Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe won a fresh mandate by winning a landslide in Sunday’s snap election, which he called as a referendum largely on his economic policies.

Having won up to four more years in power, a triumphant Abe said that the Japanese voters returned him to power because they wanted him to revive the economy through reflationary economic policies. Abe said the result showed the Japanese public’s confidence in his two years in charge.

On the surface, the election result may well buoy him. But a closer look says otherwise. For instance, Japanese experts said that the voter turnout rate of 52 percent ― the lowest of any postwar election ― alone shows that the Japanese public is not so happy with Abe’s performance and policies.

Those who cast ballots for the ruling coalition did so largely because the main opposition Democratic Party of Japan failed to capitalize on the skepticism about “Abenomics” and Abe’s falling popularity, which dropped to about 40 percent before Sunday’s election.

It was noteworthy that a pre-poll Asahi Shimbun survey found that for respondents who opposed Abe’s push for the right to collective self-defense and the restarting of nuclear reactors, the Liberal Democrats was still the top choice for the election.

In short, Japanese voters voted for the ruling coalition partly because there was no credible opposition ― as a matter of fact, the main opposition Democratic Party managed to field candidates for only 40 percent of the seats that were up for grabs.

Nevertheless, the solid victory will increase Abe’s political capital to press ahead with not only his economic agenda but also his controversial security and foreign policies.

What raises concern in the international community is the possibility that Abe will mistakenly interpret the strong performance of the Liberal Democrats in the election as a renewed mandate for his much-disputed policies of glossing over Japan’s wartime wrongdoings and moving Japan along a nationalist, rightist path.

This concern is well grounded, since Abe, serving his second period as the Japanese leader, has already established himself as a troublemaker for Japan’s neighbors ― especially Korea and China ― through a series of provocative acts.

He visited the Yasukuni Shrine that honors Japan’s war criminals and attempted to water down both the Kono Statement, which acknowledged the Japanese government and military’s role in mobilizing women for sexual slavery during World War II, and the Murayama Statement, which apologized for Japan’s colonial rule and aggression.

Moreover, he has expressed the goal of allowing Japan to expand its military role overseas by changing the postwar pacifist constitution and revising security-related laws for the right to collective self-defense.

It would be utterly mistaken, however, for Abe to believe that the Japanese voters endorsed him on these issues as well.

In fact, security and foreign policy or the prime minister’s position on history did not figure prominently in the election. The same Asahi survey found that the top three election issues were the state of the economy, streamlining the size of parliament and better child care programs to lure more women into the workforce.

Abe is set to start his third premiership about one week before the dawning of a new year, which will mark 70 years since the end of World War II and 50 years since Korea and Japan normalized their relations.

It would not be a coincidence if in the weeks leading up to the new year, news came that U.S. President Barack Obama recently urged Abe to improve ties with Korea, which were strained by his historical revisionism and nationalistic policies, and major U.S. newspapers criticized his position on history, even using such words as “nonsense,” “absurdity” and “playing with fire.”

What steps Abe will take regarding the restoration of relations with Korea and China and how he deals with criticisms raised by conscientious people around the world will determine how the important anniversary year will play out.