Singh's Japan stop was first step to shoring up regional security

Discussion in 'Foreign Relations' started by LETHALFORCE, Nov 1, 2010.

  1. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,519
    Likes Received:
    6,520
    http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20101101a2.html

    LONDON — Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Japan as part of his three-nation tour of East Asia last week was intended to underscore India's growing role in East Asia and to acknowledge that Japan has a crucial role in the emerging security environment in the Asia-Pacific.

    Urging Japan to play a larger role in India's growth story, the Indian prime minister made a strong pitch for strong India-Japan ties. He and his Japanese counterpart, Naoto Kan, signed a visa pact allowing Japanese workers to live and work in India for three years and agreed to sign, in the near future, the much awaited Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA), which has been in the works for the last four years.

    As part of the CEPA, Delhi will eliminate tariffs on 90 percent of its imports from Japan, and Tokyo will remove tariffs on 97 percent of Indian imports. The Indian prime minister had to intervene personally to make sure the CEPA was in place before his visit to Japan. There were signs of bureaucratic foot-dragging on the CEPA and it is indeed a sign of healthy India-Japan ties that it will finally be signed.

    For a Japan embroiled in domestic political instability and economic drift, India has not been a top priority in recent months. India, too, has ignored Tokyo, with the Indian bureaucracy unwilling to push the economic pacts that are important for signaling India's seriousness toward Japan.

    This is a crucial period of strategic flux in Asia and there is much that India and Japan working together can accomplish. India's ties with Japan have traveled a long way since May 1998 when a chill set in following India's nuclear tests. Japan imposed sanctions and suspended official development assistance.

    Since then, however, the changing strategic milieu in Asia-Pacific has brought the two countries together so much so that the latest visit of the Indian prime minister to Japan resulted in the unfolding of a road map to transform a low-key relationship into a major strategic partnership. But ground realities are changing in Asia rapidly and India and Japan need to demonstrate a more active response.

    China's rise is the most significant variable in the Asian geostrategic landscape today. Both India and Japan would like to see a constructive China play a larger role in resolving regional and global problems rather than become a problem itself. Concerns are rising in both countries about China's assertive diplomatic and military posture, as exemplified by events that followed the collision between a Chinese fishing boat and a Japanese Coast Guard vessel near the Senkaku Islands and by rising tensions along the Sino-Indian border.

    China's attempts to test the diplomatic and military mettle of its neighbors in the South China Sea and along the Sino-Indian border will only bring Japan and India even closer. While Delhi and Tokyo would like greater transparency and restraint on the part of China, they need to be more candid about their expectations of China's behavior toward its neighbors.

    Given the likelihood that the presence of the U.S. Navy in the South China Sea might shrink in coming years because of economic constraints, Japan should encourage a larger role for the Indian Navy in the South China Sea even as there is an urgent need for the Japanese Self-Defense Forces to expand their presence in the Indian Ocean.

    Greater bilateral defense cooperation including joint development and production of defense equipment is the need of the hour. It would be even more productive if the U.S. too were involved in Japan-India military exercises so that a broader regional security framework can be nurtured.

    Economic ties also need serious attention. Though Japanese investment in India has crossed the $3.7 billion mark, much remains to be done. The Delhi-Mumbai corridor remains a centerpiece of India-Japan cooperation in the infrastructure sector. Japan is also supporting the new Indian Institute of Technology at Hyderabad, laying the foundation for academic exchanges and collaboration between higher educational institutions of the two states.

    Japan today appears more serious than at anytime in its recent past about economic cooperation with India. The Japanese government's "New Growth Strategy" is aimed at developing emerging markets like India's through infrastructure deals that combine public financing and private sector investment.

    Regional institutions in Asia also need strengthening. Active U.S. involvement in the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations and ASEAN Regional Forum has been welcomed by member states. India should work toward enhancing its profile in such regional institutions.

    The "hub and spokes" of U.S. alliances will continue to define the regional security architecture in the region. At the global level the two sides want to re-energize the Group of Four grouping that is pushing for reform of the U.N., particularly expansion of the Security Council and inclusion of new permanent members.

    The talks on a civilian nuclear pact seem to be going nowhere at the moment with the two sides merely agreeing to speed up talks. Japan continues to insist that India sign the Nonproliferation Treaty and the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, whereas India has no intention of doing so given its long-standing concerns regarding the discriminatory nature of these treaties.

    Given the involvement of Japanese firms in the U.S. and French nuclear industry, an Indo-Japanese pact is essential if U.S. and French civilian nuclear cooperation with India is to be realized. Japanese approval is needed if GE-Hitachi and Toshiba-Westinghouse are to sell nuclear reactors to India. Meanwhile, the new liability law in India could make greater civilian nuclear cooperation between Japan and India difficult to accomplish.

    Delhi and Tokyo need to urgently assess the implications of their lackluster ties and get serious about remedying this situation. The Indian prime minister's visit was a step in the right direction, but much more needs to be done to enhance regional and global stability.
    Harsh V. Pant teaches at King's College London.
     
  2.  
  3. Parthy

    Parthy Air Warrior Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,313
    Likes Received:
    145
    India, Japan Close to Sealing Nuclear Deal; Mitsubishi, Hitachi Potential Bidders

    India and Japan are close to finalizing a civil nuclear cooperation agreement, former Japanese prime minister Yukio Hatoyama said in New Delhi on Monday. "India and Japan have come to a stage of concluding the nuclear cooperation agreement," said Hatoyama, a key leader of the ruling Democratic Party of Japan. He hoped India would uphold its unilateral moratorium on nuclear tests and underscored the sensitivity Japanese people attach to it, given that it was the only nation to suffer a nuclear attack.

    The India-Japan civil nuclear agreement is key to the success of India's ambitious plans to scale up atomic power generation. Some American firms keen to set up nuclear plants in India are owned by Japanese companies and governed by Japanese laws. The former Japanese premier also met Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Commerce Minister Anand Sharma. The negotiations for the nuclear agreement were launched on June 28 when officials from Japan and India met for the first round in Tokyo.

    The agreement will enable Japanese companies like Mitsubishi, Hitachi and Toshiba, with advance civil nuclear energy technologies, to set up projects in India where the nuclear energy market is pegged at an estimated $150 billion. Major atomic power companies of the US and France, both of which already have a bilateral nuclear cooperation treaty with India, have urged Tokyo to sign the nuclear pact with New Delhi so that they can use Japanese technology for building reactors in the country.

    Countries with which India has already signed a civil nuclear deal include the US, France, Russia [ Images ], Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Argentina and Namibia. Hatoyama, along with five Japanese delegates, also held a brief meeting with top officials of the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor Development Corporation. He announced the launch of the India-Japan Global Partnership Summit which is scheduled to be held in Tokyo in September this year.

    The summit is aimed at enhancing socio-economic, cultural and spiritual bonding between the two nations. "The summit will bring the best of the best from both the countries, not only from the field of industry but also from art, culture and education," said Sam Pitroda, co-chair of the summit.


    http://www.india-defence.com/reports-4951
     
  4. LETHALFORCE

    LETHALFORCE Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    Messages:
    20,519
    Likes Received:
    6,520
    Part company with Japan for UNSC seat, China tells India

    Part company with Japan for UNSC seat, China tells India - The Times of India

    BEIJING: India should part company with Japan in its quest for a seat in the United Nations Security Council if it expects China to back the proposal. This is what visiting Marxist leader Sitaram Yechury learnt in his discussions with Chinese leaders including State Councilor Dai Bingguo.

    "Dai said China has no objection to backing India provided we come out of Japan's field. He said they have a lot of historical baggage with Japan," Yechury told Indian journalists today.

    Though China's distrust for Japan is well known, it has not publicly made it a pre-condition for New Delhi for supporting India's case at the UN. Chinese leaders have no far restricted themselves to saying that it supported India's case "in principal".

    But Dai and other Chinese leaders chose not to discuss the Tibet problem with the Indian Marxist leader. This is surprising because Beijing is at present reworking its strategy on Indian Tibetans since the recent elections in Dharmashala. The omission is also significant because China is furious over plans of US president Barrack Obama to meet the Dalai Lama on July 16.

    "The issue regarding Tibet concerns China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and we firmly oppose any foreign official to meet with the Dalai Lama in any form," said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei.

    Yechury also discussed the problem concerning issuance of visa for Chinese workers coming in large numbers to implement projects in India, which are being built by companies in China.

    "They said it is the major Indian companies who want Chinese workers. I was surprised to hear that," Yechury said. Chinese companies were forced to use their own employees to implement projects in time as there are severe penalties involved in project delays in India, Yechury was told by officials in Beijing.
     
  5. badguy2000

    badguy2000 Respected Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    4,957
    Likes Received:
    613
    hehe ,divide and conquer....
     
  6. Virendra

    Virendra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    2,923
    Location:
    Delhi, India, India
    This is more of a wish and less of a possibility. Even the Chinese know it somewhere, or else they would've made it a case with the government behind closed doors .. not to Mr. Yechury.
    Going by the way GOI is walking I don't think any such deals were made. No desperate moves.

    Regards,
    Virendra
     
  7. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,115
    Location:
    EST, USA
    This is potentially a bargaining chip.

    Tell the Japanese to pull their weight behind India for NSG membership and support full access to N-tech and fuel; or else, we will part ways. On the other hand, we should tell PRC to publicly support us and first vote for us for UNSC seat and then we shall part ways with Japan.

    I am probably being naïve, but I'd like to see what others have to say.

    Overall, I don't think we should sour our relations with Japan.
     
    ganesh177 and sob like this.
  8. Virendra

    Virendra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    2,923
    Location:
    Delhi, India, India
    Part ways from Japs ?? ... Why ??
    As a person you might get away with it (might).
    But doing such a open chuck this and catch that in geo politics would backfire very badly.
    I don't agree with this. We break relations with anyone on OUR grounds and OUR reasons. Not on Chinese reasons to buy Chinese support.
    I don't trust the CCP for anything anyways.
    We break the trust of Japanese once, we'll lose the respect and faith every other country had in us for so long.
    Why would anyone else put trust in us then? We don't short sell ourselves like that.
    I prefer getting the UNSC seat hard way but the right way.

    Regards,
    Virendra
     
    panduranghari and ganesh177 like this.
  9. Shaitan

    Shaitan Zandu balm all day Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,400
    Likes Received:
    3,406
    Location:
    Judica
    Relationship with Japan is more important. I think at least.
     
  10. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,272
    Likes Received:
    11,275
    Location:
    BANGalore
    BS, trust the Chinese at your peril. Clear case of divide and rule.

    Vote on the expansion of UNSC should be kept away from Veto. It should be a democratic exercise.
     
    amitkriit and Virendra like this.
  11. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,115
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Japan has not been particularly kind with India when it came to India trying to procure enriched Uranium. Perhaps this has got something to do with their twin-N tragedies of WWII. Not their fault.

    We have UNSC and the obstacle is PRC.
    We have NSG and multiple obstacles.

    We should not lose both of these and India has every right to pressurise Japan to back India w.r.t. free N-trade.

    Japan’s dilemma: Nuclear trade vs nuclear disarmament advocacy | Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
     
  12. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,115
    Location:
    EST, USA
    Here you go bud!

     
  13. ganesh177

    ganesh177 Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    295
    Location:
    Pune, Incredible India
    There is no need to part from japan, for some distant dream.

    Also on other side, japan must stop being the obstacle for india in accessing the nuclear tech. Once japan does that, china will get the answer for its proposal.
     
    Virendra and pmaitra like this.
  14. Virendra

    Virendra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    2,923
    Location:
    Delhi, India, India
    Pressure is at its place and has to be applied as and when necessary. Give back in kind if you ever receive a handful. Thats not a problem, we can be that bit mean to protect our interests.
    But I don't know who is the greater sinner or the saint. And in geo politics, one doesn't care. Its between China and Japan to sort out.
    My point is, Chinese grudges with Japan should not dictate how India goes about achieving its foreign policy goals such as UNSC and relations with Japan.
    We don't choose our allies like that.
    In this kind of world, there is no way that you could part ways from any country. Hell we can't part ways from Pakistan even when we want to (talks back on track), Japan is a long shot to even think about.

    Smells of the typical Chinese style of negotiating without negotiating.
    While it could yield results in short term, we'll alienate many countries with such open blackmail. How do you think the Chinese managed to have so many enemies. And do we have enough money to throw at & gag those potential enemies? Moreover do we want to achieve our goals in this manner?
    I DON'T .. !!

    Regards,
    Virendra
     
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2011
  15. pankaj nema

    pankaj nema Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,450
    Likes Received:
    1,407
    Well it is like this Right Now India cant claim to be more powerful than Britain and France

    SO India cant say that right now India deserves a place ahead of UK and France

    If India keeps up with its economic , military and technological progress then in 20 years India will be a a BIG power

    It doesnt matter whether you are in or out of the security council

    What matters is power , When we are a big power then only we can OPENLY SAY that there are weaker nations than India in the UNSC

    So for the next 20 years India should focus on BECOMING a big power rather than expecting a favour from US
     
    panduranghari likes this.
  16. Virendra

    Virendra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    4,674
    Likes Received:
    2,923
    Location:
    Delhi, India, India
    I agree. Rather than trying to punch above our weight so early. We better focus on strengthening ourselves. Its never too easy but when we're capable enough this seat would fall in the laps naturally.
     
  17. Yusuf

    Yusuf GUARDIAN Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Messages:
    24,272
    Likes Received:
    11,275
    Location:
    BANGalore
    PM, Indias relations with Japan cannot be looked only from the prism of NSG. we are looking at a formation of either explicit or implicit alliance with US heading it against China. I think the centrality of the US will then take care of our NSG concerns as also the formation of this alliance.
     
  18. LurkerBaba

    LurkerBaba Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    6,769
    Likes Received:
    3,678
    Location:
    India
    This is coming from Sitaram Yechury, not a Chinese official.

    The Chinese can always deny it later, they don't giving a flying f**k to the Lennin/Marx/Mao worshiping CPI
     
  19. pankaj nema

    pankaj nema Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,450
    Likes Received:
    1,407
    We should know where this is all coming from

    Two years ago There was a 4 Nation Naval exercise Between India US Japan and Australia in Bay of bengal

    It made the chinese go BALLISTIC

    Chinese CCP and all other media were talking about the formation of a new ASIAN NATO

    Since then USA has been trying to mollify the Chinese but the Chinese are still worried

    Then India Japan US AGAIN had Naval exercise this time CLOSER to CHINA near the Japanese coast of Okinawa so once again Chinese are talking of an Asian alliance against China

    China Japan relations are IRREPARABLE ,there is too much historical bloodshed involved

    In fact I would bet on China improving its relation with India in order to wean India away from Japan

    India and Japan have begun what is called " Strategic and Defence dialogues "
    ie talking openly about AND declaring that yes we have a common enemy called CHINA
     
    LETHALFORCE and Virendra like this.
  20. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    Its funny if CCP thinks that Yechury can represent their interest in Indian parliament. Down with reds!
     
  21. ejazr

    ejazr Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,518
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Location:
    Hyderabad and Sydney
    Well its not Sitaram saying it on his own record but quoting Chinese leaders including State Councilor Dai Bingguo on this offer.

    The next step would be for MEA to take up that offer through backchannel and confirm if this is accurate.

    The G4 is pretty much dead anyways. I believe, Japan has already decided to withdraw and Germany was also feeling the same. There remains Brazil but India would also need to concur with other G4s before making a unilateral attempt at permanent SC seat.
     

Share This Page