Multiple Rivals and Leadership Approval: Evidence from Japan

Abstract This study examines how conflictual or cooperative policies toward rival countries affect domestic political approval, focusing on contexts with multiple rivals. I argue that the effects of conflictual or cooperative policies on leadership approval vary depending on rival’s threat levels and their salience. I hypothesize that the public is more likely to support leaders adopting conflictual policies toward more significant threats compared to lesser ones. For cooperation, I explore competing expectations based on salience levels and future gain calculations. Using Japan as a case study, I employ a mixed-methods approach combining a survey experiment and time-series analysis to test our hypotheses. Results support the hypotheses based on territorial rivals' salience levels. The public shows higher approval for conflictual policies toward more threatening rivals (e.g., China) compared to less salient ones (e.g., South Korea). Cooperation with more salient rivals significantly influences approval ratings, while interactions with less salient rivals have minimal impact. These findings contribute to literature on rivalries, territorial disputes, and public opinion by highlighting the importance of considering multiple rivalries in understanding domestic political consequences of foreign policy choices.