European Journal of International Relations

This article presents the ethical case for diplomatic criticism as a response to mass atrocities and serious external aggression. It argues, in short, that states have a moral duty to criticise the offending parties. More specifically, it argues that diplomatic criticism is often a plausible and preferable alternative to other means of addressing serious external aggression and mass atrocities (such as war, economic sanctions and other diplomatic measures). It also argues that diplomatic criticism is often preferable to doing nothing, and that even if other means are undertaken, states should engage in diplomatic criticism as well...

The term 'abnormal' has frequently been used to describe post-war Japan. Together with the idea that the country will, or should have to, 'normalise' its foreign and security policy, it has been reproduced in both academia and Japanese society. Why is Japan branded as 'abnormal', and from where does the desire to 'normalise' it come? Drawing on a relational concept of identity, and the distinction between norm and exception, this article argues that the 'abnormality-normalisation nexus' can be understood in terms of three identity-producing processes: (1) the process whereby the Japanese Self is socialised in US/'Western' norms, ultimately constructing it as an Other in the international system; (2) the process whereby the Japanese Self imagines itself as 'legitimately exceptional' (what is called 'exceptionalisation'), but also 'illegitimately abnormal' - both of which are epitomised by Japan's 'pacifism'; and (3) the process whereby both the Self's 'negative abnormality' and China/Asia are securitised in attempts to realise a more 'normal' (or super-normal ) Japanese Self...