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.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.