India and Japan: News and Discussion

[Prem]

Manmohan to visit Japan, nuclear deal on way

upswing in economic ties and the launch of civil nuclear negotiations, Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada in New Delhi next week, a preparatory visit aimed at firming up the agenda for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's trip to Tokyo later in the year. Okada is expected to be in New
Delhi on Aug 21 on a daylong visit for the India-Japan strategic dialogue, well-placed sources told IANS.

Manmohan Singh's Tokyo visit was earlier planned for December, but efforts are on to advance it by a couple of months. It could also happen in October, and may be combined with his visit to Vietnam to attend the 16-nation East Asia summit, said the sources. The finalisation of a bilateral civil nuclear pact could be announced during Manmohan Singh's visit to Tokyo, said the sources, adding that a formal signing may take place later. With the Japanese prime minister giving the nod, the two sides have held two rounds of nuclear negotiations and are confident of an early closure of a bilateral nuclear accord that will allow top Japanese nuclear companies to sell atomic equipment to India. The two sides have exchanged drafts of a bilateral nuclear pact and are closely studying each other's version with a view to ironing out differences, added the sources.
The nuclear issue will figure prominently in discussions between the foreign ministers of the two countries next week. Nudged by the US and France to fast-track the nuclear pact with India so that General Electric Co and France's Areva can use Japanese suppliers for nuclear projects for India, Japan has decided to accelerate the negotiations

.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/rssfeed/n ... 85829.aspx

[SSridhar]

India-Japan strategic dialogue from Monday

India and Japan will hold the fourth strategic dialogue on Saturday when Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada arrives in New Delhi, during which the two sides will discuss a wide gamut of issues, including civil nuclear cooperation and ways to enhance bilateral trade ties.

Okada will have delegation-level talks with External Affairs Minister S M Krishna during which they will review the status of the relationship between the two countries which had held nuclear negotiations in June this year. Rejecting the reports that the recent declaration made by Mayor of Nagasaki criticising the Japanese government for launching nuclear cooperation talks with India will have any negative impact, Secretary (East Asia) in the ministry of external affairs, Gautam Bambawale said though there was no timeline for the pact, the next round of talks will be held "sooner rather than later". He said India was aware of the sensitivities reflected in some viewpoints expressed in that country and it was appreciative of those viewpoints but it was up to the government of Japan to take care of such issues. "The two sides have decided to work towards a good working pact in the area, creating a win-win situation for both the countries. And there is no timeline to it," he said.

Before his departure from Tokyo, Okada told a press conference that he will discuss with the Indian leadership issues such as bilateral civilian nuclear cooperation pact and a free trade agreement, negotiations for which are on. Okada also said that he will "candidly convey to India critical public opinion in Japan" regarding the bilateral nuclear cooperation deal and urge New Delhi to make efforts toward nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation. The minister said Japan and India will need to discuss what to do if India conducts a nuclear test in their future civilian nuclear pact negotiations. Asked about the same, Bambawale said he will not like to discuss the issue in the public domain or through media. India will respond if the Japanese side raised it during the talks.

Besides civil nuclear cooperation, the two sides will also discuss economic ties, situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan, reforms in the UN and expansion of its Security Council. Okada is also expected to raise the situation in North Korea which does not have diplomatic ties with Japan. The visit is also aimed at firming up the agenda for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's trip to Tokyo later this year during which he will have a meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan.

India and Japan are also involved in the negotiations for a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). Japan is the sixth largest investor in India. The two sides are also involved in high-tech trade after Japan removed 11 Indian companies from the list of end-users and added four new ones recently, generating a positive momentum in bilateral ties.

[SSridhar]

India -Japan Strategic Talks

India and Japan on Saturday spelt out the parameters for a civil nuclear accord which, they hoped, would be negotiated quickly and takes into account Tokyo's sensitivities on the issue.

Speaking to journalists at the end of the fourth round of India-Japan strategic dialogue here, Foreign Minister S.M. Krishna and his Japanese counterpart Katsuya Okada expressed the hope that the economic partnership agreement (EPA) would be finalised before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Tokyo towards the year-end.

Both countries also discussed specific ways to approach the nations that disagreed with the formulation of the G-4 countries (India, Japan, Germany and Brazil), along with Africa, being represented on an expanded U.N. Security Council. The Ministers agreed to hold a brainstorming session with other partners on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly next month in New York.

While hailing India's non-proliferation record, Mr. Okada hoped that Japan's approach to disarmament and non-proliferation would be reflected in the civil nuclear pact that is being negotiated between the two countries. He said the agreement would be terminated if India tested an atomic bomb. This indicated Tokyo's desire to have a civil nuclear agreement modelled on the India-U.S. pact, which contained a similar clause.

Both leaders described economic and trade relations as the fulcrum of bilateral ties, with Mr. Okada observing that despite the “notable deepening” there was need to redouble efforts. He felt that finalisation of the EPA would help raise the economic ties by a couple of notches.

[krisna]

Why an India-Japan nuclear deal is essential

An India-Japan civil nuclear pact would be critical in signalling that they would like to build a partnership to bring stability to the region at a time when China is going all out to reward Pakistan with civilian nuclear reactors,

There are indications that negotiations on the pact between Japan and India have stalled and it now looks unlikely that this pact would be signed during the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Japan in October as originally planned. India and Japan started discussions on the possibility of Japan signing a civil nuclear agreement with India in June.

[Masaru]

Firms Face 'Unthinkable' in China, Tokyo Official Says

Swinging back at Beijing in an emerging dispute over the treatment of Japanese companies operating in China, Mr. Okada said a lack of comprehensive rules makes it difficult for foreign investors to solve labor disputes and other problems they face with increasing frequency in the nation.

"Foreign companies have faced problems in China that are unthinkable in a normal business environment," Mr. Okada said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. "We will keep bringing up these issues and we hope China will take notice and make corrections."

Among other examples of problems Japanese companies have had to deal with, the foreign minister also pointed to abrupt cuts in exports of rare earth metals used in manufacturing hybrid cars, and unfavorable local court rulings and weak implementation of favorable rulings for companies facing intellectual-property disputes.

Hope this leads to re-balancing of the Japanese investment portfolio and diversification of the manufacturing concentrated in PRC.

[Christopher Sidor]

India should not hold its relations with Japan hostage to the nuclear deal. Give japan some time, say 3-5 years before it comes around to India's way of thinking. Our relation ship with Japan should be deepened in all other spheres like space, electronics, optics, oil exploration, ship building, aviation, etc.

[Sanjay M]

India-Japan Ties Poised for Advance as Both Nations Eye China

[Neshant]

India-Japan Ties Poised for Advance as Both Nations Eye China

It would be good if something concrete was announced beyond just headlines.

Like major joint defence projects like an AWACS or Predator class UCAV or joint development of a civilian aerospace airliner project or a semi conductor park or something of technological significance.

There is so much potential but the japanese guys are just dragging their feet encumbered with nuclear non-proliferation and other irrelavant stuff.

[Sanjay M]

^^^ I think it will take a regime change in Japan before Indo-Japanese ties get that impetus for a leap forward in bilateral relations.

We'll have to wait for the current centre-left dispensation to inevitably flop, so that a more rightist govt comes to power as the only remaining untried option. The increasing trend of bullying from China and its attack dog Pyongyang will also encourage this.

With NKorea having sniped at SKorea with impunity, it's only a matter of time before they dare to take the next step up the ladder, and take a shot at Japan.

[svinayak]

^^^ I think it will take a regime change in Japan before Indo-Japanese ties get that impetus for a leap forward in bilateral relations.

We'll have to wait for the current centre-left dispensation to inevitably flop, so that a more rightist govt comes to power as the only remaining untried option. The increasing trend of bullying from China and its attack dog Pyongyang will also encourage this.

With NKorea having sniped at SKorea with impunity, it's only a matter of time before they dare to take the next step up the ladder, and take a shot at Japan.

I talked to out Japanese friend and he said the new govt social democrats are still new and have not learned the consensus building. He explained to me taking time. Japan is going thru a transition and the people are still adjusting to it.

[SSridhar]

Old Anxieties

Noteworthy, too, is the fact that the latest major power to have begun talks with India for a bilateral civil nuclear pact is none other than ‘pacifist' Japan, the world's only victim of atomic bombing.

However, Japan has now politely but firmly raised old concerns about India's nuclear security doctrine. And, this aspect shows that New Delhi increasingly finds itself being dragged back to the starting point of negotiations on peaceful uses of atomic energy. Official India obviously finds this somewhat puzzling. After all, the NSG, one of whose prime players is Japan itself, has already granted India an exceptional status. As a result, the international community is expected to treat nuclear-armed India as a genuine interlocutor for any bilateral accord on the peaceful uses of atomic energy.

What Tokyo is now seeking to do, with considerable diplomatic finesse, is to try and establish a bottom line for negotiating a civil nuclear pact with New Delhi. Surely Tokyo has not used strong language to drive the point home. But there can be no ambiguity about the Japanese government's real intentions of protecting its pacifist credentials at home and promoting cooperation with India in the civil nuclear domain at the same time.

These issues came to the fore during Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada's visit to New Delhi on August 21. Okada held wide-ranging talks with External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna and called on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The three main streams of discussions were bilateral economic cooperation, the possibility of a civil nuclear pact and the need to reform the United Nations Security Council in a way that could secure rightful places for both India and Japan.

Japanese official Hidenobu Sobashima, who was present at the Okada-Krishna talks, later told this correspondent in Singapore, over the telephone from Tokyo, that a key issue raised by Japan was the possible scenario of India testing a nuclear weapon once again. According to Sobashima, Okada told Krishna that Japan would find it “difficult” to stay the course of cooperation if India were to test a nuclear weapon again. India was informed that Japan might then feel compelled to “suspend” or “stop” such cooperation. However, Okada “did not visualise” and articulate a specific scenario such as an atomic-weapon test by India during its ongoing negotiations with Japan for a civil nuclear pact. Nor in focus was the scenario of India conducting a fresh atomic-weapon test after the signing of such a civil nuclear pact. Okada's main diplomatic objective, which was articulated clearly in his talks with Krishna and Manmohan Singh, was to let India gain a firm understanding of Japan's own sensitivities.{I hope that India had also similarly articulated why India had to go nuclear in the context of China and Pakistan and the US help to Pakistan to acquire nukes and missiles through the Chinese route. 'Firm understandings' need not necessarily be one-way traffic.}

A critical strand of thought from Japan was that its accord of this kind with India, as and when reached, must reflect New Delhi's own “efforts” towards non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament, Sobashima said. {Again, India must have articulated the past history of India's efforts at non-proliferation. Next sentence in the next para confirms this.}

Okada, for his part, was as categorical as he could be in his public comments after his talks with Krishna and Manmohan Singh. Okada said: “I first expressed my appreciation for the efforts that have been made to date by India for nuclear non-proliferation and towards a nuclear-weapons-free world. …Domestic criticism in Japan is high [over Tokyo's talks with New Delhi, which is not a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]. … Considering that… I asked for consideration on the part of India so that this philosophy of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation would be contained in the [proposed] nuclear cooperation agreement [between Tokyo and New Delhi]…. {What India would not concede in a multilateral and UN-sponsored organization, India would surely not concede in a bilateral engagement} I look forward to engaging in in-depth discussions with the Indian side regarding the formulation or wording so that the philosophy of non-proliferation and disarmament will be built into the agreement. {Oh. . they could be couched in general terms especially referring to how the P-5 must meet their side of the promise before NPT can become meaningful and before non-NPT members can be lectured to etc. etc.}I do not think we can suggest that India refrain absolutely from conducting any nuclear tests. But, if such a thing were to happen, then I think Japan will have no option but to state that we shall suspend our cooperation.”

While Krishna was circumspect and did not get drawn into a public discussion on this issue after the talks, the Japanese side was quick to detect the trend of relevant thoughts in the official circles in New Delhi. Easy to notice was the official mantra that India has already committed itself to a unilateral and voluntary moratorium on any further testing of nuclear weapons as a sequel to the 1998 Pokhran II detonations.

At one level, New Delhi is thought to believe that its maximalist commitments are those it has already made in 2008 in entering into a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and in securing an exemption from the NSG's guidelines. However, these aspects of a potential diplomatic counter-offensive by New Delhi in its negotiations with Tokyo for a bilateral civil nuclear pact did not quite come to the fore during Okada's latest talks with the Indian leaders.

Significant, therefore, was the reasoning that Japan cited in June this year to begin consultations and later negotiations with India for a bilateral civil nuclear agreement. Breaking the news of such consultations, the top Japanese official Kazuo Kodama had then told this journalist that “various elements” were first taken into account. In the “most updated position” at that time, these elements were: “the importance of India for Japan; the impact [of any Japan-India pact] on the international nuclear non-proliferation system; Japan's contribution in the area of civil nuclear cooperation; and the energy and industrial policy-viewpoint of the Japanese government.”

Subsequently, when Okada himself announced that Japan would begin formal negotiations with India, he cited one more factor that influenced him. “Japan has closely watched India's actions” since it secured an exemption from the NSG guidelines. And, the progress report was that “India has been steadily carrying out its commitments”, Okada emphasised.

Against this background of a calibrated assessment of India for nearly two years after the relevant decision by the NSG, a logical question is: Why has Japan raised this new issue now in such a categorical fashion? The answer is not far to seek.

One of the less-stated reasons that guided Japan in the first place in June this year was the fact that the Japanese knowhow and/or equipment were considered necessary for the satisfactory execution of the potential or actual civil nuclear contracts with India by some American and French firms. Moreover, implicit in the formulation about “the importance of India for Japan” was Tokyo's increasing strategic interest in New Delhi as a potential player in the wider geopolitical East Asia, where China is a dominant “native” power and the U.S. is a long-time “resident power” in its own right.

A significant public relations aspect that has come to the fore in official Japan's calculations in the period after June has much to do with the nuclear issue although this does not involve India as such. With U.S. President Barack Obama likely to visit Japan later this year for a summit of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, the Japanese are becoming increasingly conscious of what the Americans did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki 65 years ago.

Obama himself has sought to project a benign image of the U.S. across the world in general and in Japan in particular. Oft quoted in Japan are his utterances that articulate his vision of a world without nuclear weapons. As a result, there is a growing groundswell of largely unstated but deeply felt opinion in Japan that Obama is perhaps best suited to heal the U.S.-Japan wounds of the Second World War for ever. The notion of an apology from Obama for America's 1945 nuclear strikes on Hiroshima and Nagasaki is no longer considered all that unthinkable.

In August, when Hiroshima observed the 65th anniversary of the nuclear tragedy, the U.S. Ambassador to Japan attended the ceremony. This was the first-ever visit by a U.S. envoy to Hiroshima for such a poignant annual memorial. Surely, the American envoy did not proffer any apology to the people of Hiroshima and Japan. Some Japanese critics were also quick to note the U.S.' version that the envoy went to Hiroshima to signal America's solidarity with all the victims of the Second World War.

However, there is a new momentum in public opinion, especially in Japan, over the issue of a world without nuclear weapons. This should, in some measure, explain Tokyo's latest suggestions to New Delhi. The two sides have still miles to go before clinching an accord. But New Delhi and Tokyo, with their shared belief in the dream of a world without nuclear weapons, are not light years away from each other insofar as this political vision remains on the horizon.

It appears to me that the Japanese are creating an impression of dealing 'firmly' with India to appease their 'local constituency'. To that extent, we must play along while not conceding anything and reiterating our position. If the Japanese really play tough the Americans, especially GE, must sort the problem out with the Japanese. Progress made in other nuclear power projects will force the US-Japanese axis to fall in line.

[Venkarl]

Spot on SSji..All drama...Japs hopefully won't stick to that...it could be their national policy of denying anything nuclear to NPT and CTBT non-signatories....so bending that policy for a non-signatory's huge needs is productive to them...but showing some resistance to bending that policy will maalish Tokyo public...eventually this'll be an eyewash to their public.

India is willing to buy nuclear technology from Japan worth billions of currency ...and Japan will earn billions from India....its upto them whether they want money or not...ball was always in their court...

[ramana]

The Japanese think that the POKII tests have given India an advantage that needs to be negated to restore their own. There is a lot of Japanese scholarship on Indian and the bomb pre-1998. Its not about appeaseing public opinion etc.Its about their own status in the Asian balance of pwer. So long as nukes exist and they are prohibited from having them then its judicious to freeze the others.

[krisna]

Japan, India reach basic free trade accord

Asian economic powers Japan and India broadly agreed Thursday on a free trade deal that aims to reduce most tariffs between the two nations in a decade, Japanese foreign minister Katsuya Okada said.

Under the deal with India, Tokyo will cut 90 percent of its tariffs on Indian products shipped to Japan over the next decade, Okada said.
India will abolish 97 percent of tariffs on Japanese products during the same period, he said, adding that the deal was likely to cover reduced tariffs for Japanese auto parts, as Japan has long demanded.

n 2008, Japan exported 7.9 billion dollars worth of goods to India, led by industrial goods such as machinery, electronics, steel products and transport equipment.
In the same year, Japan imported 5.3 billion dollar worth of Indian goods, led by oil products, iron ore, animal feed and steel.

[VinodTK]

X-post from the People's Republic of China thread

China demands Japan release detained boat captain

BEIJING – China's foreign minister demanded that Tokyo immediately release the captain of a Chinese fishing boat that collided with two Japanese patrol vessels near disputed islands. But a Japanese court ruled he can be held 10 more days, deepening the diplomatic spat.

Yang Jiechi made the demand Friday to Ambassador Uichrio Niwa after the Japanese envoy was summoned for the third time over the crash.

Hours after Yang's protest, a Japanese court allowed prosecutors to keep the captain in custody until Sept. 19 before deciding whether to press charges against him, Naha District Court spokesman Yasuhide Yamashiro said.

[chetak]

The Japanese think that the POKII tests have given India an advantage that needs to be negated to restore their own. There is a lot of Japanese scholarship on Indian and the bomb pre-1998. Its not about appeaseing public opinion etc.Its about their own status in the Asian balance of pwer. So long as nukes exist and they are prohibited from having them then its judicious to freeze the others.

I have always been a little uneasy about the {edited}.

They are a sanctimonious lot and seem to have very conveniently forgotten their recent immediate bloody and evil past.

Our nukes are for our protection. We don't need these jokers to look down upon us or lecture us on nukes. If they got bombed it's entirely their problem.

These faqers came up to within kilometers of kohima and also andaman islands before they were beaten back.

They are staunch supporters of the pakis. They were never our well wishers.

[Sanjay M]

What do you expect - the Japanese establishment were co-opted by Brzezinski's Trilateralism, and still reflexively support the same positions even after Trilateralism has collapsed and is now giving way to 'G2'.

When North Korea fires a few more shots more intimately off Japan's bow, then we'll see the Japanese increasingly squirming as they stew in their own juices.

I'm waiting for Japan's right-wing nationalists to come to power, after all the other parties fail the Japanese people. Another Lost Decade should do it.

[Gerard]

Japan’s Nuclear Dilemma

The ‘deep dilemma’ for Japan it argued, was how to effectively appeal for the abolition of nuclear weapons while relying upon their protection, a theme echoed by Japan’s biggest business daily, the Nikkei, in its editorial the same day.

[RajeshA]

Japan’s Nuclear Dilemma

The ‘deep dilemma’ for Japan it argued, was how to effectively appeal for the abolition of nuclear weapons while relying upon their protection, a theme echoed by Japan’s biggest business daily, the Nikkei, in its editorial the same day.

They should stop appealing, then the dilemma will be gone!

[JE Menon]

Good one RajeshA

[Arihant]

What do you expect - the Japanese establishment were co-opted by Brzezinski's Trilateralism, and still reflexively support the same positions even after Trilateralism has collapsed and is now giving way to 'G2'.

When North Korea fires a few more shots more intimately off Japan's bow, then we'll see the Japanese increasingly squirming as they stew in their own juices.

I'm waiting for Japan's right-wing nationalists to come to power, after all the other parties fail the Japanese people. Another Lost Decade should do it.

The Japanese national character is a complex construct. At the risk of gross over-simplification, here are some postives and negatives form where we stand:

Negatives:
1. An innate sense of racial/national superiority: This is probably well-understood historically, but very much alive today. Historically documented in how this sense of racial superiority led them to believe that they could still prevail (by virtue of their "Bushido") when it was clear that they were losing in WWII, leading to the conflict being prolonged for several months. Apparent in this day and age to Indians from subtle acts of racism in Japan. Sometimes too naive to comprehend their own prejudice (a recent next-seat neighbour at a Japanese banquet remarked on how pleasant conversation with me was given that I did not stink of curry/spices as other Indians did). In the early 90's JAL officials admitted to segregating Indian passengers to the rear of their aircraft because they stank...
2. Tenaciousness: Historically documented in the "banzai charges" and kamikaze attacks of WWII. Tenaciousness sometimes manifests as stubbornness.

Positives:
1. Historical connections: Some in Japan are aware of the connections via Netaji and the INA (documented in the museum of their Shinto war shrine - Yasukuni Jinja). An even greater number know of Radhabinod Pal, and the position he took in the Tokya war crimes tribunal (if one stop even for a few minutes by his memorial at the same Yasukuni Jinja, one is impressed by the number of Japanese families who stop, bow and otherwise express reverence in front of his shrine). There is vague recognition in the popular psyche of the Indian roots of their Buddhism, but few realize, for instance, that Tokyo's largest temple (the Asakusa Kannon Temple) is actually a shrine to Durga/Shakti/Chandi (Kannon = Kuan Yin = a conflation of the identities of the Bodhisattva Avalokiteshwara Padmapani and Chandi).
2. Recognition of new strategic realities (ie., India's role in countering China).

[Sanjay M]

What you call tenaciousness or stubborness, I call inertia.
Kamikaze and Banzai stuff was just due to imperial propagandism and indoctrination.

I too find that curry stinks a lot. Anytime I go out with other desi co-workers to eat at an Indian restaurant, they will make sure to scrupulously wash their hands and rinse their mouths before coming back to the workplace. They've learned this from experience. We won't do this when returning from other eateries. I think that most Indians are so accustomed to spice that their nostrils are desensitized to it.

The main thing is that Japanese are insular. Because of this, they don't have enough experience with the outside world. Their limited exposure to other cultures then limits their perspectives of outsiders. They've been dutifully tagging along with the US like a stay-at-home wife, and now that the marriage is on the rocks they don't know how to come up with any alternatives.

[Karan Dixit]

Japan, India to sign free trade agreement


http://technews.tmcnet.com/topics/assoc ... eement.htm

[Karan Dixit]

While an exchange of views is not new, what has gained relevance is that New Delhi, Tokyo and Washington are on the “same page” with regard to Beijing’s aggressive postures, diplomatic sources told The Indian Express. While Pentagon in a recent report has talked about Chinese military activities, Japan’s Defence Ministry’s annual report — released last week — highlighted China’s increased military spending.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/India ... -up/681228

[D Roy]

Read the report itself. Reminds me of our own MOD annual reports.

http://www.mod.go.jp/e/publ/w_paper/2010.html

[Masaru]

I have always been a little uneasy about the {edited out racially abusive term}.

They are a sanctimonious lot and seem to have very conveniently forgotten their recent immediate bloody and evil past.

Our nukes are for our protection. We don't need these jokers to look down upon us or lecture us on nukes. If they got bombed it's entirely their problem.

These faqers came up to within kilometers of kohima and also andaman islands before they were beaten back.

They are staunch supporters of the pakis. They were never our well wishers.

It would be best to tone down the language while making your point. The Japanese public opinion was decidedly diverted away from the militarism of the imperial Meiji period. This was a deliberate attempt by the post WW2 US administration which found ground to prosper by drawing on the essential Buddhist world view of non-violence which underpinned the moral values of the society much longer than the warlike periods.

Now, Japan is unique and lucky to be isolated from continental power games and can afford to be insular. Regardless of all the modern advances in military technology the sea offers a natural protective barrier which is not available to continental powers like India/China and Korea. So the Japanese view point fashioned by the natural protection as well as the post war pacifist government under the nuclear umbrella of US is not feasible for India.

It may not be feasible for Japan itself as US power wanes and it ceases to be the pre-eminent Pacific power. This point needs to be understood to keep the sanctimonious lectures in perspective before indulging in abusive accusations.

As per the Kohima and Andaman part are you celebrating that INA was beaten back by the British imperial Army !! Japanese have been for their own reasons staunch supporters of Indian freedom movement, and I would wish that the memory of that support to India (and Netaji Subhash Bose) is not besmirched by some ill worded chest thumping bravado of beating back the Japanese army.

As far as the support for Paquis go you will find bigger and more dangerous supporters of those barbarians in the WKKs in power, pinko liberals who run the media and Resident-Non-Indians who rule the streets inside India than the Japanese can ever be. By no means condoning Japanese (cheque-book) support to Paquis, but that support is probably the last thing Indians need to worry after the internal support in India, PRC, Saudi, Unkil, Turkish, UQstani, Iranian, assorted OIC support in that order.

It is best to identify, build upon and cultivate relationships with like minded countries with no negative historic or future baggage and a glorious cultural tradition to build upon. IMHO India/Japan fit perfectly for all these parameters not driven out of fear of some third country but purely based on the synergies that can be built upon. Unfortunately both sides are falling way short of achieving this potential and the rantings quoted above are a reflection of that gap.

[RajeshA]

Now, Japan is unique and lucky to be isolated from continental power games and can afford to be insular. Regardless of all the modern advances in military technology the sea offers a natural protective barrier which is not available to continental powers like India/China and Korea. So the Japanese view point fashioned by the natural protection as well as the post war pacifist government under the nuclear umbrella of US is not feasible for India.

In this day and age, the sea is not a protective barrier, and an island can become a prison. With military advancement, some day PRC could feel emboldened enough to put a naval blockade on Japan, or take over some island group, the Japanese claim as theirs, or simply sink some Japanese ship.

Whatever the context of the skirmish, the Japanese would feel threatened. If the US does not respond appropriately the Japanese would be forced to respond. Then the Japanese would see, that the sea is not a natural protective barrier, but an open arena where one can get a bloody nose all too often, with no option of withdrawing from the arena.

Japan is not on a planet light years away, but rather in the middle of everything.

It may not be feasible for Japan itself as US power wanes and it ceases to be the pre-eminent Pacific power. This point needs to be understood to keep the sanctimonious lectures in perspective before indulging in abusive accusations.

Sanctimonious lectures by the Japanese to Indians irk Indians no end. It is like when you extend your hand of friendship, the other fumbles in his pocket, and puts on his glove beforehand.

Japan has stopped being the one developed country in Asia. There are many more. That is reality. The US security umbrella is not foolproof. Japan would have to get its hands dirty in the geopolitics of Asia.

If the term 'jap' reminds you of a derogatory term from a time when Japan was on a run in Asia and it makes the Japanese confront that part of history, the sanctimonious lectures imply a derogatory way of looking at India as well. With sanctimonious lectures the Japanese are calling Indians a morally deprived people. The sanctimonious lectures would have to go, and Japan would have to come down from the high horse when dealing with India.

As far as the support for Paquis go you will find bigger and more dangerous supporters of those barbarians in the WKKs in power, pinko liberals who run the media and Resident-Non-Indians who rule the streets inside India than the Japanese can ever be. By no means condoning Japanese (cheque-book) support to Paquis, but that support is probably the last thing Indians need to worry after the internal support in India, PRC, Saudi, Unkil, Turkish, UQstani, Iranian, assorted OIC support in that order.

The Japanese support to Pakistanis disturbs Indians far more than the support of others to Pakistan.

There is a Pakistan-friendly group in India (WKKs). They think that the two nations can reconcile without bloodshed. They may be unrealistic, or ideologically motivated but they have an interest, a stake. PRC has strategic stakes in the existence of Pakistan. The various Muslim countries need to express the brotherhood of their religion. USA have geopolitical projects running, where they think Pakistan can make a contribution. While India can understand why each of the above mentioned countries are willing to support Pakistan, Japanese behavior makes no sense at all to India.

What stake does Japan have in the wellbeing of Pakistan?

• No common religion
• No possibility of influencing the politics of the Indian Subcontinent in some way, which is visibly pro-Japanese
• No troops whatsoever in Afghanistan to support

So what is Japan's beef in Pakistan? India considers it Japan's post WWII stupidity which is costing India dearly. Would you offer an alternate explanation?

[Sanjay M]

Japan's establishment have a stake in keeping Unkil happy and dancing to his tune. This is what permits them access to Unkil's markets, and some of Unkil's nuclear-armed ships to umbrella them. This is the social order that LDP has built its privileges upon and been raised to preserve.

If Unkil says, "give money to Pak!" then they rush to give money to Pak.
If Unkil says, "give money to Afghanistan!" then they rush to give money to Afghanistan.

The Japanese Geisha will GUBO anytime her patron tells her to, because she doesn't want to be kicked out of bed and into the cold.

Hopefully, the now unemployed LDP cabinet ministers can get consulting jobs in India to tell our politicians how to behave when showing up drunk at cabinet meetings.

[Masaru]

Sanctimonious lectures by the Japanese to Indians irk Indians no end. It is like when you extend your hand of friendship, the other fumbles in his pocket, and puts on his glove beforehand.

May be you are forgetting India's own record in doling out sanctimonious, gratuitous advice to any and every one about non-violence, Palestinian rights, non-alignment, and nuclear disarmament etc. till not so long ago. If not for Pokhran 2 forced by blatant proliferation by PRC to Paquis India will be in the same camp as Japan! Once the US umbrella goes away and PRC shows its true colors (through Cheonan and the recent fishing boat incidents) Japan will fall in the same camp as India.

If the term 'jap' reminds you of a derogatory term from a time when Japan was on a run in Asia and it makes the Japanese confront that part of history, the sanctimonious lectures imply a derogatory way of looking at India as well. With sanctim
onious lectures the Japanese are calling Indians a morally deprived people. The sanctimonious lectures would have to go, and Japan would have to come down from the high horse when dealing with India.

FYI the ethnic/racial slur that the word people over here casually drop around came about during the internment of Japanese in US. This neither originated during the colonial presence in Asia nor is it even widely used there. By that reference I don't see gratuitous reference to Germans as Nazis and Italians as Fascists when the issue of MRCA competition or arms sales to Paquis comes up! Where do you get the impression some one is implying Indians are morally deprived people? So when Nehru/Gandhi etc. went around the world preaching non-violence were they implying the rest of the world is full of violent barbarians? You are mistaking foreign and strategic policy inertia with (non-existent) condescending behavior.

The Japanese support to Pakistanis disturbs Indians far more than the support of others to Pakistan.

There is a Pakistan-friendly group in India (WKKs). They think that the two nations can reconcile without bloodshed. They may be unrealistic, or ideologically motivated but they have an interest, a stake. PRC has strategic stakes in the existence of Pakistan. The various Muslim countries need to express the brotherhood of their religion. USA have geopolitical projects running, where they think Pakistan can make a contribution. While India can understand why each of the above mentioned countries are willing to support Pakistan, Japanese behavior makes no sense at all to India.

So after the tireless efforts of the WKK brigade, some of who even have risen to the topmost political position how's the situation working out?

The rest of the argument is even more hilarious! So PRC has legitimate right to proliferate N-weapons, block UN resolutions to protect Paqui terrorists because it 'created' a strategic stake by propping up and arming a terrorist state? Likewise Paquis too have legitimate interest in supporting Cashmere terrorist as they are bound by religious obligation to support coreligionists. Rage boys in cashmere and else where in India have right to burn and kill for 'Palestinian rights', 'Cartoon issue' or some random book burning? Islamist countries are likewise duty bound to support Paquis and their coreligionists in India to fight for establishing a caliphate? If all this is fine then why there are threads after threads of whines about Paquis, Saudis, PRC, Unkil etc? After all they all have legitimate interest in balkanising India by propping up Paquis! All this is acceptable but Japanese 'cheque book diplomacy' goaded by Unkil is not acceptable? Has there been any documentation of how much dole the Paquis have managed to get from Japan? The underlying message here is that Islamists, Unkil and PRC are too big and they can do as they please so let's pick on the most insignificant and minor player?


FYI it has been pointed out numerous times that Japanese foreign policy for the longest time mirrored the policy dictates from US. The way the polity is structured in Japan where govt.s change every year and bureaucrats essentially frame all the policy decisions there is huge institutional inertia in the decision making process. Vested interests from inside and outside would like the present state of affairs to continue. This to a large extent explains why Japan was underwriting a large portion of US logistical expenses in the recent wars and has carried over to the Paqui related policy too. Apart from that Japan has no 'beef' in Paquistan.

India needs to engage effectively and build upon historic linkages to break this status quo. How much of diplomatic energy / lobbying India does in Washington to break the hyphenated treatment and what fraction of it is used in Japan which incidentally still is the next biggest economy after US. Forget about US, the Indian diplomatic effort in Japan would pale in comparison to the corresponding efforts in 2-bit European countries while historically being the highest recipient of developmental/infrastructure aid from Japan.

India considers it Japan's post WWII stupidity which is costing India dearly. Would you offer an alternate explanation?

What stupidity are you talking about here; supporting INA /getting nuked by Unkil?

[Sanjay M]

^^^ I think he is referring to Japan's total deference and subservience to the US on foreign policy.

I just don't understand how the Japanese could have been blind to the longterm implications of Sino-US rapprochement following Nixon's visit.

The Japanese underestimated the instinct of the Atlantic component of their Trilateralist partners to irrevocably tilt toward China once the opportunity came around. This automatically put the Japanese on a road to nowhere, since it was inevitable that the Chinese would one day supercede the USSR. That was treated as a distant problem to be dealt with at some unspecified hypothetical future date, but as we can see, reality did not wait for them and has imposed its own penalties.

[RajeshA]

Masaru ji,

Thanx for the response and explanation.

[Arihant]

What you call tenaciousness or stubborness, I call inertia.
Kamikaze and Banzai stuff was just due to imperial propagandism and indoctrination.

I too find that curry stinks a lot. Anytime I go out with other desi co-workers to eat at an Indian restaurant, they will make sure to scrupulously wash their hands and rinse their mouths before coming back to the workplace. They've learned this from experience. We won't do this when returning from other eateries. I think that most Indians are so accustomed to spice that their nostrils are desensitized to it.

The main thing is that Japanese are insular. Because of this, they don't have enough experience with the outside world. Their limited exposure to other cultures then limits their perspectives of outsiders. They've been dutifully tagging along with the US like a stay-at-home wife, and now that the marriage is on the rocks they don't know how to come up with any alternatives.

I think Japanese "insularity" has been trotted out as an excuse for more than a century and a half (since the Meiji Restoration) - you'd think all the contact with the outside world would have helped them grow out of that insularity by now.

On a lighter note, I think most Indians would have the sensitivity to not compliment a Japanese guest for not having sashimi-breath like others of his kind.

I have many good friends who are Japanese, and most tend to agree with my analysis of their national psyche. There's much to admire about them, but we have to tell it as it is...

[Masaru]

New Warning From Tokyo on China’s Military

“China has been rather intensifying its maritime activities including those in waters near Japan. The lack of transparency of its national defense policies and the military activities are a matter of concern for the region and the international community, including Japan…”

Relations cooled earlier this year, in part because of various incidents in waters disputed by Tokyo and Beijing. In May, Japanese and Chinese diplomats also publicly sparred at a meeting in South Korea, after Japanese Foreign Minister Katsuya Okada pressed Beijing to shrink, or at least not increase, its nuclear-weapons arsenal.

Japan was also rattled by China’s refusal to condemn North Korea after a South Korean naval vessel was sunk in March, killing 46 South Korean servicemen, in an incident that Seoul blamed on Pyongyang. Japan considers North Korean one of its biggest security threats.

[VinodTK]

The Japan Times: A Sino-centric Asia unlikely

here are at least four possible Asian security scenarios. The first is the rise of a Sino-centric Asia, as desired by Beijing. China seeks a multipolar world but a unipolar Asia. By contrast, the United States desires a unipolar world but a multipolar Asia. A second scenario is of the U.S. remaining Asia's principal security anchor. A third possibility is the emergence of a constellation of Asian states with common interests working together to ensure both power equilibrium and an Asia that is not unipolar. A fourth scenario is of an Asia characterized by several resurgent powers, including Japan, India, Vietnam, Indonesia and a reunified Korea.

Of the four scenarios, the least unlikely is the first one. China's neighbors increasingly are uneasy about its growing power and assertiveness. While Beijing aspires to shape a Sino-centric Asia, its actions hardly make it a credible candidate for Asian leadership.

[Kanson]

China, Japan spat in East China Sea

Shamshad A. Khan
September 22, 2010

But this time Japan has indicated that it is not going to cave in to Beijing’s pressure and the detention of the Chinese captain will continue. Japan is also mulling the conduct of its own test drilling as a “countermeasure” and also plans to reinforce surveillance with P-3C patrol aircraft in the area. On its part, it has cancelled a bilateral summit meeting between Prime Minister Naoto Kan and Chinese premier Wen Jiabao at the sidelines of UN General Assembly meeting in New York next week.1

......

The recent change in the cabinet portfolio in Naoto Kan government has made the issue more difficult for China. A “China hawk” Seiji Maehara has taken over from a “dove”, Tetsuya Okada, as Japanese Foreign Minister on September 16. As soon as Maehara was appointed Foreign Minister, China Central Television, quoting the Japanese media, reported that a “hawk (on China) has been appointed” as Japan’s new foreign minister. Maehara’s reputation is largely attributed to his past remarks. In a speech at a US think tank in late 2005, Maehara, then leader of the Democratic Party of Japan, called China a “realistic threat,” noting that it was building up and modernizing its military capabilities.5 In his first news conference after assuming office, he reiterated that “there is no territorial problem in the East China Sea” as the Senkaku Islands belong to Japan and Japan will take “appropriate steps” if evidence of China’s drilling on the Shirakaba gas field is confirmed.6 These remarks suggest that the new leadership in Tokyo’s foreign ministry is not likely to back down even if China uses this standoff to test Japan.

[Kanson]

Mismatched intentions end up intensifying Japan-China row over islands

THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

Video footage taken by the coast guard shows the Chinese trawler deliberately ramming a patrol ship, officials said, supporting Tokyo's claim that the trawler captain obstructed them in carrying out their duties. Soon after the incident, however, Chinese media accused Japan of instigating the collision. For its part, Beijing has done nothing to set the record straight.

Instead, Chinese officials skipped the issue of how the incident came about and focused on Beijing's claim of sovereignty. They say Japan's decision to apply domestic law to waters around the islands is unacceptable.
....

However, contrary to Tokyo's insistence on handling the matter through legal procedures, Beijing apparently hoped that Tokyo would "exert prudent political judgment" in trying to resolve the matter, sources said.

This clearly was a reference to another incident involving the Senkaku Islands in March 2004 when the government under Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi decided not to indict seven Chinese arrested on suspicion of illegally landing on the islands and to deport them to China.
...
While Chinese officials apparently hoped that similar measures would be taken this time, a Japanese Foreign Ministry source noted "the nature of this incident is clearly different from the one in 2004 which involved violations of the immigration law."

[VinodTK]

Japan rejects China's demand for apology

State broadcaster China Central Television showed Zhan, 41, smiling and holding his fingers in a victory sign as he walked off the plane. He was greeted by family members bearing flowers and a small group of government officials.

But hopes that his release would defuse mounting tensions were dashed when China promptly demanded an apology and compensation from Japan.

"It is unlawful and invalid for Japan to detain, investigate or take any form of judicial measures against the Chinese fishermen and trawler," China's Foreign Ministry said in a statement. "The Japanese side must make an apology and compensation for this incident."

Japan's Foreign Ministry said the demands were groundless and "absolutely cannot be accepted."

[svinayak]

http://japanfocus.org/-Rajeev-Sharma/3406

India-Japan Ties Poised for Advance as Both Nations Eye China

Rajeev Sharma
India and Japan are poised for a rapid advance in their bilateral relations with rich economic and strategic overtones. Straws in the wind suggest that India-Japan ties could reach a historic high by the year’s end, well before Tokyo and New Delhi celebrate 60 years of their diplomatic relations. Though Japan and India have been in touch with each other for the last 1500 years, modern diplomatic relations were established on April 28, 1952.

The two countries are engaged in deepening of bilateral ties in such diverse areas as defense, business, high technology trade, science and technology and culture and the process has gained momentum over the last decade. However, the two powers will be crossing the Rubicon if and when they sign the civilian nuclear cooperation agreement they are currently negotiating. The first round of negotiations on the nuclear deal was held on June 28-29, 2010 in Tokyo with the Indian side represented by Gautam Bambawale, joint secretary (East Asia) in the Ministry of External Affairs, while Kitano Mitsuru, deputy-director general, Southeast and Southwest Asian Affairs department, led the Japanese side.
New Delhi appears confident that it will be able to address Japanese concerns amicably without yielding to Tokyo’s demand that the agreement include a clause that the deal will be off if India were to conduct fresh nuclear weapon tests. The Indians faced a similar challenge when negotiations with the United States for a nuclear deal began in 2005. After protracted talks, Washington agreed to drop its insistence on incorporating a clause stipulating that the “deal is off if India conducts fresh tests”. Instead, India agreed to insert a clause in the 123 US-India civilian nuclear agreement of 2005 that it would return all American material and equipment to Washington in the event of a fresh Indian nuclear test. New Delhi will not be averse to inclusion of a similar clause in the civilian nuclear energy agreement with Japan, but nothing beyond that.

[Christopher Sidor]

Till now all the posts that I have seen, which claim that India and Japan are coming closer due to China, are from Indian news source (rediff, ht, the hindu, toi, etc) or are being written by Indians. I have yet to see a Japanese news source or a Japanese commentator actually support these claims.

Further if we view our relationships with Japan through the Chinese prism, we are doing a disservice to ourselves. The reason being, if the japanese-chinese irritants are removed, due to some reason, will our relationship with japan still hold? Under such circumstances the Japanese might think, we do not need to have a close relationship with India.
Something similar happened with US-Pak relationship after the end of cold war. US simply abandoned Pakistan, once the cold war got over. It did not need to put up with Pakistan anymore, and the end of cold war opened the prospectus of closer relationship with India.

We should not make our relationship with japan as India-China-Japan triangle. Rather we should have a relationship with Japan, which is independent of China and independent of the Indo-Sino or Sino-Jap relationship. Something similar to the Indo-Korean relationship.

[ramana]

Can you monitor Japanese news outlets like Ashahi Shimbun etc.?