of my second year. I think it was an excellent experience for both advancing my own research and for doing an internship abroad.

Furthermore, the ability to belong to multiple research groups is another attraction. I myself belonged not only to the Ken Jimbo Seminar but also to the Motohiro Tsuchiya Seminar and the Michito Tsuruoka Seminar, which allowed me to refine my research from diverse perspectives.

After graduation, I will take my first step as a professional at a trading company. During my time as a student, I strongly felt that SFC has a culture that embraces both "challenge" and "failure." As I build my career, I want to continue to "challenge" myself with various things without fearing "failure."

Looking at SFC alumni, there are many who are successful while continuing to "challenge" themselves toward their goals. Having such close role models for "building a career" also helped me envision my own future. I can say with certainty that my decision in my third year of high school to "Go to SFC!" was not a mistake.

co-media: [Overseas Internship] An Undergraduate Student's Long-Term Internship in Washington, D.C.!?