India and Japan: News and Discussion

[Suraj]

Symbolism matters a huge deal to the Japanese. They spent a long time debating whether or not to call their national flag and national anthem that. In fact, neither was official until 1999. They spent the better part of half a century debating whether those were symbolisms of their militaristic past. They tend to move fast when they make up their minds about something. It's the making up their minds part that takes them time.

[SSridhar]

Abe Hopes to Conclude Japan's First Defence Sale with India in 40 Years - Economic Times

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visits India this weekend, hoping to wrap up the first overseas sale of military equipment by Tokyo in nearly four decades and open up the world's biggest arms market for his nation's defence manufacturers.

Abe's visit to India will underline growing business and political ties between the two nations as they close ranks against mutual rival China, with the initial focus on the sale of amphibious search and rescue aircraft to India.

Japan and India are also trying to finalise an agreement on civilian nuclear energy that would open up the Indian market to Japanese players, officials said, reflecting another shift in Tokyo's policy on a sensitive issue. However, a Japanese official said a signing was unlikely during the visit.

Japanese officials say the proposed sale of ShinMaywa US-2i planes would not infringe Japan's self-imposed ban on arms exports because the aircraft to be given to India will be unarmed and can be used for civilian purposes.

Still, it will give India considerable aviation reach across the seas and could raise China's ire.

"We have been discussing with Japan the possibility of purchase of the aircraft," said Gautam Bambawalle, the top Indian foreign ministry official dealing with North Asia.

"It will take a bit of time because defence equipment is difficult to transfer, and also the terms and conditions take time to work out."

The plane, built by ShinMaywa Industries, could be outfitted for firefighting or as a kind of amphibious hospital and costs an estimated $110 million per unit. ShinMaywa estimates that there could be a global market of about 100 amphibious planes for which it could compete.

Abe's government vows to review Japan's ban on weapons exports, a move that could reinvigorate struggling defence contractors like Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd and Kawasaki Heavy Industries Ltd. Mitsubishi Heavy will be represented on the business delegation accompanying Abe on the India visit.

Security ties between India and Japan were virtually non-existent until a few years ago. But Abe has pushed for a stronger relationship with Asia's third largest economy to balance a rising China.

Joint exercises

The two countries held joint maritime exercises for the first time in 2012, in the north Pacific, followed by another set of manoeuvres in the Bay of Bengal last month.

More exercises including exchanges between the air forces are planned this year and Abe has been pushing for Japanese participation in naval exercises that India holds with the United States each year, an Indian defence official said.

"China is a major factor driving closer ties between India and Japan," said Michael Auslin who leads Japanese studies at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington.

"Japan is looking for partners outside northeast Asia. How far this progresses depends on Chinese assertiveness and coercion."

Japan is also involved in various projects aimed at revamping India's antiquated infrastructure and building high-speed railway connections and industrial corridors between the cities of Delhi and Mumbai, and Chennai and Bangalore.

Abe will be accompanied by several top executives from companies like Mitsubishi Heavy, Sumitomo Chemical Toshiba and Hitachi, which are looking to expand commercial operations in India, the Confederation of Indian Industry said.

Mitsubishi Heavy has a wholly owned unit in India that sells machines for industries such power plants while Hitachi and Toshiba plan to supply products to urban railway systems coming up across the country.

Abe is expected to inform Indian counterpart Manmohan Singh that Japan will provide yen loans totalling about 210 billion yen ($2 billion) for construction of subway lines and energy-conservation projects, the Nikkei newspaper reported.

A Japanese official said the two sides will also likely talk about ways to make India's business environment friendlier to foreign companies.

[SSridhar]

We need closer security ties: Abe - ToI Interview

Q: Japan plays an important role in the transformation of India. You have played a personal role in building the India-Japan relationship. What are the measures by which you think Japan can help in building India in the larger strategic context of Asian security, stability and prosperity?

First of all, I feel deeply honoured to be the first Japanese prime minister to be invited as the chief guest of India's most important celebration, that of the Republic Day celebration,

I am truly delighted that Japan and India have long developed very close and friendly relations over the years. I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude for the extremely warm welcome extended from the people and the government of India to Their Majesties, the Emperor and Empress of Japan, when they visited the country from the end of November until the beginning of December last year.

I am convinced that the bilateral relationship between Japan and India is blessed with the largest potential for development of any bilateral relationship anywhere in the world. With this in mind, I would like to develop vigorously and enhance our cooperative relationship with India in a wide range of areas including political and security fields, economic relations, and people-to-people exchange, based on "the Strategic and Global Partnership".

Japan's support for India's development has been consistent. Back in 1991, for instance, Japan provided India with an emergency balance of payment support, which helped the Indian economy and its ascendancy in the global economy. Since then, Japan has been consistently supporting India, as demonstrated by the fact that India has been the largest partner of Japan's Official Development Assistance since 2003.

Further, the economic cooperation between Japan and India has now expanded into the private sector. Over the last decade, the trade volume between our two countries has tripled and the number of Japanese companies operating in India has quadrupled. Indeed, Japan and India have established a "win-win" economic partnership.

India's stable development is also beneficial for the prosperity of the Asia-Pacific region, as the country has the third largest economy in Asia and the second largest and increasing population in the world. I am determined to contribute to the development of our two nations and prosperity of the region through further strengthening the Japan-India strategic economic partnership and promoting Japanese companies' investment into India.

Compared to the growing political and economic ties between Japan and India, people-to-people exchange between the two countries currently leaves more room to grow. In order to keep the Japan-India relationship on a further solid and sound base with wider scope, I will make further efforts to impart energy to human exchange so that more people travel back and forth and actively interact between our two countries.

Q: You have said you want Japan to become a 'normal' power. What would you like India to do in the area of defence and maritime security cooperation to help Japan achieve this goal?

Today, the security environment of the Asia-Pacific region is becoming ever more severe. As the world becomes more interdependent, I believe Japan should play a more active role than before to ensure peace and stability in the region and the world, under the understanding of 'Proactive Contributor to Peace' based on the principle of international cooperation. I fully recognize the tremendous role India plays in this perspective, and hope that Japan and India will further strengthen the cooperation in the field of security.

To be specific, our two governments should deepen our dialogue and share each other's understanding on regional security, to start with. It is therefore important to further enhance bilateral dialogues such as the "2 plus 2" Secretary Level Dialogue, and multilateral dialogues such as the Trilateral Dialogue among Japan, India and the United States. In addition, we need to continue and strengthen our bilateral and multilateral joint maritime exercises. The joint exercises, conducted on a regular basis by our maritime defence forces and coast guards, embody the strong ties between Japan and India in maritime security. I expect these exercises will be further promoted and expanded.

Japan and India are bound by the seas. As I stated during my last visit to India as prime minister in 2007, I expect both Japan and India, as maritime states, to play a vital role together for the security of sea lanes and jointly carry out their responsibility in the region.

[SSridhar]

Coming a Full Circle, Shinzo Abe in India - Ananth Krishnan, The Hindu

When former Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi travelled to New Delhi in 2005, he was the first Japanese leader to visit India in more than half a decade. His visit took place at a time when Tokyo appeared somewhat wary towards India’s overtures for building closer defence ties. Fast forward a decade, and the relationship has appeared to have come full circle. It is now Tokyo that appears eager to broaden the security relationship with India, even pushing to sell its home-grown amphibious aircraft.

Mr. Koizumi’s visit has since come to be seen as a turning point. The past decade has seen an unprecedented level of engagement between both countries, underlined by regular annual summit meetings between their Prime Ministers, a rare occurrence in India’s diplomacy with most countries. This intensive engagement has persisted despite the many changes of government in Tokyo over the past nine years — as many as four different Prime Ministers have visited India during this time.

While this has reflected the consensus across the political spectrum in Japan for pursuing closer ties with India, no leader has perhaps been as vocal an advocate for the relationship as current Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Mr. Abe’s ties with India stretch back over two generations. His grandfather, Nobusuke Kishi, who visited India as Prime Minister in 1957, had deeply personal reasons to be grateful to India, particularly for its support to Japan during its traumatic and isolated post-war years.

During the Second World War, Kishi served as a senior official in the puppet Manchukuo government established in northeastern China following the Japanese occupation. In charge of its industrial development, he presided over a regime that oversaw widespread and notorious exploitation and abuse of the local labour force. Charged with war crimes — he is still regarded in China as a Class-A War Criminal — Kishi was subsequently cleared of the charges and went on to become Prime Minister. India extended a warm welcome to Kishi in 1957 at a time when the country was still largely isolated by its neighbours. Kishi made clear his gratitude by making India the first recipient of Japanese Official Development Assistance (ODA).

Mr. Abe will certainly be mindful of this history when he arrives in New Delhi this weekend on a visit which will also see him preside over the Republic Day parade as chief guest. When he visited India as Prime Minister in 2007, Mr. Abe met with the son of Indian jurist Justice Radhabinod Pal, the only member of the post-war International Military Tribunal for the Far East, who cast a dissenting vote against punishing Japanese officials for war crimes. Among the 50 suspects charged with war crimes was Mr. Abe’s grandfather, Kishi. Pal presented a lengthy dissenting opinion questioning the highly politicised tribunal’s legitimacy and motivations, although he acknowledged the atrocities committed by Japanese forces.

Mr. Abe has made clear that his government is looking to reinvigorate the relationship with India, which has been framed by his aides as a central pillar to his government’s foreign policy objectives for the region. His first term as Prime Minister, in 2007, ended in just one year after a series of missteps left him a widely unpopular leader.

Mr. Abe was given a second chance in December 2012, when his Liberal Democratic Party won a resounding victory amid public dissatisfaction with a series of governments that failed to revive a stagnating economy. Mr. Abe, in his second innings, wisely made the economy his first priority, shelving, at least for much of his first year in office, his more controversial political agenda. Mr. Abe turned to Koichi Hamada, a professor at Yale University, in crafting a bold and ambitious revival plan, announcing “three arrows” to save the economy.

Dubbed “Abenomics”, the three arrows involved massive monetary easing, an expansionary fiscal policy and a plan for long-term growth. The first two arrows had largely succeeded in hitting their target, Mr. Hamada wrote in a recent essay, evinced by a soaring stock market which has recorded a 40 per cent gain over the past year. The Japanese currency has also fallen 20 per cent against the dollar, boosting Japanese businesses by making their exports competitive again.

There is an unmistakeable return in confidence for beleaguered Japanese industry and enterprise, a resurgence that is good news for India. Japanese investments have continued to play a crucial role in building India’s infrastructure, including the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor. Japanese assistance towards a Chennai-Bangalore high-speed rail project is expected to figure during Mr. Abe’s visit. Trade between both countries reached $ 18.6 billion last year. According to the Japanese government’s figures, investment into India grew from 15 billion Yen ($ 145 million) in 2004 to 543 billion ($ 5.25 billion) in 2008. In 2011, the figure stood at 181 billion ($ 1.75 billion). Cumulative development assistance committed to India, according to government figures, has reached 3800 billion Yen ($ 36.7 billion).

On the foreign policy front, however, Mr. Abe’s record has been mixed so far. Mr. Abe has for long stated his ambition of making Japan “a normal country” and turning the page on elements of the post-war imposed pacifist Constitution that limits the development of the military. His project has taken on all the more urgency in the wake of renewed tensions with China over the disputed Senkaku or Diaoyu East China Sea islands and the rapidly growing strength of the Chinese military.

A “normal” Japan that takes on greater security responsibilities in Asia, coupled with its new-found resurgence and confidence under Mr. Abe, no doubt bodes well for India and the region. Only this month, both sides agreed to enhance defence consultations, particularly on the issue of maritime security, when Japanese Defence Minister Itsunori Onodera visited New Delhi.

Mr. Abe’s government has, on the other hand, risked undermining its regional promise as tensions with China and South Korea have worsened on the sensitive question of wartime history. Mr. Abe became the first Japanese leader in seven years to visit the Yasukuni Shrine, a memorial for the civilians who lost their lives in the war that also enshrines 14 Class-A war criminals.

The visit understandably angered China and South Korea, who view the shrine as glorifying the brutalities of Japanese militarism. The Yasukuni visit even brought criticism for Mr. Abe at home.

Mr. Abe will be the fourth Asian leader to be received as the Chief Guest at the Republic Day parade in the last five years, following leaders from South Korea, Indonesia and Thailand. The trend — albeit partly a result of scheduling — highlights India’s increased attention towards deepening its engagement with the region. It does, however, remain to be seen how India navigates the increasingly complex tensions that have cast a cloud on East Asia, and left unclear what impact a resurgent Japan under Shinzo Abe will ultimately leave on the region.

[ramana]

From US National Interest.

India Japan Alliance brewing?


Could be stretching it a bit.

[Neshant]

Could be stretching it a bit.

More like stretching it a lot.

Its only when there is large scale R&D in defence underway that you can believe any of that.

Till then its all hype.

[Rony]

This lame duck congress govt has sent of all the people Rajiv Shukla to receive Abe. Did someone say India-Japan alliance ?

[pankajs]

The Indian Express ‏@IndianExpress 18m

India invites japan to be part of Malabar naval exercises with the US http://fexp.in/OaO60767
--------------------------------->>

Shedding away its US inhibition in the dying months of the UPA government, the Defence ministry has given the go ahead to invite Japan for the next Indo-US Malabar exercises, knowing well that the next round will take place after the general elections.

The government made the invitation for Japan to join this year’s Malabar exercise on Saturday during the course of the bilateral discussions with visiting Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and his delegation.

It was in 2007 that the the Malabar, off the coast of India, was a multilateral event and even attracted formal protests from China after which Defence Minister A K Antony took a stand that Indian forces will not participate in any exercise that conveys a sense of military alliance with the US against a third country.

Also, at today’s talks, the two sides have agreed to start a National Security Advisor-level dialogue between the countries in an effort to re-energise the strategic component of the relationship that has hardly progressed despite strong economic relations.

With the Abe government setting up a National Security Council and appointing a NSA – Shotaro Yachi – this conversation, just like with other strategic partners, is now possible. Sources said this dialogue should help break the deadlock on key strategic issues like nuclear and rare earths cooperation, defence purchases and high technology trade. But clearly, this dialogue will start in its right earnest under the next government.

Interestingly, on expanding partcipation in the Malabar exercises, the Defence Ministry did not change its position in all these years despite prods from the Prime Minister’s Office. The only concession Defence Ministry made some time back was that while it will not permit these multilateral exercises off the coast of India, it will not oppose participation of Indian vessels when such exercises happen off the coast of another country.

In the run-up to this visit too, there was considerable pressure from Japan to allow its ships to participate in last year’s Malabar exercises. The Defence Ministry, however, rejected all request despite differing views from other arms of the government. So, as a gesture, a separate bilateral exercise with Japan was organised in December off the coast of India.

Was it Antony and not Munna who did not want to displease the Chinese all these years?

[Skanda]

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in India

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, accompanied by his wife Akie Abe, arrived here Saturday on a three-day official visit, and straight away called on President Pranab Mukherjee at Rashtrapati Bhavan. Abe was received by Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Rajeev Shukla at the airport.

Q: Couldnt they have found someone else Senior within the Govt to receive the PM or MoS for Parliamentary Affairs" good enough?

Added Later: Sorry Rony, didnt see your post.

[member_28352]

^^^^That is part of the protocol. Foreign dignitaries have been received at the airport since ages by ministers of state. Of course in line with American exceptionalism we tweaked our own protocol and MMS personally received Bush/Obama in India.

[SSridhar]

From the ToI report,

While welcoming Japan's participation in the Malabar exercise and the meeting to discuss co-production of US-2 amphibian aircraft, Singh also noted that the discussion between the two countries for a civil nuclear agreement had gained momentum. Both sides directed their officials to exert further efforts towards an early conclusion of the agreement.

[SSridhar]

India invites japan to be part of Malabar naval exercises with the US

In the run-up to this visit too, there was considerable pressure from Japan to allow its ships to participate in last year’s Malabar exercises. The Defence Ministry, however, rejected all request despite differing views from other arms of the government. So, as a gesture, a separate bilateral exercise with Japan was organised in December off the coast of India.

Was it Antony and not Munna who did not want to displease the Chinese all these years?

It is unfortunate that even as naval contacts between India and Japan expanded significantly in the last four years, MoD did not allow participation in Malabar exercises off the Indian coast fearing Chinese reaction. This is pathetic, to say the least. Here is a brief history of the recent developments on the India-Japan naval front.

In late 2011, during the Japanese PM Noda Yoshihiko’s visit to India, it was announced that the two navies would establish interoperability between them. India is the only other country, apart from the US, with which Japan would have such an interoperability. In June, 2012, the Indian and Japanese navies conducted their first bi-lateral joint exercise code named JIMEX-12 off the Japanese coast. This was a huge development for Indian diplomacy when India’s preference for a bilateral framework (apart from the US-India-Japan trilateral exercises) was agreed to by the Japanese after initial hesitation. The first India-Japan maritime affairs security dialogue was held in New Delhi on January 29, 2013 with their focus on maritime security including non-traditional threats and cooperation at various multilateral forums. This was quickly followed up when in late February, 2013 Vice Admiral Katsutoshi Kwano, chief of staff, Japan Maritime Self Defence Force (COSJMSDF) interacted with the Vice Admiral Shekhar Sinha, the flag officer commanding-in-chief and other senior officers of the Western Naval Command at Mumbai. The IN announced, after the February meeting, "Indo-Japanese Naval cooperation and goodwill has grown substantially over the last two decades and both the navies share common maritime perspective. JMSDF and Indian Naval Ships undertake coordinate anti-piracy operations in Gulf of Aden. Both navies have over the years built up high levels of interoperability"

Since c. 2010, the Japanese Navy (Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force, or JMSDF) has also become part of the India-US Malabar exercise. In c. 2007, a five-nation exercise (including Australia and Singapore) was conducted in the Bay of Bengal, which China objected to, after which Japan (Australia and Singapore) was not part of the exercise. The Malabar Series of exercises are no longer carried out just off the Malabar coast. The 2011 exercises were off Okinawa in Japan, but Japan itself pulled out because its Maritime forces were deeply involved in relief efforts following the earthquake and tsunami that devastated that country in March, 2011. The National Defence Programme Guidelines of Japan released in 2011, bring India into sharp defence focus. India was the only country mentioned by name in that report for defence cooperation. During defence minister A.K.Antony’s visit to Japan in November, 2011, the two navies decided to expand their joint drills to "unprecedented" levels.

The two Coast Guards signed a Memorandum of Understanding on November 24, 2006 for joint exercises, codenamed ‘Sahyog-Kaijin’, once a year which alternate off Indian and Japanese coasts.

[Karan Dixit]

^^^^That is part of the protocol. Foreign dignitaries have been received at the airport since ages by ministers of state. Of course in line with American exceptionalism we tweaked our own protocol and MMS personally received Bush/Obama in India.

That is why no one respects MMS and since he represents India, we all get to inherit the benefit.

[SSridhar]

Abe Strapped for Time but Tokyo Keen on Ties - Sandeep Dikshit, The Hindu

Had the Japanese leadership not been so keen on building ties with India, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe wouldn’t have arrived here to take part in the Republic Day parade as chief guest.

There was an all-party consensus in Japan to send Mr. Abe to New Delhi though it meant his skipping one of the opening days of the Diet. By custom, the Prime Minister and his Ministers are supposed to be in attendance, for it is the time when the annual budget is discussed and passed by parliament, say sources close to Mr. Abe.{Indeed, a tremendous gesture from Japan}

On top of it, Mr. Abe had just returned from Davos and should have ideally spent the weekend, discussing strategies for the parliamentary session with his aides.

This led to a very un-Japanese scheduling of his trip. The Japanese prepare meticulously for any major visit as was the case when their royal couple travelled to India last month. A month before the arrival of Emperor Akihito and Empress Michiko, Japanese diplomats were pacing the Lodhi Garden and practising baby steps on path ways the royal couple were to tread.

It is different during Mr. Abe’s visit. The Indians were confident he would be the chief guest at the Republic Day parade and would not do a Sultan of Oman, who did not come for last year’s parade, causing diplomatic tremors in South Block, which then hastily drafted the King of Bhutan for the role.

But till two days ago, the Japanese had not officially confirmed whether Mr. Abe would come. An invitation for a briefing said Mr. Abe “intends to come, if circumstances permit.” With less than 24 hours to go for his arrival, Tokyo finally announced that Mr. Abe would indeed visit India.

“It is a busy visit due to the start of Diet session on Friday. Before that he was in Davos. Till the last moment, things were being worked out, and he was somehow allowed to go to India. Till then, we were unable to publicly say he would go to India. It is not mandatory for Prime Ministers to attend Diet all times, but it is a practice for them to be present during the first part of the session when the budget is presented and discussed,” an Abe aide said.

“Fortunately the mood is better because the main Opposition Democratic Party of Japan has been in power and knows what it means to tie up top Ministers here instead of permitting them to make meaningful trips. Otherwise, how can you pursue effective diplomacy,” she asked. “And this explains why a majority in the Diet felt Mr. Abe’s trip to India should be encouraged.”

The last-minute squeezing in of the trip led to innovations as well as ad-hoc decisions. Barely 45 minutes after landing here, Mr. Abe was closeted with President Pranab Mukherjee. And from this meeting, he headed for delegation-level talks with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. As Mr. Abe was strapped for time, the major part of a seminar had concluded before his arrival. After completing his engagements on Sunday, Mr. Abe will leave first thing on Monday, becoming the first Japanese Prime Minister to be the chief guest at the parade.

[SSridhar]

India Invites Japanese Electronics Industry - Business Line

India has asked the Japanese electronics industry to invest in the country and benefit from subsidies and other support being offered by the Government.

“Government of India has decided to offer a package of incentives to attract domestic and global investments into Electronic System Design & Manufacturing (ESDM) sector within Electronic Manufacturing Clusters (EMC) Schemes. In addition, the Government has recently approved the proposal for setting up of two Semi-conductor Wafer Fabrications (FAB) manufacturing facilities in the country,” Commerce & Industry Minister Anand Sharma informed a team of top Japanese industrialists headed by Keidanren (Japanese Business Federation) Chairman Hiromasa Yonekura.

The Minister invited Japanese manufacturers to avail subsidy and other support being offered by Government of India for establishing FAB facilities in India, an official release said.

Sharma also stressed on strengthening of cooperation in creative industries such as design, apparel, fashion, food, house-hold goods, music, movies, animation and traditional craft.

Six Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) between Japanese companies and Indian companies in areas such as traditional/regional products, animation, apparel/fashion, lifestyle/luxury products and food were signed in the recent past.

Sharma and Yonekura also discussed the progress in the Delhi Mumbai Industrial Corridor where Japan is the main partner.

The Minister said both sides should collaborate more to realise the full potential of the India Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA).

[eklavya]

Hiroo Onoda: Last man fighting

Hiroo Onoda
Last man fighting

Hiroo Onoda, soldier of the Japanese imperial army, died on January 16th, aged 91

Jan 25th 2014 | From the print edition

BEFORE he approached the tent where his commanding officer waited on March 9th 1974, Hiroo Onoda did two things. First, he inspected his rifle. (The Arisaka 99 still worked perfectly; over almost 30 years he had treated it as tenderly as a baby.) Then he retied his boots. Nothing must be slipshod. A soldier of the god-emperor had to be pure, prepared and spiritually invincible.

He had taken elaborate care to get this far. All his guerrilla training had been employed in case, as he suspected, he was walking into a trap. He had planned the meeting for the evening, when there would be just enough light to recognise a face but not enough to hinder his escape, if necessary. Palm and bosa trees hid him as he crept down from the mountains. To cross clearings, he camouflaged his threadbare army uniform—more neatly sewn patches than uniform—with sticks and leaves. Wherever it was safe, he rested.

It was helpful that, after three decades living off the land, he was familiar with every inch of Lubang Island in the Philippines. He knew when local farmers would be about, and where, because he stole coconuts and mangoes from them and shot their cattle in order to survive. Sometimes he killed the farmers, too. After all, this was war, and he had his orders. The orders were that, though the rest of the Japanese army had withdrawn from the island in February 1945 when the Americans invaded, he, as an intelligence officer, should stay, spy on the enemy and wait for his colleagues to return. So he had waited.

In the beginning he commanded a unit of three men, but they had died at various points, two shot by the Philippine police. The war had gone very quiet, so quiet that in 1964, to his surprise, America and Japan competed in apparent amity at the Olympic games. But the island still crawled with American agents and spies, who kept dropping leaflets urging him to surrender. All of it was trickery, he thought. He told the young Japanese hiker who eventually found him that he would not stop fighting until his commanding officer, Major Yoshimi Taniguchi, ordered him to cease in person. So on that day in 1974 the elderly major, now a bookseller, especially summoned from Japan, gave him his new orders. Mr Onoda at once laid down his rifle, 500 rounds, his ceremonial sword and sword-belt and his dagger in its white case, and saluted the flag of the rising sun.

If it was not a surrender, it still felt crushingly like one. For Major Taniguchi informed him not only that the war was over, but that Japan had lost. Mr Onoda’s first thought was: how could they be so sloppy? Rather than lose, rather than lay down arms like this, a Japanese soldier was supposed to die. And he felt like dying. “Do not live in shame,” General Tojo had written; “leave no ignominious crime behind you.” His mother had given him his dagger, as he left for active service, to kill himself with if he was captured.

She meant it, for when he behaved uncontrollably at the age of six she had taken him to the family shrine to commit harakiri then and there. Of course he hadn’t been able to cut his small, quaking belly. Who could, at six? Later, it would have been almost easy. But in fact his orders in 1945 had been to stay alive, not to die. Intelligence officers were more useful that way. It meant he risked being an outcast when he returned to Japan, simply because he had not made the supreme sacrifice and added his name to the divinities honoured at the Yasukuni shrine. His duty, however, was to spend every moment serving his country in exactly the way he had been told.

That civic imperative was what mattered, he said later; nothing personal or individual. But pride entered the equation, too. He was fiercely competitive, honed with kendo and swimming—though also with a 50-a-day cigarette habit before he went into hiding—and loved to show off how well he could fend for himself. The man who kept neat and trim for years in the jungle had also cut quite a figure at 18 in central China, as a travelling salesman for a lacquerware company, driving a 1936 Studebaker and wearing English tailored suits. He had style and stubbornness as well as self-discipline. Outside reports said he wept uncontrollably as he laid his rifle down. He merely wrote that, in the course of delivering a night-long field report that covered 29 years, he faltered once or twice.

Sleeping and waking

Returning to Japan as a hero, he did not know what had become of the place. He found it cowed, drowsy, and denuded of self-confidence. Japan was blamed for the East Asian war when, in his view, it had had no choice but to fight in order to survive. The Americans, who had stripped the country of its military power and made the emperor a cypher, also seemed to have drained away the national will. After barely a year at home, loudly on the right of politics, Mr Onoda left for Brazil to be a cattle-rancher and take a wife. He eventually came back to establish a school where modern Japanese children could learn to survive in the wild, like him.

In 2007 he offered his “words to live by” to the Japan Times. Almost all were to do with civic duty and self-reliance. One thought stood out: “There are some dreams from which it is better not to wake.” By which he meant, he explained, his long dream of war.

[SSridhar]

'Abe-genda': Nuclear Export Superpower - Japan Times

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is now in New Delhi to celebrate the 53rd anniversary of the founding of the Indian Republic. His presence speaks volumes about closer diplomatic, security and economic ties and, at least from Tokyo’s perspective, a common agenda on responding to the rise of China. India remains ambivalent, pursuing a shrewd hedging strategy rather than siding with either Beijing or Washington/Tokyo, eager to maximize concessions from all sides.

“The Emperor visited India last month — a huge symbolic event — and now Abe has been invited to be the chief guest at the Republic Day celebrations on Jan. 26 — no other Japanese prime minister has been invited to this before — an invitation extended only to close friends and partners,” says Punendra Jain, professor of Asian Studies at Adelaide University in Australia. “This symbolizes their closer and evolving political and strategic relationships. Of course, the elephant in the room is China.”

Tensions with China and South Korea have spiraled upward over the past year and thus “Abeplomacy” seeks to offset Japan’s isolation in East Asia by nurturing closer ties with the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and India. Warming ties with New Delhi marks a sharp turnaround from 1998 when Japan imposed economic sanctions on India (and Pakistan) for conducting a series of nuclear tests. These sanctions were lifted in 2001, at Washington’s behest, to reward their support for the U.S.-led “war on terror.” Since 2003, India has been the largest recipient of Japanese economic assistance, and economic ties are growing due to the 2011 Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. Bilateral trade in 2011-12 reached $18.43 billion, up 34 percent from the previous year, but remains modest given the $334 billion in Sino-Japanese trade in 2012.

“The Indian nuclear tests of 1998 marked the lowest point in bilateral relations, as Japan reacted strongly to the nuclearization of the subcontinent,” says Harsh Pant, professor of international relations at King’s College London. “Tokyo suspended economic assistance for three years as well as put on hold all political exchanges between the two nations. This strong reaction from Japan was in many ways understandable, given that the Japanese are the only people to have experienced attacks by nuclear weapons.”

However, Pant explains, “many in India saw the Japanese reaction as hypocritical for apparently brushing aside India’s genuine security concerns even as Japan enjoyed the security guarantee of the U.S. nuclear umbrella.”

Japan, as the sole nation to suffer a nuclear attack, has strongly opposed nuclear proliferation on principle, and as such been an outspoken critic of India’s nuclear weapons program and refusal to join the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). However, India also bases its nonparticipation in these regimes on principle: the nuclear weapons possessing nations granted themselves a monopoly on nuclear weapons and have not followed up on pledges to eliminate their nuclear arsenals.

From the Indian government’s perspective, these nonproliferation agreements created an exclusive club of status quo powers that left their nation marginalized and vulnerable. The 1962 border war with China was an unmitigated disaster for Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru’s friendly diplomacy toward Beijing, based on the false assumption that the two nations shared a common agenda and could cooperate to reciprocal advantage. The comprehensive defeat was also a shock for the Indian armed forces, exposing inadequate military preparation. Upping the ante China then detonated a nuclear device in 1964, sending shock waves through India’s security community and ensuring that it would follow suit. In 1974, India conducted its first nuclear test, dubbed “Smiling Buddha,” and its last tests in 1998. India maintains that its nuclear arsenal is for deterrence only and has declared a nuclear no-first-use policy.

In 2008, the International Atomic Energy Agency reached an agreement with India to allow it access to India’s civilian nuclear reactors. This agreement paved the way for the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), under intense U.S. pressure, to grant India a waiver in 2008 allowing it access to civilian nuclear technology and fuel from the 48 member states. Since the waiver was granted, India has reached an agreement with the U.S. and France, among others, because they regard India as one of the most promising markets for nuclear reactor exports. Ironically, India’s 1974 nuclear test triggered the establishment of the NSG, but now Washington has abandoned the sanctions regime it once imposed and U.S. President Barack Obama backs India’s membership in the group.

Let’s make a deal

The 2008 U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Agreement brokered by the administration of President George W. Bush has become the template for subsequent agreements, meaning that India’s unilateral pledge to refrain from nuclear tests has been accepted as sufficient guarantee. Until then, the NSG only cooperated with nations that signed the NPT. Under the terms of the agreement, in the event that India does conduct a nuclear test, any decision to terminate the accord and cut access would only be invoked after a year of consultations.

This is where Japan comes in. Exports of nuclear components and technology, as well as conventional arms, are potentially key elements of “Abenomics” and much is riding on the outcome. In 2013, Abe concluded Japan’s first nuclear reactor export agreement with Turkey for $22 billion and others are pending with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, while the prime minister has also lobbied governments in Central Europe, Vietnam and Indonesia. This is a remarkable turnaround from 2011 when the prospects for post-Fukushima Japan relying on nuclear energy, let alone exporting it, looked unlikely.

Three major nuclear vendors have bagged contracts in India estimated at roughly $60 billion, but the final price will probably balloon given a history of cost overruns. For example, Finland’s order for Areva’s Evolutionary Pressurized Reactor (EPR) has nearly tripled in cost to €8.5 billion from the original price tag of €3 billion and India has ordered six of these reactors. Each of the major vendors feature significant Japanese stakes — GE/Hitachi, Westinghouse/Toshiba and Areva/Mitsubishi — and all produce key reactor components in Japan. As such, they need the Japanese government to agree to the NSG waiver and hammer out an accord with India. Abe is keen to cut a deal despite reservations within his party and ruling coalition, and has the numbers in the Diet to ignore public opposition as he did when ramming the notorious secrecy legislation through the Diet in December.

Negotiations have stalled since 2008 mostly due to Japan’s insistence on India relinquishing its right to conduct nuclear tests and an immediate cessation of cooperation if India violates its self-imposed moratorium. Japan also opposes India’s desire to reprocess spent fuel. However, a recent pact with Turkey has a provision that allows it to enrich uranium and extract plutonium if agreed in writing, paving the way for exports of relevant Japanese technologies, so it is hard to imagine that India will settle for less.

Furthermore, the Japanese government wants India to formally restate its commitment to India’s no-first-use nuclear weapons policy and support for nonproliferation in the pact. India’s position remains clear: Japan should accept the same deal as the U.S. and other NSG members that don’t include such provisions.

Discussions were suspended after the Fukushima nuclear reactor meltdowns in March 2011, but resumed in May 2013. At the end of December, negotiators had not yet bridged differences on civilian nuclear cooperation or the sale of US-2 amphibious search-and-rescue military aircraft produced by ShinMaywa. The plane deal is seen as a significant boost to growing bilateral defense cooperation. To skirt the existing ban on military exports, a stripped down “civilian” version of the plane would be sold without the Identify Friend or Foe system. The Indian Navy is keen to acquire this aircraft and plans to equip it with an Israeli IFF system. {Why should we go in for an Israeli IFF system ?} Lifting the arms export ban to help Japan’s defense sector industries is an Abe priority in 2014.

Abe wants to finalize these deals during this trip because politics might postpone agreement until the next Indian-Japan summit at the end of 2014. With Indian national elections due by May 2014 at the latest, there are countervailing pressures.

“Whether the two nations are able to sign the pact during Abe’s January visit would depend on how much risk he is willing to take on the nuclear front and whether it would be a good idea for him to sign a deal with a lame-duck government in Delhi,” Pant says. “The Indian government would not be able to deliver any significant change in its posture as elections are round the corner and they can’t dilute their traditional stand on the CTBT.”

While postponement is possible, Jain believes that “the deal is going to go ahead. I don’t see much difference between the BJP (Indian People’s Party) and Congress as far as Japan-India relations are concerned. If anything, BJP might seek closer ties with Japan.”

“The expectation is to sign the deal when Abe is in New Delhi,” Jain says. “As you know, in India, the agreement will be welcomed in all quarters; strategic analysts, former diplomats and military leaders are writing strongly in favor.”

Dissensus

But not everyone agrees. Japan’s first lady, Akie Abe, who has openly expressed opposition to her husband’s support for nuclear energy exports, told a Dec. 29 television program that, “It remains anybody’s guess if proper maintenance will be provided overseas. I wonder how Japan would cope in case of an emergency.”

According to opinion polls, her doubts are shared by a majority of Japanese, including the mayor of Nagasaki who criticized the deal in August.

Citizens in India worry, too. “(The deal) pushes India’s ill-conceived nuclear expansion ahead, creates a bad precedent of rewarding India for its nuclear tests while others face sanctions . . . and the whole dynamics of India, Japan and U.S. cozying up to contain China (will) destabilize Asia,” says P.K. Sundaram from the Coalition for Nuclear Disarmament and Peace, India.

He acknowledges that Indian parties across the political spectrum support nuclear energy, but believes that large, sustained public protests against nuclear reactors, especially near a new nuclear plant sited at Kundankulam in Tamil Nadu, represent fallout from Fukushima and widespread skepticism about nuclear safety.

Pankaj Mishra, an acclaimed writer from India, chides the Indian government for blaming “an unspecified ‘foreign hand’ for the (anti-nuclear) protests. Never mind that the much-despised foreign hand helped build the Kudankulam plant, along with much of India’s nuclear infrastructure.”

M.G. Devasahayam, a former official of the elite Indian Administrative Service, asked me whether Abe would approve the deal. I said yes, venturing that Abe is pro-India. He replied that he shouldn’t. “It is morally inappropriate for a country that has suffered the worst from nuclear holocausts in war as well as in peace to supply nuclear reactors and equipment to an over-populated country like India with limited land and water resources,” Devasahayam says. “India needs electricity that is cheap and affordable whereas nuclear power is expensive. If all costs — construction, commissioning, operation, decommissioning and safe storage of spent-fuel — are honestly factored in, nuclear power is way costlier than any other source of electricity.”

He worries that “Japan’s long-term relationship with India will be seriously jeopardized once the Indian public comes to realize the ill-effects of nuclear power on their life, livelihood, environment and future generations.”

A.V. Ramana, a nuclear physicist based at Princeton University, agrees that nuclear energy does not make sense for India due to the high costs and safety concerns. In his book “The Power of Promise: Examining Nuclear Energy in India,” Ramana argues that nuclear energy is inappropriate for India on environmental, economic and technological grounds.

“Japan, which is currently facing tremendous democratic opposition to restarting nuclear reactors within the country, is considering exporting nuclear reactor parts to a country where, again, there is significant opposition to nuclear power, a history of failure, poor technology choices and a lack of organizational learning,” Ramana says.

He cites the continued emphasis on breeder reactors, abandoned by other nations due to cost and safety concerns, as evidence of institutional myopia. “Because of its centralized character and the huge costs involved, nuclear power cannot play a significant role in solving the energy needs of the vast majority of India’s population (and) only brings with it two of the familiar — and so far insoluble — problems associated with nuclear energy: susceptibility to catastrophic accidents and having to deal with radioactive waste that stays hazardous to human health for millennia,” he says.

“Their reasons for such opposition are not difficult to discern. In the aftermath of March 11, 2011, people near an existing or proposed nuclear reactor can — and do — imagine themselves suffering a fate similar to those of the inhabitants of the areas around Fukushima,” he says.

These anxieties appear warranted after A. Gopalakrishnan, former chairman of India’s Atomic Energy Regulatory Board, revealed in April 2013 that the Russians used substandard components in building the Kundankulam reactors, planting a potential time bomb in southern India.

Nuclear liability of suppliers is a key issue because it’s a potential deal breaker. According to Arun Jaitley, the BJP opposition leader in India’s Upper House, the issue of liability remains murky despite government efforts to finesse the issue. Nuclear vendors are relying on a clause in contracts signed with the Nuclear Power Corp. of India that is designed to insulate them from any right to recourse, but Jaitley argues that legally this won’t stand. Without an ironclad waiver on liability, however, most nuclear suppliers won’t proceed. As Ramana says, “the nuclear industry doesn’t like this business of being liable for anything at all.”

Rivals suppliers in Russia and South Korea might capitalize on Japan’s misgivings. Seoul signed a civilian nuclear agreement with India in 2011 and earlier this month Park Geun-hye visited New Delhi to explore nuclear prospects. And then there is the geo-strategic angle; China recently announced it would fund and build a nuclear plant in Karachi, Pakistan — India’s arch-enemy. The pressures on Japan from the global nuclear industrial complex are also intense, reinforced by lucrative contract awards to consortium involving Japanese firms, including the GE/Hitachi nuclear project in Gujarat, where the presumptive next Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, is now chief minister.

Abe, the pitchman-in-chief, is determined to seal the deal worth tens of billions while millions of fingers are crossed that his gamble doesn’t lead to “Abegeddon.”
KYODO

[member_19686]

Framework for India-Japan Strategic Partnership & Cooperationー Joint VIF-JINF Study

　　　The Japan Institute for National Fundamentals (JINF) and the Vivekananda International Foundation (VIF) of India made public a joint study report entitled “Framework for Indo-Japanese Strategic Partnership and Cooperation” on May 21 .
The report concludes two major democracies of India and Japan should deepen cooperation in the fields of security, industry and international politics, thereby contributing to peace and stability in the region at a time when China enhances its self-righteous approach and causes frictions with other Asian countries.
　　　The JINF, a Tokyo-based think tank headed by Ms.Yoshiko Sakurai, had been conducting joint research over the past two years with its Indian counterpart, VIF headquartered in New Delhi.. Mr Ajit Doval, former director of Indian Government’s intelligence bureau, is director of the VIF.
　　　Publication of the report was made at the multipurpose hall of the House of Representatives’ First Dietmen Office Building where members of the ruling Liberal-Democratic Party and opposition parties, researchers and journalists were present. Also present as a special guest was Indian Ambassador Ms Deepa Gopalan Wadhwa who addressed on the occasion that she expected politicians of the two countries would fully utilize proposals of the joint study and that bilateral exchanges of people would be further promoted...

http://en.jinf.jp/suggestion/archives/2185

http://en.jinf.jp/wp-content/uploads/20 ... mbined.pdf

[Singha]

Japanese have only themselves to blame for being too cautious and not taking a risk like Samsung and LG did in India from 1990s. imagine back then, Samsung/LG had fairly low end products while panasonic/toshiba/sony had premium name and products even then. by failing to take risks and put footprint in the indian market with reasonably priced product they lost the huge consumer class right there, who are now migrating up on korean products.

sony and panasonic do have a market presence in the metros and good products but nowhere near the tier-3 town level penetration and marketing budgets of the koreans.

[vishvak]

Nice video on US-2 on Japanese channel NHK world. US-2 seems to have good number of fantastic innovations and huge endurance and range. Its among the best Japanese air crafts and amongst first to be sold outside domestic market.

Can't find video online though. Perhaps a must watch.
website link to that program
Some techs:
(1) A small machine between two wings that facilitates to have greater lift at lower speeds with same flaps - for shorter take off and landing.
(2) ocean rescue gears and drills, medical equipment on air
(3) some fire fighting
(4) digital fly by wire

The channel NHK world is overall very well organized and has good programs though Japanese imitating goras is senseless to watch and totally avoidable in general.

[SSridhar]

The channel NHK world is overall very well organized and has good programs . . .

Yes, true.

[SSridhar]

Abe visit, a tribute to his mentor Man Mohan Singh - Business Line

Knowing that Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will soon be ending his political career, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe used the opportunity of his visit to India to pay tribute to Singh whom he has regarded as his mentor for many years.

“He wanted to pay a tribute to Manmohan Singh and indeed to me Abe seems to be a born again politician. When he was in India in 2007 as Prime Minister it was very much a bitter sweet experience for him.

“The speech that he delivered to the joint session of Parliament gathered applause which became one of the gratifying experiences for him but during the trip his illness got worse. As a result he had to step down as Prime Minister upon returning to Japan. This (the current visit) is in part to regain confidence to successfully conclude this bilateral visit,” said Taniguchi Tomohiko, Councillor Cabinet Secretariat of Japan.
R-Day guest

Abe arrived on Saturday and was the first Japanese Prime Minister to be the chief guest at the Republic Day celebration held here on Sunday. Tomohiko said the joint statement issued after the bilateral talks ended late Saturday “is rich in context (and) big in numbers” and is supposed to withstand any change of Government in India.

“We want to show nations and peoples in Japan and India that this already good bilateral relationship has a broad bi-partisan support base. It is a hand shake of the largest democracy in the world and the most seasoned democracy in Asia, which is Japan, knowing that the neighbourhood that surrounds us has become even more unstable,” Tomohiko said.

Business deals

Commenting on the talks between the two leaders, Kuni Sato, Spokesperson of the Japanese Foreign Office, said Abe raised the issue of improving the business environment here which will be the key to the further expansion of Japanese companies’ activities in India.

“In the economic field one of the focus areas of discussion was investment rather than trade. There are over 1,000 Japanese companies here which is a remarkable figure.

“This is a big leap that shows the business interest which is vindicated by the fact that the Prime Minister came with an economic mission. CEOs of big companies came along and they are very much interested in the potential of this country,” she said.

Investment push

The spokesperson said that while trade is important the focus (now) is more on investment and India and Japan growing together economically.

Growth for stability

“It’s Prime Minister Abe’s belief that Japan’s economy should grow as that will have a good effect on the region and globally.

He also mentioned that it is very good for the Indian economy to grow because that is also a source of not only prosperity but also stability,” she said.

Praise for Modi

The Bharatiya Janata Party’s Prime Ministerial candidate, Narendra Modi, seems to have caught the fancy of Japanese officials.

Describing Modi as “energetic, good at engaging people,” Tomohiko also called him “successful, sometimes controversial, in his economic policy in his own State. He is surrounded by able and experienced people”. He added he had not met or interacted with Modi.

Modi, who has been denied a visa by the US, had visited Japan in July 2012.

[ArmenT]

Japanese have only themselves to blame for being too cautious and not taking a risk like Samsung and LG did in India from 1990s. imagine back then, Samsung/LG had fairly low end products while panasonic/toshiba/sony had premium name and products even then. by failing to take risks and put footprint in the indian market with reasonably priced product they lost the huge consumer class right there, who are now migrating up on korean products.

sony and panasonic do have a market presence in the metros and good products but nowhere near the tier-3 town level penetration and marketing budgets of the koreans.

Friend told me that Japanese firms didn't do much market research when they first came into the Indian cell phone market. They believed that since India is a third-world country, therefore the low-end phones have to be very, very stripped down to the bare-bones, so more people can afford them. Koreans did a bit of market research and found that while India is a poor country, Mango Indians are willing to pay a bit extra if the phone has a couple of features that they like. Hence, the initial low-end Japanese phones on sale in India were stripped down to the point where they had no display and single ringtone, whereas Korean phones had a cheap LCD + ability to use latest bollywood song as a ringtone. Result: Low-end Korean phones outsold the low-end Japanese phones by a huge margin.

[SSridhar]

Japan Enters where China is Barred, North-East India - Indrani Bagchi, ToI

The caption above does not do full justice as it is but one part of the breath-taking slew of prograames that the two countries have brewed and the proximity, trust and unity of purpose that has developed between the two countries. Really awesome and in the very right direction too. The next government in India, I am sure, would take it to even greater heights especially as there is bi-partisan support in Japan for its India efforts. This short visit by Abe seems quite significant even though the nuclear agreement is still elusive.

Japan is sailing in where China fears to tread. As India and Japan ramp up their bilateral relationship, India has invited Japan to invest in and build overland infrastructure in areas which are generally out of bounds for Chinese investments.

India and Japan used the visit of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to dramatically expand the scope of bilateral cooperation to include the politically sensitive northeastern states of India, areas where Chinese investment or projects are actively discouraged. Japanese companies will have the opportunity to help the development of the northeast specially to build roads, and aid agriculture, forestry and water supply and sewerage in these states.

China claims Arunachal Pradesh as its territory, which has aggravated border tensions between India and China. Security agencies have also long tracked Chinese weapons assistance to militant outfits in northeastern states. It has taken India many difficult years to calm down these hills, but China remains a significant security threat.

For India to invite Japan to build infrastructure here is a huge political statement. In 2007, China opposed an ADB loan for development works in Arunachal Pradesh describing it as "disputed territory". The last time the Japanese were in India's northeast was during the second world war, when they worked with Netaji Subhash Bose's INA to confront the British in Nagaland.

Japanese companies have also been invited to help develop a new port in Chennai, which would be used to improve India's sea-route connectivity. India assiduously keeps China out of port development because they constitute India's critical infrastructure. Japanese assistance for Chennai port is also aimed at giving teeth to a new sea-based route that would start in Chennai, and end in Dawei port in Myanmar's Tanintharyi region. The port is being developed by Thailand.

In 2012, Thai PM Yingluck Shinawatra had promised PM Manmohan Singh that Thailand would pump in a massive $50 billion into Dawei, making it a bigger investment than China's in Gwadar or Hambantota.

The development of a new port in Chennai would serve to connect the industrial centres of southern and western India with southeast Asia. In addition, Japan's investment in the Bangalore-Chennai industrial corridor would find easy outlet from Chennai.

In the larger strategic matrix, this would help in building an alternative supply chain network, giving Asia a viable alternative to the China-dominated networks currently in play. The India-Japan team for economic projects is ultimately placing pieces together to build a multi-polar Asia, a declared strategic intent of both countries.

Japan and India have agreed to work together to develop infrastructure in other regional countries as well. This would have the double benefit of being a power projection for both countries in South Asia, it could be an effective counter to the Chinese juggernaut. For India, this would be an added advantage because it always falls short in delivering quality infrastructure by a moribund public sector system. An injection of Japanese funds and expertise is just what India needs.

As part of the trilateral dialogue between India, US and Japan, a trilateral highway linking India, Myanmar and Thailand (the ambitious draw it further to Hanoi, Vietnam) is likely to see more Japanese and US interest. This is an India-led project due for completion in 2016, but by itself, India is unlikely to make the target.

In Sri Lanka, where India is working hard to squander its hard won gains, it has invited Japan to help develop a huge thermal power plant in Trincomalee. Foreign minister Salman Khurshid recently inaugurated the project, which India has promised would be a better, cheaper power project than the one developed by the Chinese in Norachcholai.

India and Japan could also jointly develop the strategically crucial oil terminals in Trincomalee. In retaliation for India voting against Sri Lanka in the human rights council, Sri Lanka has threatened to take away some of the oil terminals from India. A joint development project with Japan would solve many issues with Colombo.

Buried in the agreements between India and Japan are a promise by Japan's JICA to help India's Export-Import Bank develop more attractive funding packages for Indian projects in regional countries. India always loses to China because Beijing offers finances at very attractive rates, which India cannot. India reckons that with Japanese help, it can up its own game in the neighbourhood.

In the power play that is quietly underway in Asia, India has made Japan the centerpiece of its strategic outreach.

Manmohan hosts Abes at home

Keeping the special tempo in the India-Japan partnership, PM Manmohan Singh and his wife hosted the Japanese premier Shinzo Abe and his wife Akie to an exclusive, quiet dinner at his home Sunday evening.

Also at the dinner was Shotaro Yachi, recently appointed Abe's national security adviser, and his Indian NSA Shiv Shankar Menon.

Yachi has been Abe's closest foreign policy adviser for years. Japan's deputy vice minister Shin Sugiyama completed the table. This was probably the highest level strategic foreign policy conversation between Abe and a normally reticent Singh.

[sivab]

He is the chief guest for republic day and look at the reception he is getting on arrival in India. So stupid.

[chandrasekhar.m]

^^^^That is part of the protocol. Foreign dignitaries have been received at the airport since ages by ministers of state. Of course in line with American exceptionalism we tweaked our own protocol and MMS personally received Bush/Obama in India.

^^^sivab, this earlier reply by another member should answer your question atleast partly. Looks like we change protocol only if the other party also had changed it for us. Maybe in this case, we should have changed it. But, who knows, maybe the Japanese are strict sticklers to protocol and wouldn't like to be somehow forced to reciprocate in the future.

[SSridhar]

I am appalled by the dozens of irrelevant people milling around. It must be more dignified than that.

[SSridhar]

Japan, India and the Balance of Power Shankar Bajpai, The Hindu

Within two months, we have received from Japan, first that rare, and symbolically greatest, gesture, the visit of Their Imperial Majesties, then the Defence Minister’s, and now, the Premier’s. It is heartening that such an important country attaches such importance to us, despite our best efforts to prove ourselves unready, if not unable, to play the role clearly expected of us. Formally, we have so many ‘strategic partners,’ the term has lost meaning, but Japan surely could give it solid contents. The economic component is obvious, limited largely by our own non-performance; the strictly strategic part is even more important but even less attended to. We could grow economically even without making the most of Japan’s cooperation, but to our national security interests, it is irreplaceably valuable. Moreover, the relationship’s significance is more than bilateral; it will influence others and the global power structure.{Accurate assessment}

The power-politics and balance-of-power calculations we denounce are facts of life, standard practice for all serious countries which plan for their national security interests with evaluations of the international distribution of power. Having multiple, often conflicting, interests to manage, all countries need some organising principle. During practically all of India’s first half-century, the Cold War furnished that principle for everyone, the pursuit of other interests being conditioned by this central fact of international life. Since its end, all countries have been at sea, casting around for some new sextant to guide them. We Indians, like all others who only took charge of their own destinies just before or during the Cold War, are dealing for the first time with the interplay of multiple powers, some rising and some weakening. They all act without the constraints, indeed the discipline, imposed by the Cold War, but one development provides a major sort of organising principle, for many states if not all: the enormous rise of China.

No country has divined the ramifications of this for itself or globally — not even China. How far it will prove an alarmingly assertive power, throwing its weight about aggressively, and how far a constructive, if self-centred, leader in shaping a new, equitable world order, is a question that has spawned quite an industry, but leaving everyone guessing. Great powers have, historically, been both, usually more the former. China should prove no exception, but in a very new setting.

Most countries cop out with the banality that one must build on areas of cooperation with China while remaining wary of unwelcome possibilities. The first depends on Chinese attitudes, the latter on your own capabilities. Since no regional country comes anywhere near China’s present capabilities, leave alone tomorrow’s, each must strengthen its own, which includes building partnerships. Each will strenuously — and genuinely — maintain these are not aimed at harming, or even containing, China, but that is what China will consider them. Is that a reason for eschewing them?

Territorial integrity paramount

Perceptions are often more consequential than actualities, but that works both ways. China surely knows that how it appears to others inevitably shapes their policies. We should not fight shy of readying ourselves for unpleasant eventualities, nor imagine that these won’t happen if we do not give China cause for misunderstanding. In this complex world, we must deal with many, varied concerns, but in regard to our national security there is surely a clear and imperative organising principle: do whatever you must to ensure territorial integrity.

That imposes compulsions arising from one stark fact: two states already occupy substantial parts of our territory and claim more. Our differences certainly need not erupt in major violence; we should keep trying for a relationship, with both our neighbours, in which a realisation of the benefits of peaceful cooperation outweighs any calculations of gains from conflict. But the surest way to preclude conflict is to manifest capabilities which make it too costly. If miscalculation or mischance should nevertheless cause eruption, nobody will help us: we would have to cope alone. We are nowhere near equipped for that, on the ground or, even more importantly, in our thinking. Japan’s interest in us should at least be a stimulus for the thinking part, as well as leading potentially to improving our ground position.

Uncertainty about the intentions and will power of the America so many criticise but rely upon to limit any Chinese hegemonism makes all affected countries rethink how to safeguard their interests. We Indians are often accused of not overcoming our neighbours’ animosities towards us, but China’s are not exactly in love with it. Unlike us, however, China enjoys a respect that shapes its neighbours’ behaviour towards it. A distinguished ASEAN diplomat once remarked that, when deliberating some issue his Foreign Office “no longer ask themselves first what Washington might be thinking, but what Beijing might.” He added: “we hope we can soon also ask what Delhi might think.” That hope has kept fading, thanks entirely to us, but is still there; Japan has emerged as one country that looks actively to its realisation.

Why our political leaders refuse to see such obvious reality is incomprehensible and self-damaging. That nobody is about to attack you tomorrow does not mean there is no ‘clear and present danger’ demanding preparation for tomorrow. Enhancing our capacity to ensure our territorial integrity brooks no slacking. It has already suffered because our opposing parties would rather gather sticks to beat each other than agree not to play cheap politics on even a handful of issues of vital national importance. They have let our defence procurement become an inadequate patchwork, ignored both the essentiality of developing a strategic-thinking defence apparatus and the disturbingly unhappy civil-military relations and, not least, not allowed India to function as a serious player in the increasingly complex and demanding international arena.

One simple question can be a surprisingly useful pointer in working out our international relationships: which countries welcome a rise of India, and which dislike it? Most countries wouldn’t care; two definitely do not wish us well; a few view a strong India as an asset to their own interests. Often, we don’t recognise some of these, much less take advantage of the opportunities they offer. Japan is clearly wishing us well, as we wish it for them. There is no point in pretending that China does not drive us both more than our bilateral hopes might do otherwise, but there is no harm in that reality. We can both honestly say we are not building relations in hostility against China; but it is right and proper for us to examine what to do if China acts in hostility against us.

Long dependent solely on its alliance with America for its national security, Japan is now looking for the best ways to rely more on itself, and play a greater role in the search for Asian stability. In our totally changed world, we ourselves have evolved to cooperate strategically with the U.S. Doing so with Japan is no less important. Just how reliable a partner Japan might consider us depends on our future functioning. That functioning is stifled by political bickering — and the dysfunction of our instruments of state. Not one vote will be changed in elections by the issues affected, but with elections approaching no improvement is conceivable for who knows how long. Fortunately, most political parties can be expected to welcome cooperation with Japan.

In translating into policies his striking devotion to his country’s greatness, Prime Minister Abe has somehow included a special liking for India. It is also to our government’s — especially our Prime Minister’s — credit that our relationship has reached such a promising stage. Once before, in the 1950s, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and Premier Nobusuke Kishi had similar hopes for a special relationship. The realities of today’s strategic flux in Asia should encourage us to pick up the threads with Mr. Kishi’s grandson.

(The writer is Chairman, Delhi Policy Group, former Ambassador to Pakistan, China and the U.S., and Secretary, External Affairs Ministry)

I consider this as one of a master-piece op-eds.

[sivab]

^^^sivab, this earlier reply by another member should answer your question atleast partly. Looks like we change protocol only if the other party also had changed it for us. Maybe in this case, we should have changed it. But, who knows, maybe the Japanese are strict sticklers to protocol and wouldn't like to be somehow forced to reciprocate in the future.

Sirji, you missed my point & SSridhar got it. Where is the decorum?

[chandrasekhar.m]

Ah, sorry. I in my ignorance have never really seen any reception of a foreign leader in the past 12 years and can't remember anything from childhood. Moreover, I thought you were talking about who received him. Should have paid more attention. That's why we have people like you and SSridhar to educate people like me. Thanks

And no Sirji for me, unless it was in jest.

[Prem]

China media: Abe in India
PPC

Media are closely following the development of Japan-India relations while noting Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's "special treatment" in India during his official visit.India celebrated its Republic Day on Sunday with Mr Abe as a guest of honour at the parade. He is seeking to strengthen economic and political ties with the country on his three-day trip to the country. He has also announced $2bn (£1.21bn) in loans for infrastructure projects in India.Noting India's support for Japan's position over China's air defence zone, Qianjiang Evening News describes Tokyo's loan offer as a bid to "win India over".
However, analysts tell the paper that India places more importance on diplomatic relations with the US and China, and Delhi's interest with Japan is more on economic issues. "Aside from economic co-operation, it seems that it is not easy for Mr Abe to approach India," says Zhou Yongsheng from China Foreign Affairs University.
The Chinese version of the Global Times observes that India has "reserved the special seat for Mr Abe" but wonders if Delhi would "easily be bounded" by Tokyo to act against China.Lu Hao, from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, tells the paper that even though India needs Japan to increase its influence in the region, it would not "sacrifice" its independence.
Meanwhile, media have also briefly carried the news of China's navy patrolling the Paracel and Spratly islands - both claimed by China and other South East Asia nations - in the South China Sea over the last week in what they call a show of territorial sovereignty. The China Daily gives further details that missile destroyers Haikou and Wuhan conducted anti-submarine drills during the patrol.
"The ships will continue to sail south and practice tactical manoeuvres in the western Pacific and Indian Ocean," the paper adds.

[SSridhar]

India Close to Buying Japan-made Military Aircraft in 1.65 B Deal - Economic Times

India is set to become the first country since World War Two to buy a military aircraft from Japan, helping Prime Minister Shinzo Abe end a ban on weapons exports that has kept his country's defence contractors out of foreign markets.

The two countries are in broad agreement on a deal for the ShinMaywa Industries amphibious aircraft, which could amount to as much as $1.65 billion, Indian officials said on Tuesday.

However, several details need to be worked out and negotiations will resume in March on joint production of the plane in India and other issues.

New Delhi is likely to buy at least 15 of the planes, which are priced at about $110 million each, the Officials said.

"Its a strategic imperative for both sides, and it has been cleared at the highest levels of the two governments," said an Indian military source.

For the moment, a stripped-down civilian version of the US-2i search and rescue plane is being offered to India, to get around Japan's self-imposed ban on arms exports. A friend or foe identification system will be removed from the aircraft, another defence official said.

The two countries are discussing assembling the aircraft in India, giving India access to Japanese military technology, Indian Prime Minister Mannmohan Singh has said.

The plane has a range of over 4,500 km (2,800 miles), which will give it reach far into Southeast Asia from the base where the aircraft are likely to be located, in the Andaman and Nicobar island chain that is near the western tip of Indonesia.

The two governments have set up a joint working group that will meet in March to consider plans to either set up a plant in India to assemble it under licence by an Indian state manufacturer.

The plan is to deliver two aircraft and then assemble the rest of the planes with an Indian partner, the military source said.

The deal lays the ground for a broader Japanese thrust into India, the world's biggest arms market dominated for long by Russia but also now buying hardware from Israel and the United States.

"There is a whole amount of defence-related cooperation, between India and Japan," said Gautam Bambawalle, an Indian foreign ministry official responsible for Asia.

"We want Japanese technology, we want Japanese capital investment into India."

Weekend trip

India's navy is also interested in Japanese patrol vessels and electronic warfare equipment as Tokyo moves further along in easing its ban on military exports, the Indian officials said.

Abe discussed the aircraft deal with Singh during a trip to New Delhi last weekend as ties rapidly warm between the two nations at a time when both are embroiled in territorial disputes with China.

"Our Joint Working Group on US-2 amphibian aircraft has met to explore the modalities of cooperation on its use and co-production in India. More broadly, we are working towards increasing our cooperation in the area of advanced technologies," Singh said.

Abe is seeking a more assertive military and national security posture for Japan, whose post-war constitution, written by U.S.-led occupation forces, renounces war and a standing army.

[member_19686]

2012.06.12 (Tue)
Flaws in the Japanese “Peace” Constitution Hamper Smooth Overall Cooperation between India and Japan
　　　
Representatives from the Japan Institute for National Fundamentals (JINF) of Tokyo and India’s Vivekananda International Foundation (VIF) met in Tokyo June 3-4 to exchange views in a joint seminar entitled “Japan and India: Two Democracies Tied together for the Security and Stability of the Asia-Pacific Region.” The second day of the session, co-hosted by these two think tanks, was opened to the general audience with an admission fee, but the conference hall was so packed that additional chairs had to be brought in.

　　　The high interest the audience took in the possibility of bilateral cooperation obviously reflected their sense of urgency in terms of the need to implement effective measures to cope with China. The focal point of the seminar: how India and Japan, regarding the communist dictatorship as a major threat to the peace and security of the region, can work in closer cooperation to develop specific measures to deter China.

　　　The VIF, headquartered in New Delhi, is a leading Indian think tank
which has amassed a long list of outstanding accomplishments, especially in the research of such fields as peace and security, intelligence, and international relations. It is named after an Indian man of religion who once admired Japan, Swami Vevekananda (1863-1902), whose name I believe adds deep meaning and significance to the joint study pursued by the Indian and Japanese think tanks. Vivekananda, who was 30 years old when he visited Japan in 1893 en route to the US, is credited with having contributed significantly to religious reform in India, as well as having introduced Hinduism to the Western world.

　　　Arriving in Nagasaki, he sailed on to Kobe, from where he traveled to Yokohama by land. After visiting Osaka, Kyoto, and Tokyo, he was immensely touched by the scenic beauty of Japan and the frugality and neatness of the Japanese. Calling the Japanese “one of the cleanest peoples on earth,” he described as “picturesque” the neatness of the streets and dwellings as well as the “elegant and beautiful” deportment, etiquette, and matter of speech of the people.

　　　In 1893 when Vivekananda came, Japan was marking the 26th year after the Meiji Reform; it was four years after the promulgation of the Meiji Constitution, and just a year before the outbreak of the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-95). Realizing that Japan must defend the Korean Peninsula at all costs in order to thwart control by the big powers, Japan was going full blast making preparations for any contingencies under the slogan “Rich Nation, Strong Military.” Everywhere across Japan, Vevekananda sensed the determination and vigor of the nation, noting that “the Japanese have fully awakened to the need to develop the power that the new times now call for.” Seeing what Japan was going through then -€ as it strove to withstand overwhelming pressure from the great powers, with the whole population dead set on preserving their nation’s autonomy and independence -€ must have been dazzlingly invigorating to Vivekananda who, like his millions of fellow countrymen, must have felt the humiliation of his country being under British colonial rule. That, I believe, is why he also wrote he wished to “have many (Indian) youths visit Japan and China every year and come to their senses.”

Ridiculous Standard

　　　Vivekananda, who extensively studied the Hindu religion which constitutes the foundation of the pride and values of the Indian people, died nine years later at 39. The VIF was founded with his name in order to honor his lofty spirit. Its director is Ajit Kamar Doval, former Director of India’s Intelligence Bureau, with Prabhat Shulka who for ten years served as Ambassador to Russia assisting him as Joint Director. Raman Puri, who took part in the seminar as a panelist, is former Flag Officer Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Eastern Naval Command, having previously commanded his nation’s first aircraft carrier.

　　　Although the VIF is a group of outstanding diplomatic, intelligence, and peace and security experts, the India-Japan cooperation scheme it proposes covers all fields, including the economy. Clearly, its proposals are based on the recognition that India and Japan are natural strategic partners logically situated to complement each other.

　　　The natural bond that brings the two nations together is a shared historical perspective. India has positively and correctly valued Japan’s basic stance regarding the Greater East Asia War (the Pacific War) -€ a world of difference from China’s historical view of Japan. Also, as two of the most important Asian democracies, India and Japan face China as a common threat. They complement each other especially in terms of industry and population, with Japan embracing technology and India an abundant young work force. With 60 percent of its total population still under 30 years of age, India is an ideal recipient of Japanese technology, capable of taking that know-how and turning it into new and innovative products. Further, India’s young population represents a remarkable think tank, as many young Indians who have migrated to the US have already shown by playing a major role in the US computer industry.

　　　It is of the utmost importance for both India and Japan to make conscientious efforts together to make the most of their strong points in boosting their respective economic strength in terms of national infrastructure. For that purpose, the government will be held responsible for developing the necessary legal and institutional environment. Unfortunately, however, cooperation between India and Japan has not been progressing as smoothly as desired primarily because the Japanese government is devoid of a grand strategy to achieve its goals.

　　　A case in point is Japan’s three principles on arms exports maintained since the days of the Liberal Democratic Cabinet of the late Prime Minister Takeo Miki (1907-1988). Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda belatedly reviewed the three principles last December 27, allowing exports and transfer of arms, equipment, and technology to any nations with which Japan maintains cooperative security relations, provided that joint development and manufacture with those countries is deemed favorable to Japan. At this stage, however, it is highly difficult to determine whether or not India would be construed as one such nation.

　　　Professor Yoichi Shimada, a security expert at Fukui Prefectural University, is concerned the last of the three conditions -€ that the government will not permit the export of weapons to “nations involved in, or likely to be involved in international armed conflict” -€ will likely stand in the way.

　　　It certainly is a bizarre standard, I must say. In point of fact, Chinese armed forces infiltrate into Indian territory almost daily, triggering skirmishes. The Indian side claims up to several hundred such incidents are caused by the Chinese every year. Given these circumstances, it is quite possible to regard India as a nation involved in international armed conflict. One could even conjecture that China has intentionally been creating such incidents in order to prevent Japanese arms, equipment, and technology from being delivered to India. If such a view prevails, then there is a good possibility that the relaxed arms export principles will not be applicable to India.

Under Constitutional Constraints

　　　What the Japanese government should do is to refrain from standing on ceremony to uniformly treat the so-called “nations involved in, or likely to be involved in, armed conflict” and resolutely draw a line, based on national interest, between those nations that are considered “threats,” and those who are considered “friends.” Japan should be ready to assist friendly nations even if they are involved in armed conflict. What is being assessed most stringently by the international community today is whether Japan is willing to assume a new stance as a reliable ally, committing itself to helping friendly nations far more positively than in the past.

　　　Safeguarding maritime security in the seas around Japan through multilateral cooperation is what Japan must seek most urgently. Japan has jurisdiction over some 4.5 million square kilometers of territorial waters and exclusive economic zone (EEZ), while India has about 40 percent of what Japan has. And yet, the Japan Coast Guard (JCG) has only 12,500 personnel available to keep the seas safe, and its ships are in extremely short supply.

　　　Even as of this writing, I am certain that several hundred Chinese fishing boats are in operation within the Japanese EEZ in the seas around the Senkaku Islands. This fact in itself is unpardonable, but Japan should be on constant alert lest the Chinese should violate Japanese territorial waters and land on any of the islands of the Senkakus. However, Professor Yoshihiko Yamada of Tokai University points out that the JCG maintains only four patrol boats to guard the seas around the Senkakus against several hundred Chinese fishing boats.

　　　Alongside the acute shortage of ships and manpower, there are serious legal problems, according to Professor Yamada. The JCG law allows its personnel to evacuate ships approaching the EEZ only after its personnel inspect them. It is plainly impossible for JCG agents aboard only four patrol boats to inspect all of the several hundred boats. Should one of the Chinese boats manage to slip past them and its crew members succeed in landing on one of the islands, JCG agents will be unable to arrest or evacuate them because they are not endowed with police authority on land.

　　　Last February 28, a set of bills was approved by the cabinet of Prime Minister Noda to beef up the JCG Law, but they have yet to be implemented as the government has largely stopped functioning. The two-day seminar discussed these and many other pertinent matters. Evident from any one of these issues was the realization that Japan is virtually incapable of implementing any workable measures to benefit its relations with India primarily because of constitutional constraints, including problems faced by the JCG, possible cooperation between the Maritime Self Defense Force and the Indian Navy, as well as prevention of, and joint operations pertaining to, cyber warfare.

　　　Obviously, the “peace” constitution is an insurmountable obstacle that must by all means be grappled with before we even dare discuss matters concerning future India-Japan cooperation. The recent exchange of views with Indian policy experts has once again brought home to me the conviction that this thick wall can only be demolished by revising the constitution.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 513 in the June 14, 2012 issue of The Weekly Shincho.)

http://en.yoshiko-sakurai.jp/2012/06/12/3842

[ramana]

Good article surasena.

Keep posting such items.

[member_19686]

Shinzo Abe’s India Visit – Hits and Misses

Kanwal Sibal, Dean, Centre for International Relations and Diplomacy, VIF

Much has been achieved during Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s current visit to India and much has not. In reiterating a clear intention to strengthen bilateral ties, the visit has been a success, though in breaking new strategic ground concretely, the results could have been better.
Significant
Honouring Abe as chief guest at our Republic Day celebrations was politically significant. Such invitations are either intended to convey a desire to forge closer ties with a country or to indicate that relations had already reached a high level of entente. In other words, either an investment in the future or a celebration of success already achieved. Abe’s visit would fall in between these two categories.
The joint statement mentions the resolve of the two leaders to jointly contribute to peace and stability “taking into account changes in the strategic environment”- an indirect reference to the strategic issues raised by China’s rise and its increased assertiveness, as no other change in this environment has occurred that would disturb both India and Japan.
No doubt both countries are Asian democracies that share the values of freedom, democracy and rule of law, a feature of particular importance for Abe. But then, India and Japan have been liberal democracies since decades, without this providing a political glue all these years. If today there is a felt need to highlight this shared attachment to liberal values, it is to differentiate themselves from China’s authoritarianism. Uniting on the basis of universal values of democracy avoids the impression that the two are coming together on any explicit anti-China platform.
The issues thrown up by China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea, the Senkaku imbroglio and the ADIZ announcement could not have been ignored in the joint statement. They find indirect mention- the most that could be done realistically- in a reference to freedom of navigation, unimpeded commerce and peaceful settlement of disputes according to international law, as well as the importance of freedom of overflight and civil aviation safety.
Abe’s ambition to loosen some defence related constraints imposed on Japan after 1945 has found endorsement in our PM’s appreciation of his “Proactive Contribution to Peace” regionally and beyond. This boosts Abe as Japan manoeuvres against mounting Chinese pressure. In this broad context, the decision of India and Japan to institute a dialogue at the National Security Advisers level and their determination to “further strengthen bilateral defence cooperation” becomes significant. So does the satisfaction expressed with the regular trilateral India-Japan-US dialogue, the resolve to increase the frequency of bilateral naval exercises, and, most notably, given our reluctance on this score until now in deference to Chinese sensitivities and our aversion to be seen as drifting towards “alliance” configurations, to invite Japan to participate in the next multilateral “Malabar” maritime exercise. Japan’s offer to sell its US-2 amphibious aircraft- an important political step no doubt- is deficient from India’s viewpoint in that it is being offered as a civilian aircraft and not a military one because of Japan’s policy of not exporting military equipment.
Nuclear
The opportunity of Abe’s visit was missed for signing the civil nuclear agreement. The officials of the two sides have again been directed to “exert further efforts” towards an early conclusion. The Japanese demand that India yield more to it on the “nonproliferation” front that we have yielded to the US is both unreasonable and unrealistic. India yielded as much as it could politically to the US - the lynchpin of international nuclear sanctions on us- for a bilateral civilian nuclear deal as well as an NSG exemption for which the US lobbied with several recalcitrant countries, including China. Japan is not required to change the international nonproliferation paradigm for us; it has only to overcome some domestic resistance to the India deal. We have already reached an agreement with Canada on some issues raised by Japan, even though Canada has been particularly difficult with us on nuclear issues because of its grievance that it was its transfer of nuclear technology that enabled India to conduct a PNE in 1974. That solution is available. Abe’s commitment to support India’s full membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Australia Group and the Wassenaar Arrangement is, of course, to be welcomed.
Import
The joint statement omits any mention of space cooperation- a strategic lacuna. Both India and Japan have great strengths in space technology, as demonstrated in India’s moon and Mars missions and Japan’s participation in the International Space Station. India’s launch capabilities and Japanese robotics can be imaginatively married in some eye-catching space mission, without the MTCR impediment.
Investment, finance and technology, central to the bilateral relationship, form the hard core of the joint statement. Bilateral currency swap arrangements, generous Official Development Assistance, additional loans for the Delhi Metro, the Western Dedicated Freight Corridor, the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor, IIT Hyderabad, the planned Chennai-Bengaluru Industrial Corridor, a joint feasibility study for a high speed Mumbai-Ahmedabad railway system, cooperation in energy-efficient and energy-saving technologies, an India-Japan ICT Comprehensive Cooperation Framework, a possible Japanese Electronic Industrial Township in India, Japanese investments in National Investment Manufacturing Zones, the rare earths project, cooperation in advanced technologies, all figure in the joint statement.
Some statements made during the visit stand out because of their great import. Our Prime Minister’s affirmation that “Japan is at the heart of India’s Look East Policy” gives a new geopolitical meaning to this policy, initiated when Japan was not a part of India’s calculus. Prime Minister Abe’s remarkable statement that “the relations between Japan and India have the greatest potential of any bilateral relationship anywhere in the world” speaks for itself.

http://www.vifindia.org/article/2014/ja ... and-misses

[Christopher Sidor]

Middle-Power Cooperation between South Korea and India: Hedging the Dominance of the Great Powers ---- CSIS Pacnet Dated 28-Jan-2014

There is a wild card in India-Japan relationship. That wild card is how growing cooperation between Japan and India is perceived in Korea. We have to be mindful and keep in mind the history of Korea-Japan. And we will have to assure Korea that India - Japan relationship does not come at the cost of Korea. It would serve India's interest fantastically, if both of these countries, Korea and Japan were to resolve all of their issues. But well that is something which is up to these two countries.

[gunjur]

Apologies if already posted.

India-Japan relations: the China factor

There has been a strengthening of India-Japan relations across various domains leading to interactions at multiple levels both in government and non-government sectors. Several drivers, including the containment of China, have been identified as those leading to this intensification of cooperation and greater understanding between the two countries. While Japan has been quite explicit about the ‘China factor’, India has sought to underplay the issue even to the point of back pedalling on certain measures and initiatives. The outcome of the latest visit of the Japanese Prime Minster to India seems to suggest that there is new-found confidence in Indian strategic posturing to deal with an assertive China.

The recent Indian actions, to “accommodate” Chinese strategic and security concerns, particularly with reference to India's relations with Japan, can be tabbed down to the 2007 edition of the annual Malabar series of naval exercises. The Malabar series, which began in 1992, include diverse activities, ranging from fighter combat operations from aircraft carriers, to maritime interdiction operations. In September 2007, Japan along with India, US, Australia and Singapore participated in the first ever five-nation multilateral naval exercise, Malabar-07-2 held in the Bay of Bengal. After the exercises China sent a demarche to all the five participants of the naval exercise as it viewed the event as a collective security arrangement against its national interests. As a result India stopped multilateral naval exercises in its waters. The next edition of Malabar exercise held off the coast of Goa reverted to the bilateral format.
For the 2009 edition of the Malabar series, the Indian Navy did invite the Japan Maritime Self Defence Force (JMSDF) to participate, but the exercise was conducted off the coast of Okinawa, Japan. However, the participation of Indian warships in the exercise with the US and Japanese navies closer to Chinese maritime area of interest this time invited criticism back home. The 2010 edition in Indian waters was again an Indo-US bilateral event. The 2011 edition was cancelled due to the Tohoku Earthquake.

In the meanwhile, India and Japan agreed upon the conduct of bilateral naval exercises during Defence Minister A.K. Antony’s visit to Japan in November 2011 as a means to address Chinese objections. The maiden Japan-India Maritime Exercise (JIMEX) was conducted off Japan in January 2012. The second round of the bilateral JIMEX and the first to be conducted in Indian waters took place in the Bay of Bengal from Dec 19-22, 2013. The exercise focused on maritime security cooperation.

Indian desire to placate China seems to have reached a high point last year when India suddenly withdrew from a joint naval exercise with the US and Japanese navies off the US Pacific island of Guam. It was reported that India was only interested in bilateral naval exercises and that Malabar should be confined to exercises with the US in the Indian Ocean. Even the bilateral Malabar exercise with the US navy off Visakhapatnam was significantly scaled down. Some analysts even went so far as to suggest that India had attempted to coincide the Malabar exercise with Indian Army’s 10-day joint training with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), codenamed Hand-in-Hand which had recommenced after a five-year hiatus near Chengdu. Former Naval chief Admiral Mehta commented that India’s “strategic submission”, fearing Chinese outrage, wouldn’t augur well for the country.

Given the aforementioned soft and back-pedalling by India to accommodate Chinese concerns, the decision to invite the JMSF to take part in this year's edition of the India-US Malabar (likely to be held in the Western Pacific), is a signal to China that India is coming to its own. The joint statement issued after the Manmohan Singh-Shinzo Abe meeting welcomed India's invitation. The request to participate in the Malabar exercise came during a four-day visit to New Delhi by Japanese Defence Minister Itsunori Onodera in early January 2014.

India is also set to become the first country since World War II to buy military equipment from Japan as Abe looks to do away with a ban on weapons exports that has kept his country's defence contractors out of foreign markets. The two countries are looking to finalise a $1.65 billion deal for the ShinMaywa US-2 amphibious aircraft. New Delhi is likely to buy at least 15 US-2, which are priced at about $110 million each. A joint working group is slated to meet in March to consider plans to assemble it under licence in India. The plan is to deliver two aircraft and then assemble the rest of the aircraft with an Indian partner. The procurement of the US-2 is seen as part of the Indian response to China’s “string of pearls” strategy in Southeast Asia. India's navy is also reportedly interested in Japanese patrol vessels and electronic warfare equipment.

On Jan 25, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh made special mention in a media statement during the Abe’s visit of “expanding defence and security cooperation”, as the two sides agreed to hold talks between chiefs of the national security councils of the two countries. In this process India acknowledged Japan's National Security Strategy and the establishment of the National Security Council (NSC) of Japan. The two prime ministers expressed satisfaction at the launch of regular consultations between the secretary general of national security secretariat of Japan and India's national security advisor. The Japanese National Defence Programme Guidelines, besides referring to the US and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), state that Japan must increase its cooperation with India and other countries that share the common interest of enhancing the security of maritime navigation from Africa to the Middle East to East Asia.

The two prime ministers also reaffirmed their commitment to cooperate in the rare earths sector and shared "the strong resolution" that the commencement of commercial production of rare earths by Indian and Japanese enterprises should take place at the earliest. China had recently threatened to withhold the supply of rare earths to Japan during their stand-off in the East China Sea.

In the regional context, India has invited Japan to participate in infrastructure development programmes of the country’s northeast states, an area where China is sensitive to even Indian actions given its contested territorial claims in the state of Arunachal Pradesh. India is hoping that a new economic and transport corridor involving India, Bangladesh, Myanmar and possibly even Thailand would take shape in the future.

China downplayed Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's visit to India as a bilateral issue, even as the state media termed the trip as a failure for “not succeeding in pinning down Beijing”. According to the BBC, several Chinese media outlets carried reports of Abe’s visit, but analysts quoted in the papers were sceptical that India could be persuaded to enhance strategic ties at the cost of Chinese “friendship”. A Chinese analyst was quoted in the Global Times as saying “India’s main purpose is to obtain practical interests from Japan, and Abe’s wooing of India to resist China is more of his own wishful thinking”.

Despite the confluence of interests, Japan and India have differing approaches to managing their relations with China. For Tokyo, US-Japan-India strategic ties are a means to balance the rise of China, while New Delhi views Beijing is a key pivot of its multi-aligned foreign policy and forging a network of nations on China’s periphery may not be in Indian national interest. As the two allies proceed to forge closer ties they would be mindful that Asia’s geo-political equilibrium is not unbalanced.

[RSoami]

http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/l ... z2spUBt8qw

Russia Japan ties getting better?!
Abe visited Sochi and held discussions with Putin. Putin s agreed to visit Japan. This was the fifth meeting between the two in less than a year. Also western countries leaders stayed away from th winter olympic games that is Putin`s baby while Abe visited. They are trying to resolve the differences on the island issue. Working hard at it.

[RSoami]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/shi ... story.html

Long article on Shinzo Abe.
"His revival reflects not just his own efforts, but a fundamental sense of crisis that had developed among Japanese in recent years."

[member_19686]

Big in Japan: Why Abe is Rooting for a Modi Win
BY SHREY VERMA FEBRUARY 20, 2014

When Shinzo Abe led the Liberal Democratic Party to a landslide victory in the December 2012 Japanese general elections, one of the many congratulatory messages he received from world leaders -- and one that went largely unnoticed -- was from Narendra Modi, the chief minister of the Indian state of Gujarat. A phone conversation between the Japanese prime minister and the Gujarat chief minister is odd by strict standards of protocol, but it underscores how the personal relationship between the two men and the economic partnership between Japan and Gujarat has thrived over the years.

Recent polls show that Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the principal opposition to the ruling Congress party, is well positioned to win the greatest number of seats in India's upcoming parliamentary elections. If Modi becomes India's next prime minister, his rise could also vault the strategic India-Japan relationship to a position of unprecedented importance.

The economic success story between Japan and Gujarat is one of politics driving business. Modi's administration began pursuing a vigorous "Look East" policy courting Japan after the West, led by the United States, closed its doors to Modi in 2005 for his controversial role as chief minister during the 2002 Gujarat riots that killed more than 1,000 people. His visit to Japan in 2007 was an icebreaker of sorts, opening new investment channels between the Indian state and a foreign country.

In the years since, Gujarat's administrative efficiency and investor-friendly climate have rapidly attracted Japanese investments, with significant investment flowing into mega infrastructure projects. Suzuki, the Japanese auto giant, is already setting up new plants and ancillary units in the region, and private Japanese investment in Gujarat is expected to total $2 billion by 2015-2016. The investment spree is not restricted to Japanese multinationals. In 2009, the Japan External Trade Organisation (JETRO), a trade and investment agency under the Japanese government, partnered with Gujarat to organize the Vibrant Gujarat Global Investors Summit, a mini-Davos showcase event to attract foreign investment. Japan was designated "partner country" to the summit and represented by a senior delegation led by the Japanese ambassador.

Japan's current policy establishment enjoys strong working relations with Modi. The extent of the relationship became clear when, during an official visit in 2012, the Japanese government accorded Modi protocol befitting a cabinet minister of the union (a more highly ranked position than chief minister of a state). Coordinating the visit and overseeing the new partnership was Akitaka Saiki, a former Japanese envoy to India and now Japan's top diplomat in the current government. During the visit, Modi made it a point to call on Abe, then in opposition.

Strength in numbers

At a time when the China-Japan relationship is reaching new lows, India now forms the cornerstone of Abe's near-abroad strategy. The desire to expand the India-Japan relationship from its economic bedrock to a higher strategic level is finding greater traction in New Delhi as well.

Japanese Emperor Akihito's recent historic visit to India and Abe's attendance of Republic Day celebrations in New Delhi as India's chief guest point toward a gradual rebalancing taking place in Asia. India's invitation to Japan to take part in the U.S.-India Malabar Naval exercise, to be held later this year, was a more overt manifestation of the evolving strategic partnership. India may also soon become the first country since World War II to buy military aircraft from Japan in a $1.65-billion deal.

It is amid these shifting geopolitical relationships that Modi may ascend to India's top post. The Japanese view the emerging India-Japan relationship as going beyond economic interests and being further strengthened by Japan's special relationship with Gujarat and the mutual respect between Abe and Modi.

Politically, the two could help each other. Economically, Japanese savings are looking for greener shores as Japan battles deflationary pressures. Businesses in India, on the other hand, are hoping that a Modi victory later this year would restart the stalled reform process and revive economic growth, opening new space for Japanese investments. And China's aggressive posturing along its border with India and in the East China Sea presents an obvious rationale for strengthening India-Japan military and strategic relations.

Weakening ties with Washington?

The renewed thrust in India-Japan relations is not only a reaction to China. It is also embedded in the more expansive vision of the U.S.-Japan-Australia-India Quadrilateral Security Dialogue that Abe articulated in 2006.

Abe's "Quad" strategy has acquired a new practical dimension of late. Japan's recent apprehension about the strength of its alliance with Washington is driving Japanese diplomats to forge stronger security relationships with other Asian powers. Despite the U.S. "pivot" to Asia, U.S. relations with India and Japan, the continent's two democratic powers, have hit a rough patch. Abe's visit to the Yasukuni Shrine and his government's moves to extricate Japan from a U.S.-centric security framework have made Washington uneasy.

A similar disquiet also marks the U.S.-India relationship, where diplomatic tensions, trade disputes, and foreign policy divergences on Bangladesh and Afghanistan have garnered more headline space than defense cooperation and strategic gains made after the historic Indo-U.S. Civil Nuclear deal. The current drift in relations is further complicated by Washington's eight-year estrangement with Modi -- a position that was reversed only recently, as the American ambassador to India, Nancy Powell, met with him in mid-February.

From a geopolitical perspective, the two sides of the strategic triangle involving U.S.-India and U.S.-Japan have frayed in recent months. However, the third flank, representing the India-Japan relationship, appears to have entered a new phase of strength and proximity.

This relationship would undoubtedly find greater expression if Modi's fortunes rise. Should Modi be appointed India's next prime minister this summer, expect Tokyo to be his first stop abroad.

http://southasia.foreignpolicy.com/post ... a_modi_win