NEW DELHI: “China is the long-term strategic challenge; 10 years ago that was not the case. The growth of China has been so rapid that we cannot face them alone. Not that we seek to contain China but we want to work with other countries that share our values.”
This is not just an Indian view. It’s a view shared by other countries that neighbour China, including Japan and a latter source that shared this insight with StratNews Global, underscored two points:
“China is not looking for a fight at this stage”, he argued while acknowledging aggressive actions by China’s coast guard in the waters around the Senkaku Islands. “China claims it although we do not see it as disputed. Nobody lives on the Senkakus, there are no people there and no port. Our coast guard is there to prevent Chinese vessels from entering those waters that are rich in fish.”
The standoffs are frequent with Chinese fishing vessels entering Japanese waters supported by their country’s coast guard. But Tokyo is confident that it does not stand alone in the event of a larger conflict. “Japan is in a unique position. It is in an alliance with the U.S. that is special and we are 100 per cent sure they will not abandon us.”
Tokyo’s confidence in the U.S. may have got a boost after Nancy Pelosi’s recent visit to Taiwan, disregarding Beijing’s threats to down the aircraft carrying her. Xi Jinping had even warned President Biden against allowing her visit to go ahead, reportedly advising him ‘not to play with fire’.
But there is a view in Tokyo that China may have been forced into rattling sabre. “Pelosi’s travel plans were leaked, so she could not withdraw from the Taiwan visit and China, for its part, could not afford to show any weakness, could not lose face. The buck stops with Xi Jinping and the economic situation is forcing him on the defensive.”
The view is that Japan is not going to collapse as a result of China’s maritime provocations. There is great interdependence since many Japanese companies have invested in China. As a Japanese official put it: “We want stable ties but we will not be quiet if China’s actions violate the rules-based order.”
There is visible disquiet over the expansion of China’s nuclear arsenal. The latest Pentagon report published last November, assessed that China’s nuclear stockpile could expand to 700 nuclear warheads (from the current 350) by 2025, and at least 1000 by 2030. China is also believed to field the world’s largest arsenal of short and medium range missiles since it was never a party to the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty of 1987.
In Japan, conservatives led by the late prime minister Shinzo Abe wanted a proper discussion on “nuclear sharing”, a NATO concept where the nuclear trigger is shared with the country hosting U.S. nuclear missiles. This is the practice in Germany. Japan’s current Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is pushing this idea with the aim of “ensuring control over the Chinese nuclear arsenal”. He is advocating talks not only between the U.S. and Russia over their nuclear arsenals but that these talks should include China.
China also figures in the India Japan bilateral discussion for obvious reasons, a source pointed out. “Rules are common for all. If such provocations are allowed in the South China Sea, it will be expanded elsewhere. Their (China’s) strategy is similar to what India is seeing on its border with Chinese villages coming up. The status quo should not be disturbed by unilateral coercive actions.”
That said, Japan and India are not on the same page when it comes to Arunachal Pradesh.
“Arunachal Pradesh is a different question. We see it as a part of India but as contested territory, and any move there would require different considerations,” sources argued. “We have contested areas in Japan too that require serious consideration. It is like PoK. What would India feel if Japan carried out humanitarian aid there?”
In all the conversation about Japan’s role in the north east therefore, Arunachal Pradesh does not figure.
“North eastern India is an area of focus. We are looking at connectivity within the region with a long-term perspective,” said the source. “Myanmar is an issue and there’s little we can do about it. Linking the north east with Bangladesh is among the projects we are interested in. The JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) is researching the returns from connectivity projects so we can bring solutions.”
Bilateral trade is a huge challenge and there is a lot of room for improvement, is the sense in Tokyo. But in today’s global interconnected world, trade per se is not so important, rather it is an outcome of the broader strategic relationship and the focus is on Japanese investment in India. Over the next five years, including both public and private investment, the target is $40 bn.
Japan gives in the form of grants, yen loans and technical help (the last is basically training of personnel). Since the Indian economy has grown, there’s not much grant aid, so it is mostly yen loans. India is the biggest recipient of such loans.
The India Japan civil nuclear agreement has strong political thrust but only after overcoming fundamental differences following India’s nuclear tests. Currently, nothing is happening on that front. There’s not much support in Japan for civil nuclear energy after the Fukushima accident, but it is also clear that there cannot be any clean nuclear energy in the short term. Producing electricity with oil, gas or coal clashes with climate agenda. Since Fukushima, the nuclear industry in Japan has been struggling and exports have become difficult.
As for military cooperation, sources said: “We are still restrictive about our armed forces, their expansion and strength. There is a strong pacifist sentiment among the people. Export of arms is not bad but our defence industry is not prepared.”
A word on the Quad. “We have had some good discussions in the Quad framework so far on critical minerals but there are difficulties for all of us,” sources said. “It’s a matter for private firms to decide, where to go, how and what to do. We are not capable of doing that nor can we order them to go. There are issues like profits, sustainability that need to be considered.”
Summing up, The India Japan landscape is one of continuation. Kishida shares Abe’s vision of India and he was foreign minister for four years under him. Also, the ruling LDP comprises factions that have supported Abe, so the foreign policy will continue. It’s also clear the strategic environment does not allow for any policy change in Tokyo’s approach to India.
[/vc_column][/vc_row][/tdc_zone]
