Report of
The Japan-India Dialogueon“East Asian Regional Architectures
and Japan-India Relations ”

September 22 2010
Tokyo, Japan

Co-sponsored by
The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ)
The India-Japan Forum of Parliamentarians (IJFP) of
The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI)In Cooperation withThe Japan Forum on International Relations (JFIR)The Japan-India Association (JIA)

Table of Contents

1. Preface…………………………………………………………………...1

2. Programs of The Japan‐India Dialogue(1) Program……………………………………………………………......3(2) Participants List………………………………………………………….4(3) Biographies of the Panelists…………………………………………….5

3. Outline of Discussions…………………………………………………8

4. Appendix(1) Distribution MaterialsA) “East Asian Regional Architecture and Japan‐India Relations” (Keynote Speech for Session 1)
by WATANABE Yoshihiro………………………………………………15
B) “Debates on East Asian Regionalism” (Lead Discussion for Session 1)
by TERADA Takashi……………………….. ………………………….19(2) Introductions to Sponsoring OrganizationsA) The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ) …………………………………….……20
B) The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI)…………21

1. Preface
The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ) aims to promote a policy‐oriented exchange of views
between business, opinion and political leaders of Japan and their counterparts in the rest of the world,
and to contribute to the deepening of mutual understanding and the formation of the consensus. For
this purpose, GFJ has been actively engaged for the past 28 years in organizing policy‐oriented bilateral
and/or multilateral “Dialogues” every year between Japan and the international community.
It is for this reason that GFJ held the Japan‐India Dialogue “East Asian Regional Architectures
and Japan‐India Relations” in Tokyo on 22 September 2010. This report intends to summarize theachievements of these discussions between Japanese and Indian counterparts. Though the printed
version of the report will be made available to only a restricted number of people such as members andfriends of GFJ and their counterparts from India, the full text of the report will be available at
http://www.gfj.jp/.
The Japan‐India Dialogue “East Asian Regional Architectures and Japan‐India Relations” wasco‐sponsored by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), in cooperation
with the Japan Forum of International Relations (JFIR) and the Japan‐India Association (JIA).
It was attended by 25 participants such as Mr. Rajiv Pratap RUDY, Chairman of IJFP andMember of Parliament, Mr. Thomas SANGMA, Member of Parliament, Mr. HIRABAYASHI Hiroshi,
President of the Japan‐India Association and Mr. WATANABE Yoshihiro, Chairman of the Standing
Committee of the Japan‐India Business Co‐operation Committee. Participants exchanged opinions on
matters of significant importance related to the future of Japan‐India relations.

November 1, 2010
ITO Kenichi
President
The Global Forum of Japan1

2. Programs of The Japan‐India Dialogue(1) Programas of 22 September, 2010

The JAPAN‐INDIA DIALOGUEʺEast Asian Regional Architectures and Japan‐India Relationsʺ
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
ʺConference Room,ʺ The Japan Forum on International Relations, Tokyo, Japan
Co-Sponsored by
The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ)
The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI)In Cooperation withThe Japan Forum on International Relations (JFIR)The Japan‐India Association (JIA)

Opening Remarks

15:00‐15:05

ITO Kenichi, President of GFJ/JFIR

Session Ⅰ

15:05‐16:05

Japan‐India Relations in Regional Perspective

Chairperson

HIRABAYASHI Hiroshi, President of JIA, Vice President of JFIR, Japan

Keynote Speech (10min.)WATANABE Yoshihiro, Chairman, The Standing Committee of The Japan‐India Business
Co‐operation Committee (JIBCC), Japan

Lead Discussant (5min.)

Rajiv Pratap RUDY, Member of Parliament (Bharatiya Janata Party), Chairman of IJFP, India

Lead Discussant (5min.)TERADA Takashi, Professor, Waseda University, JapanFree Discussions (35min.)All ParticipantsSession Ⅱ

16：05‐17：00

Aspects and Prospects of Japan‐India Relations in the 21st Century

Chairperson

HIRABAYASHI Hiroshi, President of JIA, Vice President of JFIR, Japan

Keynote Speech (10min.)Manish TEWARI, Member of Parliament (Indian National Congress), India

Lead Discussant (5min.)KONDO Masanori, Senior Associate Professor, International Christian University, Japan

Lead Discussant (5min.)Thomas SANGMA, Member of Parliament (Nationalist Congress Party), India

Free Discussions (35min.)All Participants3(2) Participants List
【Indian Panelists】
Rajiv Pratap RUDY

Member of Parliament, Chairman of The India‐Japan Forum of Parliamentarians (IJFP)Thomas SANGMA

Member of Parliament, Member of IJFPManish TEWARI

Member of Parliament, Member of IJFP

Mukut MITHI

Member of Parliament, Member of IJFP

Prem Das RAI

Member of Parliament, Member of IJFPShivakumar UDASHIMember of Parliament, Member of IJFP

Ramesh CHANDRAN

Executive Director of IJFP, Advisor of The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry(In seniority order)【Japanese Panelists】
ITO Kenichi

President of GFJ / JFIRHIRABAYASHI Hiroshi

President, The Japan‐India Association, Vice President of JFIRWATANABE Yoshihiro

Chairman, The Standing Committee of The Japan‐India Business Co‐operation Committee

TERADA Takashi

Professor, Waseda University

KONDO Masanori

Senior Associate Professor, International Christian University(In order of appearance)【Other Japanese Participants】
CHINO Keiko

Columnist, The Sankei Shimbun

HIRONAKA Wakako

Vice Chair, Global Environmental Action

IWASAKI Kentaro

Worldwide Support for Development

KINOSHITA Hiroo

Advisor, National Small Business Information Promotion Center

KOIKE Yuriko

Member of the House of Representatives

KUNIEDA Yasuo

Manager, Global Planning Division, The Bank of Tokyo‐Mitsubishi UFJ,Ltd.

MADARAME Tetsuji

General Manager, Government and Industrial Affairs Group, Nippon Yusen

MANO Teruhikoformer Advisor to the President, The Bank of Tokyo‐Mitsubishi, Ltd.

TAJIMA Takashi

former Ambassador to Canada

TAKUBO Tadae

Professor Emeritus, Kyorin University

WATANABE Mayu

Opinion Leader Governor of GFJYAMAZAWA Ippei

Professor Emeritus, Hitotsubashi University

YANO Takuya

Executive Secretary of GFJ, Senior Research Fellow of JFIR
(In alphabetical order)4

(3) Biographies
A)Indian Panelists and Participants
Rajiv Pratap RUDY

Member of Parliament, Chairman of The India‐Japan Forum of
Parliamentarians (IJFP)Members of Parliament (The Upper House) from Bharatiya Janata Party. Received M.A. from St.
Michaels High School, Patna (Bihar), Government College and Panjab University, Chandigarh. Served
various positions including Union Minister of State of Commerce and Industry, Union Minister of Stateof Civil Aviation. Concurrently serving as National Spokesperson, Bharatiya Janata Party, Member ofCommittee on Science and Technology Environment and Forests, Member of Joint Parliamentary
Committee on Wakf.
Thomas SANGMA
Member of Parliament, Member of IJFPMembers of Parliament (The Upper House) from Nationalist Congress Party. Received Under Graduate
Diploma in Computer Applications from Tura Government College (N.E.H.U.), Tura and C.A.I.
(Kolkata). Served various positions including Chairman of Tura Municipal Board, Member of Railways
Consultative Committee. Concurrently serving as Member of Committee on the Welfare of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes, Member of Committee on Transport, Tourism and Culture, Member ofConsultative Committee for the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Manish TEWARI
Member of Parliament, Member of IJFPMembers of Parliament (The Lower House) from Indian National Congress. Received B.A. in
Economics from Punjab University, Chandigarh and University of Delhi. Served various positions
including Secretary of All India Congress Committee, National President of Indian Youth Congress.
Concurrently serving as National Spokesperson of All India Congress Committee.
Mukut MITHI
Member of Parliament, Member of IJFPMembers of Parliament (The Upper House) from Indian National Congress. Received B.Sc. from J.N.
College, Pasighat. Served various positions including Cabinet Minister of Government of Arunachal
Pradesh, Chief Minister of Arunachal Pradesh, Lieutenant Governor of Puducherry. Concurrently
serving as Member of Central Advisory Committee for the National Cadet Corps, Member ofGoverning Council of North‐Eastern Indira Gandhi Regional Institute of Health and Medical Sciences.
Prem Das RAI
Member of Parliament, Member of IJFPMembers of Parliament (The Lower House) from Sikkim Democratic Front Party. Received B.Tech.,
P.G.D.M., at IIT Kanpur and IIM Ahmedabad and former Eisenhower Fellow. Served various positions
including Member of Committee on Information Technology, Member of Committee on Ethics,
Member of Committee on Human Resource Development.
Shivkumar UDASHIMember of Parliament, Member of IJFPMembers of Parliament (The Lower House) from Bharatiya Janata Party. Received B.E. from Bangalore
Institute of Engineering. Served as Member of Committee on Urban Development, and Member ofCommittee on External Affairs.
Ramesh CHANDRAN

Executive Director of IJFP,Advisor of The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry
Served various positions including Editor‐in‐Chief for Foreign Affairs in The Times of India
Newspaper and Chief Correspondent in U.S. for the Newspaper. Concurrently serving as Executive
Director of all Parliamentarian Forums of India under The Federation of Indian Chambers ofCommerce and Industry.
(In seniority order)
5B)Japanese Panelists
ITO Kenichi

President, The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ) /The Japan Forum on International Relations (JFIR)
Graduated from Hitotsubashi University. Entered Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1960. Studied at
Harvard University (1961‐1963). Served as various positions including Director of First Southeast Asian
Division until 1977. Served as Professor at Aoyama Gakuin University (1984‐2006). Concurrently serves
as President of The Council on East Asian Community, and Professor Emeritus of Aoyama Gakuin
University.
HIRABAYASHI Hiroshi

President, The Japan‐India Association(JIA) /Vice President,JFIR
Graduated from the University of Tokyo. Entered Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1963. Served as
Director‐General of Economic Cooperation Bureau, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs(1993~95), Chief
Cabinet Councilor on External Affairs of the Prime Minister’s Cabinet(1995~98), Ambassador to India(1998~2002) and Ambassador to France(2002~06). Currently serving as Visiting Professor of Graduate
School of Waseda University, External Director of the Board of Directors in Toshiba Corporation,
MITSUI & Co., Daiichi‐Sankyo Corporation and NHK Promotion Inc..
WATANABE Yoshihiro

Chairman, The Standing Committee of Japan‐India Business
Co‐Operation Committee of Japan Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Graduated from The University of Tokyo. Entered The Bank of Tokyo, Ltd. in 1970. Served as Chief
Executive for Global Corporate Banking of The Bank of Tokyo‐Mitsubishi, Ltd., Senior Managing
Director of Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group. Currently serving as Advisor of The Bank ofTokyo‐Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., Member of APEC Business Advisory Council of Japan, and Managing
Director of The Institute for International Monetary Affairs.

TERADA Takashi
Professor, Waseda University
Received Ph.D. from Australian National University in 1998. Served various positions including
Assistant Professor of Faculty of Arts and Sciences at National University of Singapore and Associate
Professor of Waseda University.
KONDO Masanori
Senior Associate Professor, International Christian University
Received BA from Tokyo University and Ph.D. from Stanford University. Served as Member ofJapan‐India Eminent Personsʹ Committee for the 21st Century in 2001 as well as the India‐Japan Joint
Study Group in 2006/7. Currently serving as Representative to Japan to the board of Global
Development Network, Visiting Senior Researcher at the Institute for Indian Economic Studies, andDirector of the Japan‐India Association.

(In order of appearance)63. Outline of Discussions

Outline of Discussions
Opening Remarks
ITO Kenichi, President of GFJ/JFIR, welcomed all the participants,
especially Mr. Rajiv Pratap Rudy, Chairman of the India‐Japan Forum of
Parliamentarians (IJFP) and other six members of IJFP to this 2nd Dialogue of
GFJ with India. He explained why it was the 2nd Dialogue of GFJ with India,
saying that it was because GFJ had a 1st Dialogue with India on October 4, 1996,
and he continued that it was a pity that we could not have such occasion until
today for the past 14 years.
Then he continued to say that the 1st Dialogue was co‐sponsored by the
GFJ and the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses of India, headed by Dr.
Jasjit Singh, then Director of the Institute, in which it was predicted that the 21st
century would become the century of Asia, and the role of Japan and India
would be by far greater than it was in the 20th century.”
President ITO then referred to one contribution JFIR had made to thedevelopment of the Japan‐India relationship. He introduced the 29th Policy
Recommendations of JFIR announced in September 2007 on the topic of ‘India’s
Leap Forward and Japan,’ which was presented to Japan’s Prime Minister andthen announced publicly. He explained that many of the 10 specificrecommendations presented in the Policy Recommendations were accepted ascommon sense now in Japan. He concluded his remarks by saying that the factthat we could talk among ourselves today about ‘East Asian Regional
Architectures and Japan‐India Relations’ told how far we had already come inbuilding up our relationship.

Session I on “Japan‐India Relations in Regional Perspective”
In Session I, chaired by HIRABAYASHI Hiroshi, President of JIA andVice President of JFIR, the keynote speech was presented by a Japaneseparticipant in which he said “India and China have emerged as leading powers
in the coming decades. Japan, India and China are major rivals for influencing

8Asia and peace‐keeping. It is important to fully utilize international institutions
such as ASEAN+3 and APEC. China is increasing the dependent population asa result of aging society, and even India maintains a high share of working
populations. Water management is a major obstacle to resurgence. This is agreat potential area of our cooperation because Japan has experience andtechnology in the field. India’s GINI index is restively low, which means
relatively equal while China’s GINI index is high, which means they havestrong difference between the rich and poor. As is commonly said in Japan, themost stable way to stand is by three legs, not by two legs, we should therefore
welcome India’s resurgence. Japan and India are now going to consummate
EPA as an extension of India’s successful Look East Policy. About the coming
APEC Summit on November, India’s accession into APEC is an aspiration forbusinessmen in order to promote free and open movements of businesspersonand service, capitals and technological transfer and so on. It’s crucially
important for APEC to include India as a member. India has advantage of labor
services and IT industries while Japan has advanced industrial technologies andfunds to invest. Japanese private sectors will support India’s private sector forbringing India on the next stage of industrialization.”
Then, another Japanese participant made comments as Lead Discussantin which he said “There are two issues about the East Asian Regional
Architectures. The first is whether the two rival institutions; ASEAN+3 (APT) or
ASEAN+6 (EAS) would be the central organization for East Asian community
or something like that. EAS has no financial cooperation while APT has
developed the Chiang Mai Initiative Multi‐lateralization or a de facto AsianMonetary Fund. So, EAS may be slighted as far as the aftermath of the global
financial crisis lingers. The second is which one will lead the framework of ATP;ASEAN or the three countries of China, Japan and South Korea (CJK). APT
cooperation are initiated and financed by one of CJK countries with little or no
input from the others, which means that APT cooperation are a series of‘bilateral’ ASEAN Plus One project rather than regional framework. In addition,
there are two independent variables for the development in the region; whether
ASEAN can achieve its economic community‐building in 2015, while the UScommitment to it will be secured to reduce the marginalization syndrome; andwhether China’s maritime and territorial ambitions will be causing disruption,or the new leader chosen in 2012 launches a new thinking towards Japan.”
Following this, the Indian participants presented their views on the9theme of the session such as (1) “India enjoys democracy and takes care ofevery religion and its practices. However we are concerned with several issues
including huge defense budget accounting for more than one fifth of the whole
national budget, which is made necessary by the presence of such neighboring
countries as China, Nepal, Bangladesh and Pakistan,” (2) “India also has its
own challenges such as poverty, development and high inflation and social
issues.”In the Free Discussions, both Japanese and Indian participants actively
exchanged their views as follows:
Participant from Japan: Japan is concerned about the recent behavior of China in
the East China Sea, how is the situation about border disputes between India
and China?
Participant from India: Those countries having land disputes with China have tocarefully watch how China prepares itself for transition of power possibly
towards 2012. There is now internal leadership struggle in China. While you
hear one thing about China from someone in the Chinese government, you hearsomething totally different from another in the Chinese Communist Party or its
Peopleʹs Liberation Army.
Participant from India: India has been trying to improve our relations with China
after China’s aggression to India in 1962. From India’s point of view, Tibet isindependent. Tibet issue is not making progress despite our diplomatic efforts
to improve the relations with China. Further development of the East AsianRegional Architectures wouldn’t be completed, if China, Japan and India will
not deepen their mutual understanding.
Participant from India: As far as the Look East Policy in India is concerned, it isvery strategically important. But we face some difficulties in full
implementation of the policy. One of them is that we have problems with
Myanmar. And with Bangladesh, we have problems like immigrant issue. We
have to see sea ports around India more strategically like those of Sri Lanka and
Bangladesh, and Nepal. I feel the Look East Policy has been going on
successfully in Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.

10Participant from Japan: Japan and India have agreed on enhancing the navy
cooperation, including joint exercises and providing mutual assistance. I think
this is one of the fields we can cooperate. China’s navy activities are very active
as if they were irritating and checking Japan’s reaction. Although Japan has very
limited ability for the navy cooperation because of our self‐binding constitution,
we have to seek ways to cooperate with your navy.

Session II on “Aspects and Prospects of Japan‐India Relations in the 21stCentury”
In Session II, chaired by HIRABAYASHI Hiroshi, President of JIA, Vice
President of JFIR, several participants from India presented their views on thetheme of the Session such as (1) “From the India’s perspective towards theregion for the next two decades, there are three or four constants to be noted.
The first is the fact that the United States will continue to remain as the single
biggest outside balancer not only for Asia but for the entire world. The second
is the fact that China is going to be the single biggest strategic enigma. The thirdis multilateral structures in East Asia including those robust ones such as APT,
EAS, APEC and others. Although there are regional organizations in South Asia,
we have a long way to go to establish stable structures,” (2) “India sees the next
twenty years as time for consolidation. For the last two decades, we’ve had
bloodshed and challenges in terms of education and poverty. We would like toutilize the next two decades in order to consolidate ourselves. But it doesn’tmean that India is going to be isolationist,” (3) “Japan has been a kind ofco‐traveler along with Brazil and some other countries in the democratization of
UN Security Council. We feel that Security Council should reflect the current
global reality,” (4) “There is a need of greater regional engagement, that’s why
over the past decades the Look East Policy has been robust in India,” (5) “As far
as the India‐Japan relationship is concerned, we do think it has to bestrengthened bilaterally. But we have to be very careful that our relations
should not be taken as if it were a military alliance.”
Following this, a Japanese participant made comments as Lead
Discussant, in which he said “India is becoming more important for Japan in
the time when Japan and China have some tensions, Japan‐India EPA has been
finalized, and the discussion on bilateral nuclear agreement was finally started.

11

From the point of view of Japan‐India bilateral relations, there would be issuesof Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and employment, infrastructures, ODA,
nuclear issues. There is a kind of discrepancy in Japanese and Indian statistics
with regard to the FDI. As to EPA negotiation, India compromised more thanJapan did because India felt it was waste of time to keep pushing their demands.
The EPA will not make a big change in the near future, but do in the long term,
because, for example, the Japanese automobiles will be more competitive
thanks to the EPA or FTA so that Indian people can enjoy them more cheaper.
Currently there are few investment projects for India’s infrastructures fromJapan. Japan has to make clear some big plans in a concrete way. The
Delhi‐Mumbai Freight Corridor Projects, one of the biggest ODA projects in
India, has some minor problems we must solve in the coming future. The
Japan‐India nuclear negotiations have been started finally, reportedly becauseof US and French pressures. In these contexts, the next few years would be a
testimony about if Japan makes big investments for India, although Japanesecompanies are still hesitant to do so.”
Following this, several opinions were presented from the Indian side,
such as (1) “Some parts of India are exposed to Chinese economic threats.
Chinese economy affects Indian economy by replacing Chinese cheap productswith Indian products. Also, China’s economic presence is affecting Indian
exports. This situation is quite alarming,” (2) “Japan and India can play a majorrole in the economic integration of the region,”(3) “India‐Japan relations are
deep in the economic field but the bilateral relations in political and security
fields are under development, including North Korea’s nuclear issue.”In the Free Discussions, all the participants joined the exchange of viewsand expressed their opinions and proposals on the Japan‐India relations asfollows:
Participant from Japan: Whether it is ASEAN Plus Three or ASEAN Plus Six, bothlack a common view of democracy. Does India have any idea to form a kind of
new cooperation system comprising, for example, Australia and New Zealand?
And I wonder which country will absorb the excessive products of Asia.
Participant from Japan: I know many young and skilful workers from India. I
expect the new EPA agreement provide those young skilful workers from India
with working opportunities in Japan.

12Participant from India: We do not want to see Asia only in sub‐regional context.
Rather, we would like to see Asia in a larger context where each sub‐region
talks and cooperates. East Asian Community or APEC or whatever else, India iseager to cooperate with one or two or three of these frameworks because we area member of the East Asia Summit and others. We will cooperate with whatevera regional arrangement in Eat Asia.
Participant from India: As for the Delhi‐Mumbai Industrial Corridor Project,which is a state‐sponsored industrial development project of the Government ofIndia, Japan has a great role to play in facilitating and bringing it all together.
Participant from Japan: Japan and India are geographically separated, and also
very different in climate, characteristics, culture and region. That is why we do
not have big problems, we can therefore develop better relations.
Chairman HIRABAYASHI concluded the Dialogue.

13

4. Appendix

(1) Distribution MaterialsA) “East Asian Regional Architecture and Japan-India Relations”(Keynote Speech for Session 1) by WATANABE Yoshihiro

East Asian Regional Architecture
and Japan-India Relations
Sept. 22nd, 2010
Yoshihiro Watanabe
Institute for International Monetary Affairs

1• Resurgence of India and China• East Asian Regional Frame Work
Economy and Commerce• Rivalry among Three Kingdoms
Natural Resources etc

215Resurgence of India and China
in Population unit 000s Maddison US Cencus
1500

1820

2030

China

103,000

381,000

1,458,000

India

110,000

209,000

1,421,000

Japan

15,40031,000116,000

USA

n. a.

9,638

364,000

57,332133,000

400,000

W Europe

3

Resurgence of India and China
in GDP
1500-1820: 1990 Int’l $2030: 1990 PPP
unit Million $( Angus Maddison)

China

1500
61,8001820
2030
228,600 22,983,000

India

60,500111,417

10,074,000

Japan

7,700

20,7393,488,000

12,548

16,662,000

159,851

12,556,000

USA
W Europe

44,183

4

16

Resurgence of India and China
Per Capita GDP Int’l $ 1990 & ppp Maddison
1500

1820

2030

China

600

600

15,763

India

550

669

7,089

Japan

500

533

30,0721301

45,774997

31,389USA
W Europe

771

5

Rivalry among Three Kingdoms
Natural Resources etc• Water Resources 1996 by Wu 2005
Total 100 m3

per head m3

China28,100

2,220

India

20,850

1,878

Japan

5,370

3,389

USA

24,780

8,801
6

17

Rivalry among Three Kingdoms
Urbanization UN and Gvts.
China ‘00
2007
2030
India 2001
2030

Urban Million(%)
459 (36)593 (45 )(60)
286 (28)(41)

Japan ‘ 00
2030

(64)
(73)

Rural
808 (64)727(55)(40)743 (72)
(59)
(36)
(27)
7

Specific features• China’s rise based on Reform & Open policy
Special Economic Zones
Land policy Acquisition, Development andMonetization
Farmers and Peasants
Diplomacy Rise in peace to China can say no
Imbalance High Gini Index
818B) “Debates on East Asian Regionalism”(Keynote Speech for Session 1) by TERADA Takashi
Debate No.1: ASEAN+3 (APT) vs. ASEAN+6 (EAS)
Why was EAS established despite the APT’s existence?
Growing China’s influence and growing US and Japan’s concern: China’s role as arule‐setter cannot be disturbed by Japan(human tights or IPR not chosen as agendas).

The 2006 EAS Chairman’s statement; APT: ‘the main vehicle towards achieving an East
Asian community’, and EAS: playing a ‘complementary role’.
APT, well institutionalized: 57 bodies (1 Summit, 14 ministerial, 19 Senior Officials, 2
Directors‐General, 18 technical level meetings and 2 other tracks meetings).
More significantly, EAS has no financial cooperation while APT has developed the
Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralisation or a de facto Asian Monetary Fund. So, EAS
may be slighted as far as the aftermath of the global financial crisis lingers.

Debates No.2: ASEAN‐led or plus 3 (CJK) led?
a)

Why was “plus” named? (the origins in 97); CJK was not entitled to holdSummits and to make conditions for the EAS participation.

b)

Difficult relations among CJK until late 2000s but Trilateral Summit was
officially institutionalised including various SOM and ministerial meetings, and theSecretariat will be built in Seoul in 2011.

c)

APT cooperation are initiated and financed by one of the +3 nations with little
or no input from the others … a series of ‘bilateral’ ASEAN Plus One projects …
rather than East Asian framework.

“Given combined political, economic and military power of [CJK], it is a matter of timethat ASEAN+3 is changed into 3+ASEAN” (JoongAng Daily 15 Dec 09).
Question: Is this power‐based assertion valid? If so, would CJK be associated strongly
enough to lead?

Independent variables
1. Whether ASEAN can achieve its economic community‐building in 2015, while the
US commitment to it will be secured to reduce the marginalisation syndrome.
2. Whether China’s maritime and territorial ambitions will be causing disruption, or the
new leader chosen in 2012 launches a new thinking towards Japan.

19

(2). Introductions to OrganizationsA) The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ)

as of September 22, 2010

【Objectives】 As we embrace the 21st century, international relations are becoming increasingly interdependent, and globalization and regionalism are becoming
the big waves. In this global tendency, communicating with the world, especially neighboring countries in the Asia-Pacific region at both governmental andnon-governmental level, is one of the indispensable conditions for Japan to survive. On the basis of such understanding, The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ) aims topromote the exchange of views on commonly shared interests and issues in the field ranging from politics and security to economy, trade, finance, society andculture, and to help business leaders, Diet members and opinion leaders both in Japan and in their counterpart countries to discuss the formulation of new orders inglobal and regional arenas.
【History】 The 1982 Versailles Summit was widely seen as having exposed rifts within the Western alliance. Accordingly, there were expressed concerns that thesummit meetings were becoming more and more stylized rituals and that Western solidarity was at risk. Within this context, it was realized that to revitalize thesummit meetings there must be free and unfettered exchanges of private-sector views to be transmitted directly to the heads of the participating states. Accordingly,
Japanese former Foreign Minister OKITA Saburo, U.S. Trade Representative William BROCK, E.C. Commission Vice President Etienne DAVIGNON, andCanadian Trade Minister Edward LUMLEY, as representatives of the private-sector in their respective countries, took the initiative in founding The Quadrangular
Forum in Washington in September 1982. Since then, the end of the Cold War and the altered nature of the economic summits themselves had made it necessary for
The Quadrangular Forum to metamorphose into The Global Forum established by the American and Japanese components of The Quadrangular Forum at theWorld Convention in Washington in October 1991. In line with its objectives as stated above, The Global Forum was intended as a facilitator of global consensus on
the many post-Cold War issues facing the international community and reached out to open its discussions not only to participants from the quadrangular countries
but also to participants from other parts of the world. Over the years, the gravity of The Global Forum's activities gradually shifted from its American component(housed in The Center for Strategic and International Studies) to its Japanese component (housed in The Japan Forum on International Relations), and, after theAmerican component ceased to be operative, the Board of Trustees of the Japanese component resolved, on February 7, 1996, that it would thereafter act as anindependent body for organizing bilateral dialogues with Japan as a hub for all countries in the world, and amended its by-laws accordingly. At the same time, The
Global Forum's Japanese component was reorganized into The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ) in line with the principle that the organization be self-governing,self-financing, and independent of any other organization.
【Organization】 The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ) is a private, non-profit, non-partisan, and independent membership organization in Japan to engage in andpromote international exchanges on policy-oriented matters of bilateral, regional and global implications. While the secretariat is housed in The Japan Forum on
International Relations, GFJ itself is independent of any other organizations, including The Japan Forum on International Relations. Originally established as theJapanese component of The Quadrangular Forum at the initiative of HATTORI Ichiro, OKITA Saburo, TAKEYAMA Yasuo, TOYODA Shoichiro in 1982, GFJ iscurrently headed by OKAWARA Yoshio as Chairman and ITO Kenichi as President. The membership is composed of 11 Business Leader Members including thetwo Governors, MOGI Yuzaburo and TOYODA Shoichiro; 15 Diet Members including the two Governors, KOIKE Yuriko, and TANIGAKI Sadakazu; and 83
Opinion Leader Members including the four Governors, SHIMADA Haruo, OKAWARA Yoshio, ITO Kenichi and WATANABE Mayu. Friends and supporters of
The Global Forum of Japan are organized into the Supporters’ Club of the Global Forum of Japan. Financially the activities of GFJ have been supported by theannual membership fees paid by 11 leading Japanese corporations (Toyota Motor Corporation and Kikkoman Corporation contributing 5 shares each, and the other9 corporations contributing 1 or 2 shares each) as well as by the grants provided by The Japan Foundation, Japan-ASEAN Exchange Projects, Japan-ASEAN
Integration Fund, The Tokyo Club, The Japan-Korea Cultural Foundation, etc. YANO Takuya serves as Executive Secretary.
【Activities】Since the start of The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ) in 1982, GFJ has shifted its focus from the exchanges with the Quadrangular countries for the
purpose of contributing to the Western Summit, to those with neighboring countries in the Asia-Pacific region including US, China, Korea, ASEAN countries, India,
Australia, European countries, and Wider Black Sea area, for the purposes of deepening mutual understanding and contributing to the formation of international
order. GFJ has been active in collaboration with international exchange organizations in those countries in organizing policy-oriented intellectual exchanges called“Dialogue.” In order to secure a substantial number of Japanese participants in the “Dialogue,” GFJ in principle holds these “Dialogues” in Tokyo. A listing of topicsof “Dialogues” and its overseas co-sponsors in last six years is given below.
Year

Month

2005 April
June
November
2006 February
June
September2007 January

June
July
November
2008 January
June

Topic

Co-sponsor

The Prospect of East Asian Community and Japan-Korea Cooperation

Presidential Committee on Northeast Asian Cooperation Initiative (Korea)

The Prospect for East Asian Community and Regional Cooperation
Peace and Prosperity in the Wider Black Sea Area
and the Role of Japan
Review and Perspective of the Japan-Taiwan Relationship
An East Asian Community and the United States
Prospect for Japan-ASEAN Strategic Partnership after the First
East Asia Summit
The China-Japan Relationship and Energy and Environmental Issues

ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies (ASEAN)
University of Shizuoka, The Black Sea University Foundation (Romania), The International
Center for Black Sea Studies (Hellenic Republic)
Taiwan International Studies Association (Taiwan)
The Pacific Forum CSIS (US), The Council on East Asian Community
ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies (ASEAN)

The US-Japan Alliance in the 21st Century
The Challenges Facing Japan and ASEAN in the New Era
Japan and Black Sea Area in the Rapidly Changing WorldAn East Asian Community and the US
Cooperation in Environment and Energy

July

Japan -China Relations Entering A New Stage

September

Prospect of Japan-ASEAN Partnership after the Second Joint Statement
on East Asia Cooperation2009 April
June
September2010 January
February

US-Japan Relations Under the New Obama Administration
Prospect of Japan-China Relationship in the Changing World
Japan-ASEAN Cooperation amid the Financial and Economic Crisis
Prospects of Changing Black Sea Area and Role of Japan
Promoting Japan‐China Cooperation on Environmental Issues of the
21st Century:In Pursuit of Recycling Society
Promoting Japan-U.S. Cooperation in Non-Traditional Security: the Case of Counter Piracy
East Asian Regional Architectures and Japan-India Relations

May
September

China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (China), Energy Research Institute,
National Development and Reform Commission (China), The Japan Forum on International
Relations
National Committee on American Foreign Policy (US)ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies (ASEAN)
Organization of Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC), Embassy of Turkey, Universityof Shizuoka
The Pacific Forum CSIS (US)The East Asian Institute of National University of Singapore(Singapore)
Institute of Japanese Studies, China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations(China)ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies (ASEAN)
National Committee on American Foreign Policy (US)China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations (China)
ASEAN Institutes of Strategic and International Studies (ASEAN)
Organization of Black Sea Economic Cooperation
School of Environment, Beijing Normal University (China)
National Bureau of Asian Research (US)The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (India)

20B) The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI)
Established in 1927, The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce & Industry (FICCI, http://www.ficci.com/ ) is thelargest and oldest apex business organization in India. Its history is closely interwoven with India's struggle forindependence and its subsequent emergence as one of the most rapidly growing economies globally. FICCI plays a leadingrole in policy debates that are at the forefront of social, economic and political change. Through its 400 professionals,
FICCI is active in 39 sectors of the economy. FICCI's stand on policy issues is sought out by think tanks, governments andacademia. Its publications are widely read for their in-depth research and policy prescriptions. FICCI has joint businesscouncils with 79 countries around the world.
A non-government, not-for-profit organization, FICCI is the voice of India's business and industry. FICCI has direct
membership from the private as well as public sectors, including SMEs and MNCs, and an indirect membership of over
83,000 companies from regional chambers of commerce. FICCI works closely with the government on policy issues,enhancing efficiency, competitiveness and expanding business opportunities for industry through a range of specialized
services and global linkages. It also provides a platform for sector specific consensus building and networking. Partnerships
with countries across the world carry forward our initiatives in inclusive development, which encompass health, education,
livelihood, governance, skill development, etc.
FICCI serves as the first port of call for Indian industry and the international business community. Established in 1927,
FICCI is the largest and oldest apex business organization in India. Its history is closely interwoven with India's struggle forindependence and its subsequent emergence as one of the most rapidly growing economies globally. FICCI plays a leadingrole in policy debates that are at the forefront of social, economic and political change. Through its 400 professionals,
FICCI is active in 39 sectors of the economy. FICCI's stand on policy issues is sought out by think tanks, governments andacademia. Its publications are widely read for their in-depth research and policy prescriptions. FICCI has joint businesscouncils with 79 countries around the world.
A non-government, not-for-profit organization, FICCI is the voice of India's business and industry. FICCI has direct
membership from the private as well as public sectors, including SMEs and MNCs, and an indirect membership of over
83,000 companies from regional chambers of commerce.
FICCI works closely with the government on policy issues, enhancing efficiency, competitiveness and expanding
business opportunities for industry through a range of specialized services and global linkages. It also provides a platform
for sector specific consensus building and networking. Partnerships with countries across the world carry forward our
initiatives in inclusive development, which encompass health, education, livelihood, governance, skill development, etc.
FICCI serves as the first port of call for Indian industry and the international business community.
FICCI has established forums of parliamentarians with the U.S. (India-U.S Forum of Parliamentarians), U.K(Indo-British Forum of Parliamentarians), Germany (Indo-German Forum of Parliamentarians), the India-European Union
Forum of Parliamentarians (IEUFP), and with Japan (India-Japan Forum of Parliamentarians/ IJFP).
※About IJFPThe India-Japan Forum of Parliamentarians (IJFP, http://www.ijfp.net/index.htm ) was launched by the Honorable
Minister for External Affairs, Shri K. Natwar Singh, on April 29, 2005, on the occasion of the visit of the Prime Minister ofJapan, H.E. Junichiro Koizumi, to India. The inaugural ceremony witnessed the presence of Masaaki Yamazaki, Deputy
Chief Cabinet Secretary of the Government of Japan, Onkar S. Kanwar, President, FICCI and Ashwani Kumar, Chairman,
IJFP and H.E. Yasukuni Enoki, the Ambassador of Japan to India. The launch was also well attended by several Members of
Parliament, Ambassadors, and leaders from the business fraternity. The parliamentarians present on the occasion were A.R
Shaheen, Tarlochan Singh, Lalit Suri, Preneet Kaur, Raashid Alvi, Nirmala Deshpande, Sachin Pilot and Robert Kharshiing.
The ceremony was also attended by several Ambassadors, including those of Netherlands, Nepal, Qatar, New Zealand,
Australia, Bhutan, Saudi Arabia and others.
A rock solid relationship structured over half-a-century forms the foundation of Indo-Japanese cooperation today. Japanand India have much in common, and our democratic institutions in particular, have provided an invaluable foundation to
our bilateral relations over the years. The nineties witnessed a new level of economic engagement, which, thereafter was
focused on trade, investment and technology transfer in a collaborative framework premised on complementarities.
This relationship was promoted to a higher level by Prime Minister Mori's visit to India in August 2000, when both statesagreed to establish a "Global Partnership between India and Japan in the 21st century". The Japan-India Joint Declaration of
December 10, 2001 has set the ball rolling for things to shape up in Indo-Japanese relationship in the 21st century. To raise
the bilateral relationship to a "qualitatively new level" was the ultimate aim of the Joint Declaration. With the two countries
widely perceived to emerge as amongst the largest global economies by 2050, the logic of the deepening of this relationshipis self evident: Hence, the Formation of the India-Japan Forum of Parliamentarians (IJFP).
The IJFP comprises prominent parliamentarians from across the political spectrum with a strong conviction regarding thefuture of India-Japan relations.
The forum is the latest amongst other successful forums of parliamentarians with the U.S. (India-U.S Forum of
Parliamentarians), U.K (Indo-British Forum of Parliamentarians) , and Germany (Indo-German Forum of Parliamentarians)
all of which are actively supported by FICCI. Recently, FICCI also launched an India-European Union Forum of
Parliamentarians (IEUFP).
The IJFP will serve as a powerful group and provide a channel for constructive communication through Track II
diplomacy. The Forum of Parliamentarians will also provide a platform for structured dialogue and consistent interaction
between the Parliamentarians of the two countries. It will not only accentuate bilateral collaboration, but also initiate apartnership in dimensions that have scope for further cooperation or are relatively unexplored. More significantly, suchinter-parliamentarian linkages will tighten the bonds between the lawmakers of India and Japan to further the common
agenda of the two countries.
21

Copy Inhibit

GF-Ⅲ-E-B-0046

The Global Forum of Japan (GFJ)
17-12-1301, Akasaka 2-chome Minato-ku, Tokyo, 107-0052, Japan[Tel] +81-3-3584-2193 [Fax] +81-3-3505-4406[E-mail] gfj@gfj.jp [URL] http://www.gfj.jp/