Why Does Japan Explicitly Highlight Maritime Security in Its Partnership Agenda with NATO but the Others Do Not? : A Study into the Strategic Partnerships between NATO and the IP4

This thesis investigates the divergence in strategic partnership agendas between NATO and the IP4: Japan, Australia, South Korea, and New Zealand. While existing literature recognizes interest in NATO from the IP4, as well as experiences of maritime security threats, it does not explain why only Japan explicitly highlights maritime security in its partnership with NATO, while the others do not. Directed by neoclassical realism, this study establishes three factors behind such divergence: staggering security and geographic priorities, varying views of security capabilities, and wavering belief in NATO capabilities. Guided by qualitative tradition, this research analyses government and organization documents - such as security strategies, defence reports, white papers and NATO publications - supplemented by media sources. A thematic analysis compares prioritizations, actions and partnership intent among the IP4. Findings reveal the IP4 has distinct national priorities and separate assessment on NATO capabilities in the region. This explains Japan's contrasting agenda to its counterparts. Research limitations include accessibility of documents and relevant authenticity. Nevertheless, this thesis contributes to understanding IP4-NATO dynamics and offers a foundation for further studies on partnership variations.