RESOURCE PAPER - 10

Japan and India:
The Challenges of 2017

by
Dr. Sridhar Krishnaswami

RESOURCE PAPER - 10

Japan and India :The Challenges of 2017

by
Dr. Sridhar Krishnaswami
Special Assistant to the Vice Chancellor,Professor, Dept. of Journalism and Mass Communication,
Faculty of Science and Humanities,
SRM University, Chennai

2017 is going to be a challenging year for Japan and India. This
Resource Paper throws light on some of the challenges facing both thecountries. But there is an undercurrent of confidence that Japan andIndia will emerge stronger and closer in the coming decade.
We hope this Resource Paper must be interesting reading.

December 2016

N. Krishnaswami
ChairmanJapan and India: The Challenges of 2017
ABSTRACT:The increasing belligerence of China, a Russia that is keen on
bouncing back as a major actor in gobal affairs and an UnitedStates in the hands of a Trump Presidency from January 20,
2017 have raised the stakes in the international system. Thisphenomenon along with the rightward trends in Europe haveplaced added pressure on key players like India and Japan whoare trying to fathom a relationship factoring in the existing anddawning realities of the Asia Pacific. What are the challenges
and opportunities for these two Asian nations as they wadethrough troubled waters? A comment.
The year 2017 promises its share of challenges for the Asia
Pacific but the question is if it is also going to come up with anequal amount of opportunities for nation states in the area torealize the full potential individually and collectively. India andJapan are major players in the Asia Pacific who are trying toshape a partnership that maximizes the width and depth of thebilateral relationship as well as maintaining an aura of peaceand stability in the region, which has not been easy by any
stretch of imagination in the recent past.
In ways more than one, India and Japan are in different
neighborhoods but the problems faced by the two nations are
somewhat similar. South Asia with India as the dominant
power is a highly troubled region, not just on account ofmilitary rivalries and internal discontent. The region has at least
one nearly failed state - Pakistan - constantly harping on“loose” talk of use of nuclear weapons; with the same state seen5

as the epicenter of global terrorism; and of a political systemthat is clearly out of touch with the global realities and yetmasquerading as a responsible actor regionally and globally.
East Asia is a part of the world that has its share of worries aswell. And heading this list will be the regime of Kim Jong Un of
North Korea which competes vigorously with the civilians andbrass hats of Pakistan in the irrational talk of the use of nuclear
weapons and even going to the fantasy thinking of wiping out
cities in the United States with long range missiles. All this in
the midst of abject poverty and near total hunger in that
economically impoverished nation, propped up only bycommunist. In recent times even Beijing has become a little
wary of the antics of its client state and rightfully so.
South Asia and East Asia have another thing in common as well
- terrorism. Regionally, nations in South Asia have condemned
terrorism emanating from Pakistan and unleashed across theborder against India with few even in the comity of nations
unwilling to accept the face of innocence put up by Islamabad.
And the dreaded ISIS recently murdered two Japanesenationals as a way of retaliation for Tokyo's official aid
packages to countries in the Middle East, notably Egypt. For acountry that has long battled the Japanese Red Army, the brutal
killing of its nationals by the ISIS was a wake up call to thegrowing realities of international terrorism. And Tokyo is quite
aware of the kind of activities that Pyongyang has indulged in
East and South East Asia, from kidnappings to organized andsupervised acts of terror.
The challenges to India and Japan in the Asia Pacific go muchbeyond Pakistan, North Korea and Terrorism. It brings into
focus the role of China in South Asia, East Asia and in theregion of the Asia Pacific as a whole that has raised eyebrows6not only in New Delhi and Tokyo but also in other capitals ofSouth East Asia, the Pacific and the United States. And therecent cozying up between China and Russia have furthered up
the ante with the hope in some quarters that the change ofleadership in Washington together with a perceived change in
relationship between Washington and Moscow could draw
down the anxiety. To India and Japan and in the Asia Pacific,
China is the bottom line that all nations, directly and indirectly,
are working to address. Just how precisely this is going to bedone remains to be seen.
Obviously the leaderships in New Delhi and Tokyo will notwant to be seen as seeking a partnership or fine tuning theirrelationship to “contain” or “encircle” China; yet at the sametime India and Japan cannot be blind to what China has been
doing in the Asia Pacific. In South Asia, Beijing has
undoubtedly been working to keep a check on India by seeking
political, military and economic alliances with countries in theneighborhood. That New Delhi could have missed
opportunities for the same is a valid argument; but in the newdispensation the Modi government is seeking to put in place apolicy that is cohesive keeping in mind the longer term pointsof view.
Both India and Japan have seen with concern the deliberate
militarization of the South China Seas by China which hasbrought forth strong responses from countries like Vietnam
and the Philippines, two of the six claimants to the chain. India
is drawn to the area not only for the rights of freedom tonavigate but also commercial prospects through association
with Vietnam. The bottom line to both New Delhi and Tokyo is
one of freedom of navigation and protection of vital sea lanes
through which much of oil passes through. The waterways
around the Andamans and Nicobar Islands is a case in point for7

Japan. Naturally any unilateral attempts to choke thewaterways by Beijing will be of heightened tension.
There has been a lot of concern in the recent past of the role of theUnited States in the Asia Pacific that has been watched quite
carefully by both India and Japan. From a strategic and security
perspective, Japan's perceptions have been pegged to the realitiesof the Cold War and since the 1990s in the changed and changing
scenarios of the Asia Pacific. For a country that was drawn into
the Mutual Security Treaty with the United States since the early
1950s, during the Cold War the Japanese were worried that they
were going to be dragged into the anti-communist crusades of theUnited States that manifested itself in a very large way by theVietnam War. But the end of the Cold War and the risingbelligerence of China - and by extension North Korea - from thelate 1990s led to a feeling in Washington that the United States
may be drawn into the problems of Japan.
And today with the election of Donald Trump as the President of
the United States, the perceptions in Japan could well be that Tokyois going to be dragged into the changed realities and rhetorics. A
case in point is that Trump's disturbing views on Taiwan and in a
not-so-subtle suggestion that the incoming administration need not
be bound by the One China Policy that had been painstakingly set
in place over the last four decades or more. Beijing has reacted verystrongly to the statements of the incoming administration includingthat of the President elect, but Trump seems to be unfazed at what
has been said. In fact the political leaders must have been taken
aback by the turnaround on Taiwan at a time when they were
expecting tough talk and action only on the economic front fromthe incoming Republican administration.
The problem for both India and Japan as far as the future of theAmerican role in the Asia Pacific is in the unknown - the extent
8

to which Washington is going to be committed in reach and in
financial commitment. If the rhetoric in the campaigns areanything to go by already voices against spending too much on
behalf of others have been heard. And this brings back tovociferous calls in the 1970s and 1980s about countries like
Japan getting a “free ride”. At the same time if Washington
under a new Republican dispensation is going to aggressively
counter China in the Asia Pacific, it would have to retain theexisting force structure, if not substantially add on to theexisting capabilities.
Another factor that Japan and India would have to factor in thenew scheme of things under a Trump Presidency is theeconomic angle with trade wars looming large on the horizon.
The prospect is not only of a Washington-Beijing showdown,
but also one of between Washington and Tokyo and with allcountries that the United States posts a trade deficit. HowChina is going to retaliate in the event of a trade war remains tobe seen but to believe that the Asia Pacific is going to beunaffected by this round of acrimony would be naïve.
While it may be too premature to read too much into Trump's
foreign policies especially pertaining to the Asia Pacific, initialsignals seem to point as being beneficial to India and Japan
particularly when seen in the context of China. And some ofthis has to do with the fashion in which the incoming
Republican administration deals with Russia and in theresponse of Moscow. To see a complete turnaround in
Washington-Moscow relations or expecting Vladimir Putin todance to the tunes of the United States is as naïve as it is silly.
But a warming up of the bilateral relations will indeed have achilling effect on China which has been seeking in the last few
years to draw closer to Putin in an effort to check the UnitedStates' perceived hostility. The lifting of sanctions on Russia by9the new administration in Washington would mean that Putin
does not have to look too far for alternatives - Russia has lost
billions of dollars in oil revenues.
Trump is not the only game-changer in the Asia Pacific. China isseeing with concern a change in Moscow's attitude towards Tokyo
as well. The dispute over the Kurils is not going to be settled overnight but the visit of Putin to Japan has raised the prospect of bothTokyo and Moscow looking beyond the short term. A Presidential
visit from Russia to Japan has taken place after a decade; and Tokyoused the occasion to ink economic deals for US$ 300 billions, asignal to Moscow that China is not the only alternative for lucrative
contracts. Furthermore Putin is simply too smart to be roped into
any economic and arms deals with Pakistan courtesy China
knowing full well the shortcomings and dangers of dealing withthat tottering state in South Asia.
A changed equation between Washington and Moscow will no
doubt hurt China's foreign policy goals; and the double
whammy to Beijing will be if Moscow and Tokyo move awayfrom political acrimony to finding ways to settle differences.
The changed relations between the United States, Russia andJapan will undoubtedly benefit the Asia Pacific and in theprocess strengthen the political hands of India and Japan indealing with any rising ambitions of China in the region.
Beijing will increasingly find it difficult to push its aggressive
posturing as it will find others equally willing to stand toughand principled to outrageous unilateral demands.
The complexities of the international system being what theyare, China is well aware of the fact that global governance isbound to be challenging given the political change that hascome about or in the near offing in key capitals of the world. Acommentary in the People's Daily said, “Looking into the next
10

year, the international situation may become even more
complicated posing greater challenges for the development ofboth China and Russia”, in what seems to be an attempt to lookat the impact of a thaw in Washington-Moscow relations. Witha Trump administration showing clear signs of staying on thecourse with India, even more troublesome for Beijing must bethe growing political trilateral of Washington-Tokyo-New
Delhi with the security and strategic implications that comealong with this.
To India and Japan, meeting the challenges of 2017individually and together is going to take a lot of politicalcourage and foresight. The changing landscape of the Asia
Pacific comes with opportunities as well that would have to bechannelized in a fashion that does not upset the balance in theregion. In the Far East and South East Asia, Japan in spite of all
its good intentions still comes with a baggage given the trackrecord in the second world war. The closure of the second
world war with respect to Japan has not been completed tosome in those parts of the world.
Bilaterally speaking India and Japan have come a long way as
entrenched democracies minus any political discomfitures.
The two countries are looking to expand the scope of therelationship in a manner that does not spark any tension in theimmediate regions and beyond. But New Delhi and Tokyo
have to pursue policies in their national interests which may or
may not be to the liking of countries in the Asia Pacific; neither
can the two countries fashion policies to humor any one or agroup of countries in the region.
Fortunately for India and Japan there has not been the recent
tendency to harp on the “missed opportunities” of the past.
The lack of dynamism in India stemmed not from lack of11

policy insightfulness but an obsession with coalition politics
often times leading to political paralysis. From a Japan's pointof view, red-tapism and corruption were major stumbling
blocks as also in an attitude of waiting for the United States totake the lead in setting the tone and tenor. The gradual warming
up of Indo-US relations has given a fillip to Indo-Japan
relations to the point that Tokyo has signed on to a civilian
nuclear arrangement and is now on the verge of getting intohigh tech defence exports to India.
Against the backdrop of the strategic and political global andregional challenges governments of both India and Japan cantake some comfort in that there is strength and direction ingovernance with the result that both countries are able to lookat the future beyond one or two personalities. Prime Minister
Abe is in a position to charter a foreign policy for Japan that isprogressive in spite of the pressures from the extreme rightwing; and his Indian counterpart, Prime Minister Narendra
Modi, is seeking to give clarity and long term vision to foreign
policy with a view to putting the country among the industrial
giants in a globalised world. At the same time both leaders areaware of the fact that nurturing a relationship means dealing
with not only challenges but also successfully managing alasting partnership.

12