Japan: Ties are getting stronger

India and Japan have traditionally held one another in estimation. Japan’s victory in the Russo-Japanese war of 1905 was hailed in this country as the military triumph of an Asian power against a European one, a circumstance that boosted the impetus to overthrow British colonial rule. But for all that, up till quite recently the relationship between the two countries remained one of one-way aid, Japan being the provider. Its prestige was high as a centre of technological innovation and as the world’s second largest economy after the United States, while India struggled with its “Hindu rate of growth”. In the Cold War years, with Tokyo firmly on the side of Washington and India theologically nonaligned, occasional diplomatic chiding of India by Japan — partly in fulfilment of its political obligations to the US, which had dropped the atom bomb on it, defeated it in World War II and virtually dictated its security policy — was par for the course in the absence of a substantive relationship or dialogue. This template looks to be changing with the end of the logic of the Cold War, the rise of India, and faint stirrings in Japan of its sovereign spirit in relation to the US. The visit of the Prime Minister, Mr Yukio Hatoyama, this week as part of the annual bilateral summit between the two countries helps to extend the idea in both countries — which surfaced during the tenures of Mr Hatoyama’s predecessors, Mr Junichiro Koizumi and Mr Shinzo Abe — that the ties between them should develop in a changed direction in which both recognise the vitality of the other in securing Asian stability in economic and security terms, while eliminating the prospect of conflict. India and Japan can have a fresh, strong and regenerative relationship that is beneficial for Asia and the world. As the Prime Minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, noted during the Japanese leader’s visit, economic ties will be the “bedrock” of the interaction between the two countries. The joint statement signed at the end of the summit appropriately stresses key investment areas. There is also a filling out of the security and defence dimension which had commenced with the conclusion of a security agreement in 2008 when Dr Singh had visited Japan. This essentially relates to counter-terrorism and the safety of sea lanes, and deeper collaboration between the military establishments and the foreign ministries of the two countries. The move underlines the mood among policymakers and planners to forge and develop wide-ranging ties with a long shelf life. These are matrices to build on for the expansion and the deepening of ties, across a spectrum that speaks of a long-term commonality of interests. It may be premature, however, to get into circles over international security affairs insofar as counter-proliferation in the shape of NPT and the CTBT are concerned. The two countries do not have shared coordinates in this field, and Mr Hatoyama was frank enough to acknowledge this in his interaction with the media in New Delhi. Dr Singh did indicate that a new situation might come about if the US and China ratified the CTBT. This was respinning the formulation of the Vajpayee era that India won’t stand in the way of the coming into force of the CTBT (which can’t happen until India ratifies it).