As important concepts derived from alliance theory, minilateralism and quasi-alliance exhibit significant differences in practice. In the evolution of the trilateral cooperation mechanism between the United States, Japan, and the Philippines, although the U.S. portrays it as an exemplar of minilateralism under the “Indo-Pacific Strategy”, it demonstrates distinct “quasi-alliance” characteristics. Examining the seven dimensions of treaty constraints, exclusivity, scope of cooperation, cooperating parties, confrontational attributes, internal relationships, and cooperation goals, this paper argues that the United States, relying on its discourse hegemony, has framed this mechanism as “minilateralism”, while Japan and the Philippines have legitimized their policy of following the United States by joining it. Compared to “minilateralism”, the trilateral cooperation mechanism between the United States, Japan, and the Philippines is closer to a “quasi-alliance”, and is actually a “quasi-alliance” under the name of “minilateralism”. Its essence aims to strengthen strategic containment of China from security, economic, narrative, and other fields. The conceptual analysis of the trilateral cooperation mechanism between the United States, Japan, and the Philippines breaks through the narrative framework set by the United States at the theoretical level, providing a mirror for China to cope with the challenges brought by the trilateral cooperation mechanism between the United States, Japan, and the Philippines.

Alliances are strategic assets that safeguard the national security interests and hegemony of the United States. Since the United States began its competitive strategy towards China, it has intended to form a strategic deterrence against China through the alliance of the trilateral relationship between the United States, Japan, and ROK, in order to win over China. The United States, Japan, and ROK have jointly taken a series of strategic measures, not only provoking ideological “factional confrontation” with China in terms of values, but also forming a “small NATO” in Northeast Asia to contain China in terms of military security, and promoting the “de-sinicization” of Chinas supply chain in economic cooperation. However, at the same time, the alliance of the trilateral relationship between the United States, Japan, and ROK also faces constraints such as goals beyond the scope of the U.S. financial resources, a lack of deep reconciliation in Japan-ROK relation, and potential checks and balances from China, Russia, and Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea. Therefore, in order to eliminate the small group pressure brought by the alliance of the United States, Japan, and Republic of Korea, China needs to continuously balance the strategic stability relationship between China, the United States, and Russia in Northeast Asia with the development of the international situation, actively promote economic cooperation with Northeast Asian countries, especially Japan and Republic of Korea, and thus promote the construction of a community with a shared future in the surrounding areas to jointly create a new future for Asia.

Japan has limited arable land yet has achieved remarkable accomplishments in the agricultural sector, overseas agricultural expansion is an important support, as it promotes agricultural and economic development in both Japan and host countries, achieving mutual benefits. Japan‘s agricultural development in Brazil is a successful case, driven by both funding and technology, effectively alleviating Japan’s food crisis while helping Brazil become a major exporter of agricultural products after years of cooperation. Subsequently, Japan and Brazil attempted to conduct trilateral cooperation with Mozambique, but the initiative did not achieve the expected results due to a lack of understanding of Mozambique‘s national conditions, insufficient risk assessment, and the non-participation of Japanese agricultural enterprises. This indicates that agricultural development in Mozambique faces more complex factors, requiring more detailed risk assessment. Bilateral and multilateral cooperation offers a multidimensional perspective on Japan’s overseas agricultural development, and Japan‘s successful experiences in bilateral cooperation and lessons from trilateral cooperation provide many useful insights for China’s overseas agricultural development.

The unique governance system formed by Japan over the years in response to flood disasters has not only reduced the huge losses caused by floods, but also enhanced the flood response capabilities of grassroots governments, communities, and the public in Japan, which helps to enhance the effectiveness of disaster prevention, reduction, and relief in Japan. Taking the Municipal and Rural Flood Disaster Response Guide, which has been continuously adjusted and updated in recent years, as an entry point for analysis, it is found that Japan has already constructed a flood disaster emergency response and relief system with the Cabinet as the pivot, the central government, prefectures, municipalities and villages as the hierarchical responsibility in its long-term flood disaster management practice. It has significant characteristics of close coordination between engineering and non-engineering measures, scientific and complete disaster emergency organization system, developed disaster emergency information network system, and continuously enhanced public awareness of disaster prevention and reduction. It has certain reference and enlightenment value. As China and Japan are both East Asian countries with frequent incidence of extreme rainstorms and, We can appropriately draw on Japan’s experience in flood disaster management, learn from its lessons, and improve the ability of grassroots capacity to deal with natural disasters such as floods by strengthening the resultant force of flood response, building a smart disaster prevention system, cultivating a national disaster prevention culture, and building a new paradigm for flood prevention and management, so as to enhance the grassroots-level capacity to respond to floods and other natural disasters, and continue to consolidate the grassroots foundation of emergency management.

Against the backdrop of global education digital transformation, in response to the challenges of the “5.0 era”, the issuance of the “New Learning Guidelines” in 2017 marked Japans official entry into the period of education digital transformation. Through research, it has been found that Japan has accelerated the construction of digital campus infrastructure, laying a solid foundation for the development of teachers digital literacy; widely integrating digital content into teacher education courses to promote the improvement of teachers digital literacy in the pre-service stage; implementing diversified and blended digital literacy training for in-service teachers to promote their professional development; and enhancing teachers digital literacy through government, third-party agency evaluation, and school self-evaluation. Through Japan‘s experience, we can provide insights for China in four aspects: strengthening software and hardware to build a digital campus infrastructure, deeply integrating digital content into teacher education courses, streamlining management models to enhance the effectiveness of teacher digital literacy training, and constructing a national digital literacy evaluation system for primary and secondary school teachers.

This paper examines the localization approaches and pathways of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages(CEFR)in the fields of English and Japanese language education in Japan, revealing the differentiated functions and recontextualization logic of the CEFR in different institutional domains. The study finds that CEFR-J focuses on the scientific reconstruction of language assessment, aiming to address the slow development of Japanese English learners language proficiency through detailed level segmentation and calibrated quantitative tools. The “JF Standards” focus on promoting overseas Japanese language education, constructing practical teaching guidelines through the localization of ability description language in local contexts. The Japan Framework of Reference for Japanese centers on policy guidance, adopting a strategy of “faithful translation with limited adjustments” to provide a unified language standard for educational administration. This tripartite differentiation, that is “theoretical assessment-instructional dissemination-policy management”, demonstrates both the tension of cross-cultural adaptability and local flexibility of the CEFR, offering important insights for the development of a “Chinas standards of Japanese language ability”.