India-Japan Relations: Culture, Religion and Regional Integration

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/301294520
India-Japan Relations: Culture, Religion and Regional Integration
Book · March 2014
CITATIONS READS
0 5,351
1 author:
Gundre Jayachandra Reddy

Sri Venkateswara University
16 PUBLICATIONS 8 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Gundre Jayachandra Reddy on 15 April 2016.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

India-Japan Relations
Culture, Religion and Regional Integration
Edited by
G. Jayachandra Reddy
seaps
UGC Centre for Southeast Asian & Pacific Studies
Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati
India-Japan Relations:
Culture, Religion and Regional Integration
©Copy rights 2014 by the editor
Published by
UGC Centre for Southeast Asian & Pacific Studies
Sri Venkateswara University
Tirupati-517502
Andhra Pradesh, India
Email: director.cseaps@gmail.com
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a

retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means,
mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior
written permission of the publisher.
First Edition: 2014
ISBN: 978-81-926904-5-2
Layout & Printed at: D&Dee - Designing and Creative Production,

Nallakunta, Hyderabad - 500 044.
Ph No: +91 9440 726 907, 040 - 2764 3862.
ii
About the Book
India and Japan are the two Asian major powers; cooperation and
understanding between them whom is critical in moulding the
21st century as the 'Asian Century'. Maintaining regional
equilibrium and strengthening institutionalized multilateral
cooperation in Asia have lent credence to the claim that India and
Japan are natural allies, thanks to their historical and
civilizational links spanning several centuries, mutual goodwill,
amity and respect, absence of conflicting strategic interests and
commitment to promote peace and stability. While the Japanese
held India in high esteem as the land of the Buddha, Japan has
always remained a source of inspiration to the Indians, inasmuch
as Japan exposed the myth of European invincibility by defeating
Russia in 1905 and sought to eclipse European colonialism by
offering moral and material support to the freedom struggle
carried on from Japan by Rosh Behari Bose and Subash Chandra
Bose. As if it was a manifest destiny to emerge as an economic and
technical powerhouse, Japan demonstrated its capability when it
accomplished rapid recovery from the devastation during the
World War II.
India-Japan relations, which were confined to the cultural sphere
since the 7th century AD, also embraced political and economic
domains in the post World War II period. As a gesture of
friendship and goodwill, India, unlike others, did not subscribe to
exacting war reparations from Japan. Even though India and
Japan established diplomatic relations in 1952, their bilateral ties
were largely restricted to trade and economic assistance. As Japan
remained a trusted ally of the US and India moved closer to the
Soviet Union during the Cold War period, their interaction at the
political level was in disarray. Cultural exchanges, holding of
'Japan Month' in October 1987 and the 'Festival of India' in April
1988, opening of an office by the Japan Foundation in New Delhi
in 1994 and Japan's offer of help for preservation and restoration
of Buddhist monuments in India are a few testifying to good stead
of relations between India and Japan.
iii
This book, “India-Japan Relations: Culture, Religion and
Regional Integration” contains 18 articles, authored by eminent
scholars in their respective fileds of specialization. This
compendium focuses on India-Japan mutual religious respects
that led to strengthening cultural relations and their implications
for regional integration specifically in Asia. Sufficient space was
also given to the role of China in India-Japan relations. A host of
papers looks at the historical and cultural perspectives,
encompassing linkages rooted in Buddhism and the purposive
role of India, Japan and China in shaping the Asian
regionalization and thereby in the emerging Asia. The fact and
figures provided in different articles of this book are a valuable
source of information for the scholars who would be involved in
research on India-Japan relations with special reference to
culture, religion and regional integration. In brief, this volume is
useful for all those concerned with the India's Look East Policy
and how India looks at Japan with its cultural and religious
background to promote Asian regionalism.
iv
Editorial Note
It is certainly a classical example in the world that India and Japan
have been sustaining their bilateral relations bereft of any
disputes ideological, cultural, religious or regional issues. This is
unique phenomenon testifying to the fact that these two Asian
giants have committed to the pursuit of respecting the sentiments
of each other and withstood at the times of need. Cultural
exchanges between India and Japan are said to have begun in the
6th century A.D. Indian culture, filtered through Buddhism, has
influenced the Japanese culture and thought, and this has
remained as a source of Japanese sense of closeness with India.
Direct exchange in the modern era, however, began only in the
Meiji era (1868-1912), when Japan embarked on the process of
modernization. At the same time Japan's image in India was so
tremendous and positive and India viewed the emerging Japan in
20 Century as the beginning of Asians resurgence. Nethaji
Subhash Chandra Bose is equally popular and respected in Japan
apart from extending an excellent support to the Indian National
Army (INA). In 1949 Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru gifted an
Indian elephant to the Ueno Zoo, in Tokyo. This brought a ray of
light into the lives of the Japanese children suffering from the
aftermath of World War II. The elephant, named after Indira,
Nehru's daughter.
During World War II Nehru chose an anti-Japanese policy and a
hard line towards Japan. He was against Japan's control of Asia.
Finally, after WWII due to his Asianism and Asian concerns
Nehru changed his policy towards new and non-militaristic
Japan and laid a foundation of positive and cordial postwar
relations between India and Japan. A leading Indian freedom
fighter and revolutionary leader Rash Behari Bose who was one of
the key figures of the Ghadar Conspiracy and the Indian National
Army (INA), throughout his life and activities especially in Japan,
called for Asianism and liberation of Asia with Japan as the
v
leader. He escaped to Japan from the British intelligence in 1915
and soon became a Japanese citizen in 1923. He continuously
emphasized the need for complete cooperation and solidarity
between India, China and Japan.
During World War II Indian troops under the British Empire
fought Japanese troops and Indians under the Indian National
Army (INA) which was established outside India and fought the
British with Japanese support. Indian independence leaders, like
Mahatma Gandhi clearly mentioned their position regarding
Japan and India's participation in the War. In the text of war
resolution drafted by Mahatma Gandhi it was stated, that
“Japan's quarrel is not with India. Japan's war is against the
British Empire. India's participation in the War has not been with
the consent of the representatives of the Indian people. It was
purely a British act. If India were freed, her first step would
probably be to negotiate with Japan” (New York Times, August 5,
1942, available: http://www.ibiblio.org/
pha/policy/1942/420427a.html, accessed 5 August 2014).
Some Indian scholars, relate Nehru's Asianism or Asian concerns
to the Japan's mission of Asian unity, which Netaji Subhas
Chandra Bose had endorsed during the World War II. Indeed,
Subhas Chandra Bose was supportive of creation of a new Asia,
where all vestiges of colonialism and imperialism would be
eliminated. When Nehru became a Vice-President of the
Executive Council in the Interim Government of India in
September 1946, in deference to his priorities, he organized a
conference of Asian countries in India on 23 March to 2 April 1947.
Nehru, who was interested in Japan to participate in the Asian
Relations Conference, sought to place Japan as an equal with
other Asian nations. But, because of the change in Japan's status
from a dominant nation to a nation defeated in the war, which
was still under the occupation of the Allies and under the orders
vi
of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers General
MacArthur, Japanese delegation was not allowed joining the
conference. Nehru, who was keen on Japanese delegation to
participate, vehemently refused the call of the Conference to
make a special representation to General MacArthur.
Ever since the diplomatic relations between Japan and India were
established in 1952, the two countries have enjoyed cordial
relations based on trade and economic and technical cooperation.
The cultural agreement between Japan and India was signed in
1956 and took effect the following year. In 1951, India established
a scholarship system for overseas students. This system to this
day provides an opportunity for young Japanese scholars
involved in the Indian studies to further the study and research in
India. Cultural exchanges picked up in the 1980s with Japanese
local governments becoming involved in exchange activities with
their Indian counterparts and the traditional Indian performing
arts are shown in Japan. The Japan Month was held in October
and November 1987. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi attended the
April 1988 opening ceremony of the Festival of India. In January
1994, the Japan Foundation that has been actively engaged in
cultural exchanges since 1978 opened an office in New Delhi.
Japan has been extending grant-in-aid to research institutes,
universities, and cultural faculties and thus encouraging such
cultural activities.
The growing cooperation and warmth of these two major Asian
democracies, found expression in their decision to commemorate
the momentous occasion of 60th Anniversary of the
establishment of India-Japan diplomatic relations in a fitting
manner in 2012.
This book, India-Japan Relations: Culture, Religion and Regional
Integration” contains 18 articles which had been presented by
eminent scholars in their respective field of specialization at an
vii
International Conference organized by the UGC Centre for
Southeast Asian and Pacific Studies, Sri Venkateswara
University, Tirupati in December 2012.
The organization of the Conference and the publication of this
work would not have been possible but for the financial support
of the UGC, timely response from the participants, cooperation of
my colleagues and the former Directors of the Centre. I am
confident that this work, which is fairly replete with inspiring and
enlightening matter, will comment itself to wide range of readers,
including academicians, researchers, policy makers, students of
international relations and all those interested in India-Japan
relations.
Tirupati
11 June 2014 G. Jayachandra Reddy
viii
List of Contributors
M. Deenadayal : Research Scholar, Department of History,

Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati,
Andhra Pradesh, India
Eiko Ohira : Professor of English, Tsuru University, 3-
8-1, Tahra, Tsuru, Yamanashi, Japan
Gehna Banga : 2nd Year BBA-LLB (Hons.), Faculty of
Law, IFHE, Hyderabad, India
Lalima Varma : Professor, Centre for East Asian Studies,
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi,
India
K. Manjusree Naidu : Associate Professor, Gitam Institute of
Management, Gitam University,
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India
Michimi Muranushi : Professor, Institute for Oriental Cultures,
Gakushuin University, Tokyo, Japan
Moises Lopes de Souza : PhD Candidate of International Doctoral
Program in Asia-Pacific Studies (IDAS),
National Chengchi University , Taipei,
Taiwan. & Researcher of Group of
Studies in Asia of the Center of Research
in International Relations of University of
Sao Paulo (USP) Brazil.
Philippe CACHIA : College of Social Sciences, National
Cheng Chi University, Taipei, Taiwan,
ROC.
Rabindra Sen : Professor, Department of International
Relations, Jadavpur University, Kolkata,
India.
D. S. Rajan : Director, Chennai Centre for China
Studies, Tamil Nadu, Chennai, India
V. Ramesh Babu : Assistant Professor, Centre for Southeast
Asian & Pacific Studies, S. V. University,
Tirupati.
ix
Sabu Thomas : Assistant Professor and Head, Post
Graduate Department of Political Science,
Government College Madappally,
Vadakara, Calicut, Kerala.
J. Sankar Ganesh : Assistant Professor, Department of
Performing Arts, S.V. University,
Tirupati.
Sankar Mukherjee : Assistant Professor, Gitam Institute of
Management, Gitam University,
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Sourya Banerjee : 2nd Year BBA-LLB (Hons.), Faculty of
Law, IFHE, Hyderabad, India.
N. Sreeramulu : Academic Consultant, Dept. of Political
Science and Public Administration, S.V.
University, Tirupati-517 502, A.P., India.
Srinivasulu Bayineni : Associate Professor, Department of
Economics, Yogi Vemana University,
Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Sri Siddhartha Sankar Manna : Assistant Professor of Political Science,
Department of Political Science,
University of Gour Banga, Mokdumpur,
Malda, West Bengal, India
V. Sudarshan : Reader, Department of History and
Tourism Studies, V.S.M. College,
Ramachandrapuram, East Godavari Dist.
A.P., India.
Sudhir Singh : Department of Political Science, Dyal
Singh College, University of Delhi, New
Delhi, India.
Taiyaba Nazil : Assistant Professor, Department of
Education and Training, Maulana Azad
National Urdu University, Gachibowli,
Hyderabad, A.P., India.
Zeba Siddiqui : Student (Masters in Sociology, II year),
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi,
India.
x
Contents
About the Book iii
Editorial Note v
List of Contributors ix
Conflict resolution in North Asian: The impact of culture on 1

the Sino-Japanese relationship
Philippe CACHIA
Cultural relations between India and Japan: A descriptive 25

Study
K. Manjusree Naidu and Sankar Mukherjee
Rabindranath Tagore and Miyazawa Kenji: A Vision of a 40

Supreme Self
Eiko Ohira
Indo-Japan Cultural Relations, with a Reference to Urdu in 51

Japan, the Role of Japanese Urdu Scholars
Taiyaba Nazli
Elegant Escalation of Indo - Japan Cultural Relationship 66

through Performing Arts
J. Sankar Ganesh
India Japan Relations through Buddhist Culture for 97

Understanding Economic Development and World Peace
Deenadayal and Sudarshan
Buddhism: a comparative analysis between Dalits and 112

Burakumin
Zeba Siddiqui
Challenges to Japan's Foreign Policy in the Twenty First 128

Century: Placing India
Lalima Varma
China-Japan rift and Implications for India 147

D.S.Rajan
xi
The Sino-Japanese Territorial Dispute and its Implication for India 157
Michimi Muranushi
Rising China and India-Japan Ties 184

Rabindra Sen
Indo-Japan Relations in the Wake of Emergence of China 201

Siddhartha Sankar Manna
India and Japan in Asian Regionalization 212

Sourya Benerjee and Gehna Banga
India-Japan Relations in the Era of Strategic Partnerships: 224

Domestic and Regional Foundations of a Partnership
Moises Lopes de Souza
Contribution of India and Japan in Asian Regional Integration 245

and Development
Srinivasulu Bayineni and V. Ramesh Babu
Indo-Japan Relations & Asian Balance of Power 263

Sudhir Singh
'From Rhetoric to Reality' Examining the Potentials of Indo- 278

Japanese Partnership in 'Emerging Asia'
Sabu Thomas
India-Japan Relations: A Historical Perspective 288

N. Sreeramulu
xii
Conflict Resolution in North Asia: The Impact of
Culture on the Sino-Japanese relationship
Philippe CACHIA
Abstract
For the first time in history, China and Japan are powerful at the same
moment. However, international experts watch with growing concern the
two giants being unable to cement an enduring relationship. Increasingly,
both the countries are the theater of negative and aggressive public
expressions of emotions, often rooted in war history. Why can't Japan and
China achieve what France and Germany had; i.e. reconciliation?
While clearly belonging to the field of International Relationships, this paper
uses social psychological evidences to demonstrate that reconciliation is the
outcome of conflict resolution mechanisms that are culture-dependant.
Unfortunately, it is argued here that China and Japan do not have the
cultural tools to manage their historical conflict efficiently. While in many
countries of Christian background, previous enemies can be friends again if
they follow a few steps based on apology and forgiveness, in North Asia,
resolution mechanisms are lacking.
The author reviews some western approaches to rebuild the broken
relationship and then compares studies from the west about Japan and China
to demonstrate the differencesin conflict resolution methods.
Psychological studies have highlighted the cultural differences in handling
conflicts between Japan and China.But it might be argued here that applying
psychological conclusions to the highly rational field of International
Relations is a case of ecological fallacy. We are arguing here that not only are
the diplomatic activities subject to cultural context and bias, but also that the
general public becomes more influential on political decisions in both the
countries. The impact of culture, public emotions and social psychological
phenomena is growing. As a consequence culture might increasingly have
an impact on the political decisions between China and Japan.
Keywords: Japan, China, conflict resolution, social psychology
As Economic borders come down, cultural barriers go up, presenting new

challenges and opportunities (Douglas Ivestor, former CEO of Coca-Cola)
1
India and Japan Relations
Introduction
Domonique Moisi in “The Geopolitics of Emotions” proposes
that the twenty first century will be the “Asian century”, but also
the “century of identities”. In today's globalized world the
struggle for ideology has been replaced by the struggle for
identities: When everybody is concerned, to assert one's identity
by showing how different and unique one it becomes critical.
According to Moisi, this urge is often revealed through the
expression of public emotions. In parallel, the one key aspect
overlooked in the common approach to diplomacy is identity
(Hoobler, 2002; Lund, 1996). Managing identity issues in the
course of political negotiation is central to successful international
conflict diplomacy. Diplomatic actions, policies and
communications exchanged take various forms and involve
issues of identity and cultural differences. It is in the context of
this raising hunger for emotional expression described by Moisi
and the admission that diplomatic styles are embedded in
cultural identities, that I would like to review the Sino-Japanese
relationship.
For the first time in history, China and Japan are powerful at the
same time. They are in 2010, respectively the second and the third
highest GDP in the world (CIA book-fact). International relations
expert are however watching with growing concern the
relationship between the two countries. In many instances, this
relationship seems to worsen with time. The reconciliation
between France and Germany, which led to formation of the
European Coal and Steel Community and then to the European
Community, is often compared to the Sino-Japanese relationship.
Why can't Japan and China achieve what France and Germany
achieved?
This paper argues that reconciliation is the outcome of conflict
resolution mechanisms that are highly culture dependant.
Unfortunately, I am demonstrating here that China and Japan do
not have the cultural tools to manage their conflict efficiently. In
many western countries of Christian background previous
enemies can be friend again if they follow a few steps of sincere
2
Conflict Resolution in North Asian: The Impact of Culture on the Sino-Japanese relationship
apology, goodwill and forgiveness. The ethics of reconciliation

are grounded in these societies because direct communication is
valued and therefore conflicting situations happen often. In
consequence, western societies provide tools to rebuild
friendship: “a fault confessed is half amended” says the French
proverb. In North Asia however, social life is much less prone to
conflicts. Harmonious social relationships wa (in Japanese), are
maintained through respect of mianzi (face), guanxi (network of
personal connections in China). Individuals see themselves in
defined societal positions where fighting is to be avoided. As a
consequence, conflict resolution mechanisms are less needed.
The Sino-Japanese relationship carries open historical scars; old
pains are added to a growing rivalry. The diplomats and political
leaders of the two countries obviously need to use the best tools
available. In this paper I will first review the western examples
where diplomats have used restraint, forgiveness and shows of
weakness as ways to prove their goodwill and rebuild a broken
relationship. In the second part, I will compare conflict resolution
approaches of the West and the East and show how North Asian
cultures lack the societal tools to deal with international conflicts.
Finally, building on societal differences of Japan and China, I will
propose a few options, grounded on cultural realities to build
sustainable peace in the region.
Part1: Diplomacy of peace seeking and success stories: How
Enemies Become Friends?
Several theories of international conflict management have been
proposed. The Relational Order Theory (ROT) (Burgoon& Hale,
1984), emphasizes two concepts associated with inter personal
communication and negotiation: power dependence, or ability
each party has to control the other and affiliation, the extent to
which parties can communicate liking, trust or cooperation
etc…These two dimensions combine into four “frames”,
competition/aggression, isolationist peace, conditional peace
and unconditional peace (Donohue 1998). See figure below:
3
Figure-1
The strength and the difficulty with the ROT approach is its
simplicity. Categorizing the relationship along two criteria
provides a macro understanding for the status of a relationship
between two countries but does not allow the analysis of the
unfolding of diplomatic events and judge whether these are
constructive to peace or not.
The Relational Process Management (RPM), like other conflict
resolution processes provide a useful framework to address an
existing conflict through the steps of crisis diplomacy and
transformative diplomacy. Just like in hostage conditions,
countries in crisis become entrapped into competitive or
aggressive behaviors (Holmes 1997), unable to escape the
psychological or emotional conditions that bind them. In order to
analyze the Sino-Japanese relationship, however, the RPM
requires the existence of a crisis to be unknotted. While the
situation might happen in the future, it has not been the case, in
modern times, between Japan and China and we therefore
propose the usage of another framework.
Kupchan (2010), in “How Enemies Become Friends”, reviews
several couples of countries which have over time succeeded in
stable peace(Figure-2).Kupchan's approach seems to fit our
analysis because it not only allows for a step-wise analysis of the
process and also applies to countries that are not in a crisis.
According to Kupchan, The first stage toward stable peace is
unilateral accommodation. This step is a show of goodwill that is
4
expected to be reciprocated in the next stage described as

reciprocal restraint. In this unilateral accommodation stage, the
proposing country deliberately makes himself vulnerable to his
enemy. This is done by deliberately giving away pieces of
territory, renouncing to take advantage from a strong negotiating
position or proceeding to demilitarization of contested territories.
A state would pursue these unambiguous demonstrations of
being intent, only if it is really motivated to befriend its adversary.
Also, the gambit will be played only if the state expects its enemy
to understand its move. The outcome then depends on the
enemy's reaction. If the enemy ignores the gesture and does not
follow action of its own concessions, then rivalry continues and
the proposing state has lost its original gambit. If however the
rival state answers with its own concessions, both states have
demonstrated goodwill to each other and can then assume the
next stage.
Figure-2
5
The stage of reciprocal constraint follows on the steps of unilateral

accommodation. Both states now practice reciprocity, avoid rivalry
and foster reconciliation. Kenneth Boulding (Kupchan 2010, p.
112-113) describes this period as “peace dynamic”, where
reciprocated initiatives in tension reduction (GRIT) are
performed by both the players. In this new stage, restraint can be
of two forms, co-binding and self-binding. Self-binding is an
unilateral step in restricting its own capability. Demilitarization
of disputed territory is an example. Co-binding is the use of
power checking mechanism such as third parties or supranational
organisms that bind the new friends together. Whether they use
co-binding or self-binding, the two states prove each other
continuous reciprocity in concessions and trust is slowly built.
The psychological explanation to this phenomenon is given by
Morton Deutsch (1958 p. 272) analysis of cooperative behavior. In
his study, Deutsch demonstrates that cooperative environment
promotes cooperative behavior much more than competitive or
individualistic behavior. This clearly shows that the first step of
unilateral accommodation might be a gambit. But as cooperation
starts, it becomes a self catalyzing phenomenon. Realistic
theorists will explain this approach arguing that cooperation,
more than competition is advantageous for the states. Therefore
institutionalized cooperation allows for better outcomes for both
the states. From a Constructivist theory point of view,
cooperation will lead to “shared meanings and understandings”
(Adler & Barnett1988).
As seen in the previous paragraph, two major assumptions are
required to make the unilateral accommodation a success. First both
countries should understand the process of reciprocal concession.
Unfortunately, as we will see in the following chapters, this
process is embedded in Christian ethics and is not common in
North Asia. Co-binding and self-binding are especially unknown to
Chinese negotiators where power position defines the attitude.
Second, before engaging in risky concessions, adversaries should
share an understanding of their reciprocal situation. For example,
if both the countries think they have the stronger position, they
6
will both see the adversary concession as a sign of weakness and

not a sign of goodwill. Again, we will see here that Japan and
China may have “crossed” images of themselves that blur their
real intentions.
Several Christian values defining relationship in the western
world are involved in the two steps of unilateral accommodation
and reciprocal restraint. Initial unilateral accommodation is a show of
weakness. To abuse it is to abuse the weak and to betray an offer
for accommodation. Unilateral accommodation seems to be
embedded in the idea of repentance and consequent forgiveness.
Christian morality provides a direct connection between the
admittance of sin and the forgiveness received in exchange.
Admitting a sin is also a show of weakness. There is no doubt in a
western mind that such an offer of weakness, whether by
admitting a sin or by putting oneself at the mercy of the enemy
carries a highly moral statement. The only ethical response is to
reciprocate. Reciprocity is therefore the immediate consequence
of unilateral accommodation. The further step of reciprocal restraint is
the expression of a universal human trait, also visible in the Asian
cultures, to repay a gift. The major criteria from Kupchan are
summarized in Table-I below:
Table-I
First steps to peace Major criteria
Unilateral accommodation Equal or stronger position of initiator
Significant concession
Concession that was not necessary in the first place
Clear intent to be friend
Reciprocal restraint Show of understanding
Do not abuse the situation
Return the concession Co-binding, Self-binding
Continuous exchange of cooperation
Common goal or identity Political and societal shared goal, history or enemity
Compatibility of cultures allowing understanding
Strong will to forget the past
Cooperation put into practice
7
Kupchan uses several case of histories, among them the German-

French relationship to demonstrate his point.
Part 2: Theories of conflict resolution applied to North Asia
Conflict resolution is a scholarly area of multidisciplinary
approach. Scholars from social psychology, organizational
behavior or game theory have produced a wide variety of
theories. “Conflict resolution” is not understood like the simple
coexistence where former enemies just abide by the law and avoid
violence. The concept studied here is reconciliation. It is dealing
with a former enemy as though it is now your friend and long-
term partner. This process of reconciliation is geared toward the
future and is based on compromising and acceptance of
differences. The point is important because in Asia, conflict
management is often reduced to “avoidance”. Enemies still hate
each other (inside), but give a show of compromise (outside) to
maintain harmony. This idea is expressed in Japan by the
dichotomy tatemae/honne and the Chinese concept of mainzi.
These do not match our definition of reconciliation.
Theseapproaches are, at best, hoping that time will erase the past
and at worse, postpone the future conflict.
In western cultural contexts conflict resolution often involve the
following steps: improving communication between the
disputants, problem clarification, and building win-win solutions
for the parties involved (Ury& Fisher 1981). By contrast, in non-
Western cultures, direct communication between the antagonists
can sometimes be totally avoided because they are perceived as
rude. Therefore, community leaders, hierarchical figures or third
parties are often involved as mediators to resolve the conflict and
avoid direct communication with adversaries.
One reference framework for conflict resolution has been
developed by K. W Thomas (Blake & Mouton 1964; Rahim 1983;
Thomas 1992). Thomas evaluates conflict along two dimensions:
concern for self and concern for the others. Depending on the
respective importance of both dimensions, a negotiator will end
up using different negotiation styles: Integration (also called
8
collaboration or win-win approach), obliging, dominating, avoiding

and compromising (Thomas & Kenneth 1976). The selection of
negotiation style seems to be highly correlated with culture. In
egalitarian western countries the preferred modes of negotiations
are oriented toward benefitting both the parties. Integrating or
compromising styles are preferred (Ohbuchi et al. 1999).
Egalitarian countries are also often more individualistic (by
comparison with the more collectivist and hierarchical cultures of
Asia). Individualist countries tend to put less emphasis on
harmony in the relationship and therefore avoidance as a
negotiating style is rarely chosen (Holt et al. 2005; Ohbuchi et al.
1999). Overall, the preferred styles of negotiation are summarized
in Table-II below. A detailed explanation on China and Japan is
also included in Table-II.
Table-II
Conflict resolution style
High concern Equivalent concern High concern
for others for self and others for self
Oblige / Integrate / Dominate /
Avoid Compromise
Accommodate collaborate compete
West Rare Yes Rare Yes Rare
China Rare Yes Yes Rare Yes
Japan Yes Yes Yes Yes Rare
a) Implication for the peace-seeking process

As expected, the steps toward peace proposed by Kupchan are
highly connected with the conflict resolution or negotiation
practices. And negotiation practices are themselves impacted by
culture. The process proposed by Kupchan is connected very
much with the ethics of the West. As shown in Table-II,
compromising and collaboration are the most common approaches
to conflict resolution. But Kupchan has shown that obliging (or
accommodating) the adversary has proven a better path to long-
term peace. Table-III provides the relation between the Kupchan
steps and the negotiation styles. Indeed, both steps of unilateral
accommodation and reciprocal restraint, belong to the obliging
9
approach of conflict resolution. Why is that? In the peace-building

process, the first mover has still a position of power, but he
chooses NOT to obtain (incremental) so he gains from
compromising or trying an integrative approach. Instead, by
obliging he is taking an unnecessary risk, and therefore shows the
adversary that there are higher gains to obtain from the
relationship. To prove his point the first mover takes a big risk, a
show of weakness, unilateral accommodation. Now the adversary
has two options: he may not see cooperation as valuable for
himself and decide to abuse or dominate the situation. Our
argument here is that the dominating negotiation style is not
preferred in the west: Christian morality assesses an offer of
goodwill or a show of weakness as highly moral. Obliging is
therefore the expected and moral reaction. When both parties
have obliged, there is higher value in cooperation and the next
stages become easy. Both parties can revert to regular negotiation
approaches of compromising and integrating. Western or Christian
morality provides the ethical context favorable for the steps to
uncover smoothly. Win/win is the goal, obliging is the sign. Now,
in individualistic countries of the west, social appurtenance does
not matter much (see Hofstede's Cultural dimensions theory).
The same resolution methods apply to anybody whether they are
from in-groups or out-groups. As explained below this differs
extremely from Asian collectivist cultures where social norms are
totally related to social positions horizontally or vertically
(Hwang 1988).
Table-III
First steps to peace Major criteria Conflict resolution aspect
Unilateral Equal or stronger position This is a show of obliging
accommodation Significant concession to adversary in a surprising
way while a compromising
Concession that was not
or integrative approach is
necessary in the first place
expected
Adversary can abuse the
situation (dominate) or
reciprocate by also obliging
10

Reciprocal Show of understanding A dominating response is
restraint Do not abuse the situation highly improbable &
damaging in the long term
Return the concession
Adversary also chooses to
give away (oblige) and
Continuous exchange of cooperation can start
cooperation
Both parties are expected to
win from this process
(integrating negotiation
style)
Before I review Japanese and Chinese styles of negotiation, a few

precisions are required. First,negotiation is a social process and as
such, it happens in a cultural context. The cultural context not
only indicates what is normal and what is abnormal, but it also
defines right from wrong. As demonstrated by Hostfede, Asian
countries have shown a highly collectivist notion of society
compared to more individual western countries. In collective
cultures such as Japan (and China to a certain extent), individuals
merge personal and collective objectives. Japanese for example
tend to identify totally with their country (Reischauer 1988).Since
conflict resolution and negotiation can also be defined as a
process of balancing a personal relationship (or trust) with
potential gain (Leight et al. 2010). The importance given to a
personal relationship (or loss of trust) defines the maximum gains
that can be obtained. The importance given to trust and
relationships in a given culture defines the negotiation mode.
Western negotiators will base their reasoning on a logical
argument and avoidance of contradiction (Nisbett et al. 2006).
Both Chinese and Japanese negotiators are more sensitive to
relationship and face than logical argument. “They tend to focus
their cognitive attention on relationship and context”
(Peng&Nisbett1999), rather than logic arguments.As a
consequence, a threat to relationship or loss of trust is perceived
as a breach of harmony (wa) for Japanese, and as a breach of face
(mianzu) for Chinese. Japanese place such a high value on the
existing relationship that they care more about maintaining the
11
relationship rather than reaching preferential economic outcome,

hence their tendency for obliging (Gelfand et al. 2006; Reischauer
1988; Nakane 1973). Similarly social relations with members of its
own group are extremely important for Chinese (Chen &Starosta
1977).
Another aspect of negotiation, useful for the argument of this
paper is the outcome of a negotiation. Westerners' objective of
conflict resolution is an integrated, or win-win agreement where
both parties can benefit. While it is clear that Japanese tend to hold
a similar view, Chinese negotiators might be more comfortable
with zero-sum bargaining where the balance of power defines the
outcome (Ma &Jeager 2005).
Finally,the last parameter to consider is reputation. Glick and
Croson(2001) demonstrated that four profiles of reputation
emerge after continuous negotiation: “liar-manipulator” (seen as
willing to do anything to gain from the negotiation), “tough-but-
honest” (negotiator who will make few concessions but will not
lie), “nice-and-reasonable” (makes some concessions) and
“cream-puff” (makes concession regardless of what the other
does). Once the reputation profile is set, not only it is very difficult
to modify it, but also it changes the negotiation attitudes of
players. Once a negotiator is perceived as “tough” or “liar”,
adversaries will toughen their approach and if the negotiator is
perceived as “cream-puff” the adversaries will try to take
advantage.
To proceed to our conflict resolution methods analysis, we have
reviewed the works of several scholars: Ohbuchi et al. (1999)
compares US and Japanese undergraduate handling of conflict
and Tinsley (1998) analyzed self-described models of conflict
resolution for Japanese and US managers. Tinsley and Brett
(2001),as well as Ma and Jeager (2005) compare US and Chinese
conflict management styles. Chen and Starosta (1977) provide a
detailed analysis of Chinese negotiation style Hwang (1997)
provides a Chinese conflict resolution framework and finally Kim
et al. (2007) compares conflict resolution preferences between
managers and employees for Chinese, Japanese and Koreans.
12
b) Conflict resolution among Chinese

According to Chen and Starosta (1977) the concept of “conflict” is
similar to the idea of mao-dun in Chinese culture, which means
“contradiction”, “logically incompatible” or “mutually
opposed”. In modern China, the concept of mao-dun is expanded
to any situation of antagonism or difficulty between individuals
or groups. Resolution methods are based on Taoist ideas of Yin
and Yang or Sun Tzu's Art of War (Sun Tzu bingfa) but also Marxist
and Maoist thought. Harmony is one primordial value of Chinese
culture. The ultimate goal of interaction is to achieve social
relationships without conflict. Conflict prevention is maintained
by following the principle of li (property, rites). Li involves the
idea of norms and rules of proper social behavior and provides a
feeling of respect for others that leads to harmony. Mutual
reciprocity in a relationship (lishangwanglai) expresses harmony
through responsible interaction. However destruction of li (or
non respect for norms) allows us to blame the other for breaking
harmony and justify the use of force (lianlihoubing) (Chen &
Chung 1994; Chen & Xiao 1993). It is important to note that
harmony does not mean equality. In the social context of the five
Confucian codes of ethics, harmony means respecting norms, or
li. In addition to li, two concepts cement Chinese social life. These
are mianzi and guanxi. Guanxi relates to relationships between two
parties. Following the Confucian tradition of the “five codes of
ethics”, relationships in Chinese society are only defined between
dyads: between husband and wife, older and younger brothers,
father and son, two friends and between ruler and the subject.
These particularistic relationships provide rules of interaction
that define li for each situation and are supposed to maintain
harmony and avoid conflict (Chen & Chung 1994; Hwang 1988;
Jocobs 1979). Mianzi represents the social position in the social
network. Showing mianzi is to acknowledge authority and
prestige. Showing mianzi not only demonstrates respect for others
but also proves your own willingness to preserve harmony.
Harmony within the social network is maintained through
tradition (li) and the respect of other's face or mianzi.
13
A critical aspect of Chinese social relationship and conflict

resolution is the use of power (Hwang 1988). Whether it is
obtained through the traditional Confucian value of seniority or
through obtained-authority, power balance defines the conflict
resolution approach. In Confucian societies The Confucian five
codes of ethics define who holds authority (ruler, father, husband
and older brother). Therefore elders often obtain a wide range of
prerogative and automatic respect. This made seniors or
authoritarian figures the perfect mediators during conflicts. Not
only are seniors or authoritarian figures supposed to possess
greater knowledge, but also they hold the status required to order
contenders on the issue at stake. As a result, power positions are
often abused in Chinese society and therefore become themselves
a constant challenge to harmonious relationship.
Out-groups
As a consequence of these Chinese rules of relationship,
interaction with out-groups is hardly defined in Chinese culture
(Hwang1988). Especially if the out-group is of a different
nationality, there is no li to determine how harmony can be
maintained. Recent scholarly work has shown that aggressive
behaviors toward out-group members can be very drastic in
Chinese society (Bond & Lee 1981).This has been explained by
Ward (1970) as the consequence of the absence of peaceful models
for conflict resolution. Of course, aggression is not the only means
of conflict resolution with out-groups.Chinese tend to replicate
the in-group approach and create a network of relationships
(guanxi) based on respect formainzi with out-group members.
When a conflict erupts, breaking the relationship is only balanced
by the potential gain to be obtained and the value of the
relationship. If breaking the relationship is too costly, the only
remaining option is to recourse to a mediating third party.
However, when dealing with out-groups members the impact of
societal pressure on maintaining harmony li is absent. Use of a
mediator has been described in many conflict resolution studies.
The mediator has to be a person of authority, namely the ruler, the
father, the elder brother or the husband, or of seniority, an elder. A
14
common way of resolution is to appeal to the detractors' sense of

mianzi: “For the sake of my face, do not quarrel anymore” (Brown
1977; Ma 1992; Bond & Lee 1981). If the mediator has sufficient
face, the detractors can agree on solving the mediator's face and
start peace-making.
c) Conflict resolution among Japanese
Like Chinese, Japanese share a strong collectivist view of society
(Hofstede). Japanese also avoid direct communication asit might
lead to counter-productive emotions (Reischauer 1988). As a
consequence, obligingis the preferred style of negotiation when
integrative (win/win) is not possible (Reischauer 1988). Japanese
however do not share the Confucian fivecodes of ethics with
similar intensity. For Japanese families relationships are highly
hierarchical but the power of the hierarchical figure usually is
very limited (Nakane1973). The sense of appurtenance to the
nation, as a very homogenous group, is however extremely
strong (Reischauer 1988). While Chinese are also proud of being
Chinese, they do not share the sense of homogeneity and national
appurtenance held by the Japanese. Finally, Japanese society is
also extremely hierarchical (Nakane 1973), but again, the power
positions are usually weak. Japanese powerful figures tend to let
their subalterns make decisions and solve conflicts in a
consensual way (Reischauer1988), which is not the case among
Chinese or Westerners.
Kim et al. (2007) have provided an experimental analysis on the
conflict resolution styles of Chinese, Korean and Japanese. These
scholars have analyzed the conflict styles of Chinese and Japanese
in the work place using Thomas' framework of conflict resolution
styles (Integrating, Obliging, Compromising, Avoiding or
Dominating). The findings of their research are summarized
below:
Overall, the analysis shows that all Asians are trying to use
integrating (or win-win) strategies with their manager when a
conflict arises. This is due to the respect for hierarchy and the
collectivist aspects of Asian cultures. Japanese prefer to oblige
when integration is not possible. This result confirms the research
15
Figure-3
from Honna and Hoffer (1989) and Moran et al. (1994) which have
proven that Japanese highly value the other's welfare and have
therefore a tendency for obliging the adversary's request. They
also show the lowest use of dominating style. In his analysis of
Japanese negotiation styles, March(1988) confirms, that in case of
conflict, “caucus, apology, expressing regrets, are usually
enough”. Japanese value cooperative approaches such as
integration and compromising, disdain dominating as it upsets the
relationship, and would rather oblige or avoid.
Chinese on the other hand, have high concerns for self-face (or
mianzi). Their social standing is more critical when dealing with
other people and they therefore tend to oblige less (Ting-Toomey
&Kurogi 1998), and rather recourse to dominating strategies. This
is a consequence of the concept of mianzu in Chinese culture.
Among other findings, Chinese tend to care more for their self
(they show a rather individualistic tendency among Asians)and
show higher power distance (Hofstede). Power distance is the
extent to which the less powerful members of organization and
institutions (like the family) accept and expect that power is
distributed unequally.
16
d) Implication for a peace seeking process involving Japanese

and Chinese
How are these conflict resolution tendencies impacting the
process of stable peace between China and Japan? Peace is the
expression of long-term friendship between two peoples.
Coexistence and compliance to law do not ensure long-term
peace. Long term peace is valuable because it not only protects
former enemies from fighting again; it also provides the
environment for cooperation that multiplies benefits.
Let me turn to the Kupchan's stages of unilateral accommodation
and reciprocal restraint. First of all, the Japanese have a tendency to
be obliging and therefore might make a unilateral accommodation
move. In the current geopolitical situation, both countries are
equally strong and obliging from Japan would probably be
understood as a concession. However with an increasingly
confident China, the same concession might soon be understood
as a display of weakness, which then will not be reciprocated.
China making the first obliging move is much less probable. It is
not only culturally exceptional for China, as shown in Figure-3,
butit makes more sense to wait a few years for an even stronger
geopolitical position rather than giving away now (power
positioning).
The decision on the Japanese side to oblige on a sensitive area of
dispute (for example giving away the Senkaku/Diaoyudao), will
depend on the expected response from China. The difficulty is not
only that China might not understand the proposition, it might
simply abuse it. In the following step of reciprocal restraint, China
could support Japan's claim for a seat at the UN or share oil
exploration in the Senkaku/Diaoyudao area. While the idea of
harmony might provide the cultural context for such a reciprocal
answer, power calculation might also encourage Chinese
negotiators to just accept the move as normal, since
“Senkako/diaoyudao are already part of China” or see the move
as a “compensation for war crimes”, for example. This move
would certainly have a cost: increased animosity with Japan. But,
as we will see in our analysis, the other option of concession to
17
Japan might bear a higher cost: a major domestic backlash for the
Chinese government. Then as a consequence on the Japanese side,
obliging to China might certainly not be successful. As a
conclusion, a simple review of the process already demonstrates
that the major difficulty lies in the second step of reciprocal
restraint from China. Both the first steps of obliging by Japan and
the further steps of collaboration, should not pose major cultural
difficulties.
Table-IV
Unilateral Equal or stronger position The first move of obliging
accommodation Significant concession (if any) will come from
Japan
Concession that was not
necessary in the first place China might not see the
need to return concession
Reciprocal Show of understanding China might not oblige as a

restraint Do not abuse the situation response
Return the concession Shared sense of harmony
provides the moral context
for returning concession.
Continuous exchange of But China might abuse the
cooperation new position of power if
gains are high
In a later stages,
cooperation in an
integrating style is expected
In the right column of Table-IV, I have summarized my

hypothesis. Let's now review the evolution of the Sino-Japanese
relationship over the time and determine if events of unilateral
accommodation or reciprocal restraint have alreadyhappened and
why stable peace has not yet broken out between the two Asian
giants.
Part 3: Analysis of the Sino-Japanese relationship
During the 1972 to 1982 period, Chinese domestic politics were
still fully controlled by senior Chinese leaders and top-down
communist ideology. Except during the first period of friendship,
when both countries were ready to practice reciprocal restraint, the
18
relationship between Japan and China slowly emerged as unable

to favor peace-building. More recently, the involvementof
Chinese public opinion into diplomacy has become highly
emotional and focused on the unapologetic Japan. These
emotions resonate with Chinese nationalism, in an economically
stronger and more confident China. Obviously Japan is the out-
group that helps define what Chinese identity is.
We argue here that cultural differences between the two countries
are the major cause of this situation. For westerner, it is commonly
necessary to rebuild the relationship and conflict resolution
methods are required:Usually one person will make the first step.
The adversary will understand the move as conciliatory, and
reciprocate. As proven in the examples of France-Germany and
England-USA provided by Kupchan, western nations have built
peace following the same model.
In Asia, social life is focused on harmony and indirect
communication to avoid conflict. Unfortunately, when conflict
happens, there is no solution, except asking for a figure of
authority, common to both groups to intervene. Furthermore, the
power relation in Chinese culture makes more probable the abuse
of a reconciliatory move by the adversary. In this cultural
environment, accommodation between Japan and China should
require diplomats to have a very good understanding of the
opposite culture. Such a relationship existed in the first period of
our analysis. Zhou, Deng and Mao all had knowledge of Japanese
culture. On the Japanese side, many members of the
administration lived in China during the war and understood the
culture. But recently, politicians of both the countries are less
aware of the opposite culture. Furthermore both governments are
now heavily influenced by societal factors mostly from nationalist
tendencies, which are not willing to reconcile.
So what can be done? Culture cannot be changed, so the solution
has to be adaptive. In Asia, one way of solving problems is to
avoid talking about it. Time will erase past conflicts. One solution
is then to call on harmony and cooperation whenever possible.
19
After all, exchanges between Japan and Chinese society are

growing, not only in the business arena but also through student
exchanges or tourism. Several associations dealing with historical
events have been created and are clusters of friendships. Media
coverage of a Japanese citizen who saved Chinese lives during the
Great East Japan Earthquake, is contributing to rapprochement of
hearts. Then both governments should move to the next step and
restrain from bringing back history on stage. Textbooks and
Yasukuni visits on Japan side are not constructive. Education in
mainland China should focus on the suffering brought by war, not
by Japanese. Similar efforts were done in Europe to disconnect
remembrance of suffering from Germany. After all, humans are
all capable of producing atrocities, not especially German or
Japanese.
In her study of “Apology In International Politics”, Jennifer Lind
(2009) shows that war leaves scars on both sides, whoever the
aggressor is. Even if the suffering incurred by Japanese invasion
in china has to be recognized, one-sided contrition is not
constructive. As Lind proved in her paper, “Balance between the
demands of internal and external audiences and the goals of
justice and international reconciliation” has to be obtained.
Casting past events as “shared catastrophes” in a non-accusatory
fashion will reduce Japanese backlash and promote partnership.
Another approach to conflict resolution, as explained above, is to
bring in a third party mediator. In Asian social conflicts, the
mediator is often a person of authority or an elder. But what
country or organization could be recognized by both China and
Japan as a mediator today?Multilateral forums such as the Asia
Pacific Cooperation Forum (APEC) or Association of South East
Asian Nation + 3 (ASEAN+3) seem unable to show authority that
is recognized by both China and Japan. Local powers such as The
United States, South Korea, Australia or India have all aligned
with Japan in the recent years. Europe, because it is remote
enough for not being entangled in local strategic moves and also
because it has enormous economic stakes in avoiding a crisis in
North Asia might be in the best position to play the mediator.
20
Finally, European history has proven that there is more to gain

from forgiveness than revenge or rivalry.
References
Adler, E. & Barnett, M.(1988) (eds.), Security communities. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Blake, R.R. & Mouton, J.S., (1964). The Managerial Grid, Gulf, Houston, TX.
Bond, M.H. & Lee, P.W.H. (1981). “Face saving in Chinese Culture: a
Discussion and Experimental Study of Hong-Kong students”. In
A.King and R. Lee (Eds.), Social Life and Development of Hong-Kong.
Hong Kong: Chinese University Press.
Brown, B.R. (1977).“Face Savings and Face Restoration in Negotiation”. In D.
Druckman (Ed.), Negotiations: social-Psychological Perspectives. Beverly
Hills: Sage Publications.
Burgoon, J.K. & Hale, J.L. (1984).The fundamental topoi of relational
communication. Communication Monograph, 51, 193-214
Chen, G.M. & Chung, J. (1994).”The Impact of Confucianism on
Organizational Communication”, Communication Quarterly, 42, pp. 93-
105.
Chen, G.M. &Starosta, J.W. (1977). “Chinese Conflict Management And
Resolution: Overview and Implications”. Intercultural Studies VII: 1,
pp. 1997-98.
Chen, G.M.& Xiao, X-S (1993). The impact of “harmony” on Chinese negotiations.
Paper presented at the annual convention of the Speech
Communication Association, Miami Beach, Florida.
CIA fact-book https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-
factbook/ viewed on June 16th 2010.
Donohue, W.A. (1998). Managing equivocality and relational paradox in the
Oslo peace negotiation. Journal of Language and Social psychology, 17, 72-
96
21
Gelfand, M.J., Major, V.S., Raver, J., Nishii, J., O'Brian K.M.
(2006).“Negotiating Relationally: The Dynamics of the Relational Self
in Negotiations”.Acad. Manag. Rev. 31(2): pp. 427-51.
Glick, S. &Croson, R. (2001).“Reputation in Negotiations”.Wharton On
Making Decisions, (Ed.). Hoch, S. &Kunreuther, H., New York Wiley:
pp. 177-86.
Holt, J.L. &DeVore, C.J.(2005).“Culture, Gender, Organizational role and
Styles of conflict resolution: a meta-analysis”, International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, Vol.2 No.2. pp. 165-96.
Hofstede, G.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede%27s_cultural_
dimensions_theory & http://www.clearlycultural.com/geert-
hofstede-cultural-dimensions/power-distance-index/ viewed in June
16th 2010.
Honna, N.& Hoffer, B. (1989).An English Dictionary Of Japanese Ways Of
Thinking, Yuhikaku, Tokyo.
Holmes, M.E. (1997). Processes and Patterns in hostage negotiations. In R.G.
Rogan, M.R. Hammer, & C.R. Van Zandt (eds.), Dynamic processes of
crisis negotiation: Theory research, and practice (pp. 77-93). Westport, CT:
Praeger
Hoobler, G. D. (2002, June). Inside the Black Box: Developing the process of
conflict diplomacy. Paper presented at the International Association of
Conflict management Conference, Park City, UT.
Hwang, K.K. (1988), “Renqin and Face: The Chinese Power game”. In K.K.
Hwang (Eds.), The Chinese Power Game.Taipei Juliu: pp. 7-56.
Hwang, K.K. (1997). “Guanxi and Mientze: Conflict Resolution in Chinese
Society”, International Communication Studies. VII: 1, pp. 1997-98
Jocobs, B.J. (1979). “A Preliminary Model Of Particularisitc Ties in Chinese
Political Alliances: Kanching and Juan-his in a Rural Taiwanese
Township”. China Quarterly, 78. pp. 237-73.
Kim, T-Y., Wang, C., Kondo, M., Kim TH. (2007). “Conflict Management
Styles: The differences among the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans”,
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol.18 No.1. pp. 23-39.
Kupchan, A.C. (2010). How Enemies Become Friends. The Source of Stable
Peace.Princeton University Press. NJ.
Leight, L. T., Wang, J.,Gunia, B.C. (2010). “Negotiation”, Annu. Rev. Psychol.
61: pp. 491-515.
22
Lind, J. (2009). “Apology In International Politics”. Security Studies, 18:pp.

517-556, Routledge.
Lund, M.S. (1996). Preventing violent conflicts: a Strategy for Preventive
Diplomacy. Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press.
Ma, R. (1992), “The role of Unofficial Intermediaries in Interpersonal
Conflicts in The Chinese Culture”.Communication Quarterly, 40:pp.
267-78.
Ma, Z.&Jeager.A, (2005). “Getting To Yes In China: Exploring Personality
Effects In Chinese Negotiation Styles”.Group Decision and Negotiation
14: pp. 415-437.
March, M.R. (1989).The Japanese Negotiator: Subtlety and Strategy beyond
western logic. Kodansha International Tokyo: p.184.
Moran, R.T., Allen, J., Wichmann, R., Ando, T. and Sasano, M.
(1994).”Japan”, in Rahim, M.A. & Blum, A.A. (Eds.), Global Perceptive on
Organizational Conflict, Praeger, Westport, CT: pp. 33-51.
Moisi, D. (2009). The Geopolitics of Emotions: How cultures of fear, Humiliation,
and Hope Are Reshaping the World. Anchor Books, New York
Morton, D. (1958). Trust and Suspicion.The Journal of Conflict Resolution, Vol.
2, No. 4: pp. 265-279.
Nakane, C. (1973).Japanese Society: A Practical Guide To Understanding The
Japanese Mindset And Culture. Tuttle Publishing, Tokyo.
Nisbett, R.E., Peng, K.P., Choi, I., Norenzayan, A. (2006).“Culture and
Systems of Thought: Holistic versus analytic Cognition.Psycho. Review.
108(2): pp. 291-310.
Ohbuchi, K., Fukushima, O., and Tedeschi, J.T. (1999). “Cultural Values In
Conflict Management: Goal Orientation, Goal Attainment,
AndTactical Decision”, Journal of cross-cultural Psychology, Vol.30, No1:
pp. 51-71.
Peng. K.P. &Nisbett, R.E.(1999). “Culture Dialectics, And Reasoning About
Contradiction”. Am. Psychol. 54(9): pp. 741-54.
Rahim, M.A. (1983).Managing ConflictIn Organizations(2nd Ed).Praeger,
Westport, CT.
Reischauer, O.E. (1988).The Japanese Today: Change And Continuity. Charles
Tuttle Company Tokyo, Japan.
23
Thomas, K.W. (1992). “Conflict And Negotiation Processes In

Organizations”, in Dunnette, M.D. & Hough, L.M. (Eds.).Handbook Of
Industrial And Organizational Psychology, Consulting Psychologist
Press, Palo Alto CA: pp. 651-717.
Thomas, K. (1976). Handbook of Industrial And Organizational Psychology.
"Conflict Anf Conflict Management". Chicago: Rand McNally.
Ting-Toomey, S. &Kurogi, A. (1998). “Facework Competence In
Intercultural Conflict: An Updated Face-negotiation
Theory”.International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol., 22 No.2: pp.
187-225.
Tinsley, C.H. (2001).“Models for conflict resolution in Japanese German and
American Cultures”.Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.86, No.4: pp.
583-93.
Tinsley, C.H. & Brett J.M. (2001).“Managing Workplace Conflict in the
United States and Hong-Kong”.Organizational Behavior And Human
Decision Processes, Vol.85, No2: pp. 360-81.
Ury, F. & Rodger, F. (1981).Getting To Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without
Giving In. New York, NY: Penguin Group.
Ward, B.E. (1970).The Logic Of Using Stratagems By Traditional Chinese (In
Chinese). Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, National Taiwan
University.
24
Cultural relations between India and Japan:
A descriptive Study
K. Manjusree Naidu and Sankar Mukherjee
Abstract
The relations between India and Japan are rooted in cultural exchanges that
have extended themselves to diplomacy and strategic alliances benefiting
the future of both the Asian countries. The cultural relationship is the subject
of social, political, economic aspect which weaves the bonding ties between
any countries. India and Japan have strengthened their long cherishing
relationship through the different aspect of socio-economic way. Three
phases (Historical, Independence movement, World War-11, Modern
economic development) of development have been witnessed between these
countries which reinforce the strength of cultural relationship between the
two different geographic nations of the Asia-Pacific region. For centuries,
India and Japan have engaged in cultural exchanges, primarily as a result of
Buddhism which spread indirectly from India to China and then to Japan.
This study is an attempt to unlock the reasons and merits of the Indo-Japan
cultural relationship based on the past, present and future prospects.
Objectives:
This detailed study aims to seek the root of the origin of the cultural
relationship between India and Japan. In addition to that it likes to explore
the need and the role of cultural relationship to further strengthen the socio-
economic and political environment between these two nations. Moreover it
also wants to throw a light on the area where more cultural activities can be
augmented to boost the mutual trust between the citizens.
Keywords: Historic Relation, Pre & Post Independence Relationship,

Buddhism, Trade Partnership
Introduction
Culture is a term influenced by the school of thoughts and
behavior in the area of certain geographical habitats. The
inhabitants are the torch bearer of the activities through whom
this word has been coined to be a powerful form to denote as
“CULTURE”. Culture embodies the story of the human activities,
likings, desire, influence of the geography etc. Notwithstanding
the fact of difference in taste, likings and feelings etc. culture
25
always play a catalistic role in designing other model of

relationship.
Culture is one of the most best approaches to purser and cherishes
the relationship between the animate and inanimate creatures in
this universe. Human race is deemed to be the most valuable
resource in the world which further differentiates it from the
other species through another form of expression called
“culture.”
A facet of human behaviour in pursuit of political-economic-
social gain exhorts the insight of culture. Culture depends on the
different factors being practised by the different people within a
boundary. Moreover, it is not a static state as it transcends and
transforms into various view points when is exchanged between
the nations as well as areas within the nations. Intra and interstate
exchange is the formative pattern of any culture. The More the
exchange rate of human action is, the more the thriving of culture
which in turn strengthens the others relationship between the
nations. In the broader perspective, it is the two way form, as it
can be generated from the other sources when it can itself be the
one source of relationship. India and Japan have developed the
long standing relationship rooted in the ancient past with the
formation of different factors as depicted below.
India and Japan lying on two geographical areas have many
differences between them. Though India and Japan might show
some similarities in certain aspects like family life, both the
countries have a lot of differences. India is officially called as the
Republic of India and lies in South Asia. Japan, on the other hand
officially called as Nippon, is an island country of the Pacific
Ocean that lies in the East Asia. While India is divided into many
states, Japan is divided into prefectures. In area, Japan is very
much smaller to India. India is a hinterland rich in culture,
heritage, sovereign status, along with folklore revered deities,
gallant heroes and heroines with the co-existing demons from the
mythology. From the times of ancient history, India-Japan
relations have always been strong.
26
Cultural relations between India and Japan: A descriptive Study
Cultural exchanges between India and Japan began early in the

6th century with the introduction of Buddhism to Japan from
India. The Indian monk Bodhisena arrived in Japan in 736 to
spread Buddhism and performed the eye-opening of the Great
Buddha built in Tōdai-ji and stayed in Japan until his death in 760.
Buddhism and the intrinsically linked Indian culture had a great
impact on the Japanese culture which is still felt today, and has
resulted in a natural sense of amicability between the two nations.
The relations between the two nations have continued since then
but direct political exchange began only in the Meiji Era
(18681912) when Japan embarked on the process of
modernization. Indo-Japan Association was founded in 1903.
Further cultural exchange occurred during the mid-late 20th
century through Asian Cinema with Indian cinema and Japanese
cinema both experiencing a "golden age" during the 1950s and
1960s. Indian films by Satyajit Ray, Guru Dutt, and Rajanikant are
influential in Japan, while Japanese films by Akira Kurosawa,
Yasujiro Ozu and Takashi have likewise been influential in India.
Other historical documents show the friendship between the
Japanese thinker Okakura Tenshin and Indian writer
Rabindranath Tagore and the Bengali poet Priyamvada Banerjee.
Another luminary of India is the great Hindu monk Swami
Vivekananda who had scripted a cultural bonding between these
two countries after his visit to Japan which had filled him with
enthusiastic admiration for the patriotism of the Japanese people.
"Their country is their religion." he declared with his face aglow
with enthusiasm. "The national cry is 'Dai Nippon, Banzai'. Live
long, great Japan! The country before and above everything else.
No sacrifice is too great for maintaining the honor and integrity of
the country." Swami Vivekananda sowed the seed of cultural
ties between Japan and India by his statement about Japan as one
of the cleanest people on the earth. The cultural relationship
between the two nations is in the pace of rapid change with the
momentum of economic development after the Indian economic
liberalization in the post 1991 period. This descriptive study aims
to unleash the cultural roots between the two countries which
further pave the way to strengthen the exchange of their cultural
relationship.
27
Over the years Japan has become India's strong trading partner.
Japan-India Association was founded in 1903. Japan's emergence
as a power in the early 20th century was positively viewed in
India and was seen as the beginning of an Asian resurgence. In
India, there was a great admiration for Japan's post-war economic
reconstruction and subsequent rapid growth Correspondences
between the distinguished individuals from both nations had a
noticeable increase at the time. The historical documents show the
friendship between Japanese thinker Okakura Tenshin and
Indian writer Rabindranath Tagore, Okakura Tenshin and
Bengali poet Priyamvada Banerjee
During the Second World War, the Japanese imperial army
employed Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose's Indian National Army in
battles against the British forces. India is the largest recipient of
Japanese ODA (Official Development Assistant). India and Japan
have stood by each other at critical moments in their history.
India and Japan were closely linked during the Indian
independence movement. The alliance arose from talks between
Japanese Lieutenant-General Renya Mutaguchi, Japanese War
Minister HidekiTojo, and Subhas Chandra Bose, who led the
Azad Hind, The Japanese Government extensively supported the
Indian National Army and the Indian Independence League
during India's fight for independence. India and Japan concluded
loan agreements for Indian independence war. Japanese forces
fought alongside the Indian National Army in many battles, most
notably at the U Go Offensive at Manipur. The offensive
culminated in Battles of Imphal and Kohima where the Japanese
and their allies were first held and then pushed back. India and
Japan participated in the Greater East Asia Conference with other
Asian countries in 1943. They declared their objective to work for
the abolition of racial discrimination. In view of a common
Japanese discrimination against the Chinese and Koreans,
however, it is uncertain as to how seriously the Japanese meant
this? Andaman Islands and Nicobar Islands which were under
the British rule were returned to India by Japan. In 1944, Subhas
Chandra Bose sent the Indian youth cadets to the Imperial
28
Japanese Army Academy and Imperial Japanese Army Air Force

Academy to train them as future pilots. Monument honoring
Radhabinod Pal, at Tokyo's Yasukuni shrine, Japan was enacted
for judgment in favor of Japan and also as a remembrance of
India's refusal to attend the San Francisco Peace Conference in
1951 for the reason that India was more concerned with the
limitation on Japanese sovereignty and national independence.
After Japanese restoration of sovereignty, Japan and India signed
a separate peace treaty and established diplomatic relations on 28
April 1952, in which India waived all reparation claims against
Japan. This treaty was one of the first treaties Japan signed after
World War II. There after the diplomatic, trade, economic, and
technical relations between India and Japan were well
established. India's iron ore helped Japan's recovery from World
War II devastation, and following Japanese Prime Minister
Nobusuke Kishi's visit to India in 1957, Japan started providing
yen loans to India in 1958, as the first yen loan aid extended by
Japanese government.
The relations between the two nations were constrained,
however, by the Cold War politics. Japan, as a result of World War
II reconstruction, was a U.S. ally, while India pursued a non-
aligned foreign policy. Since the 1980s, however, efforts were
made to strengthen the bilateral ties. India's 'Look East' policy
projected Japan as a key partner. Since 1986 Japan has become
India's largest aid donor and remains so.
India-Japan Historic Relations
For centuries, India and Japan have engaged in cultural
exchanges, primarily as a result of Buddhism which spread
indirectly from India to China and then to Japan. Asoka is rightly
looked upon as the first great royal patron of Buddhism. Indeed it
was through his efforts that Buddhism came to occupy prominent
position in India and abroad with the Expansion of Buddhism
from India to various south Asian countries like China, Japan
Korea Burma Ceylon etc. Japan has been called the land of
Mahayana Buddhism. This form of Buddhism originally
flourished in china and travelled to Japan through Korea. There
29
after Buddhism developed through the efforts of both the Chinese

and the Japanese monks. A historic division of the Japanese
Buddhism can be made as follows:-
1. Period of importation 6th century-7th century A.D (Asoka and
Nara period): The first manifestation of Buddhism in Japan
consisted chiefly in adopting it to Shintoism a native cult of
Japan. Buddhist monks of Japan accepted the workshop
and admitted Shintoism side by side with the Buddha
image. In this manner Buddhism was able to gradually
establish itself among the common people without
rejecting Shintoism outright. When Buddhism made its
appearance for the first time in Japan it was accepted by the
aristocracy which was the intellectual class of the Japan in
those days. Once it was patronized by aristocracy it was
rapidly spread throughout the country. Several emperors
of ancient Japan adopted Buddhism and accepted its trends
and guiding principles in life
2. Period of nationalization 9th century -14th century A.D
(Heian and Kamakura period): The Tendai and Shingon
monks were nationalized the Buddhism and gradually
gained in popularity and made the doctrines that are still
too scholarly to be easily understood by the common
people and fostered the complete acceptance and
absorption of Buddhism by the common people in Japan. In
this period the Buddhism was popularized and
nationalized and it signifies the epoch making landmarks
in the history of Japanese Buddhism
3. Period of continuation 15th century-20th century A.D (T he
Muromachi, Momoyama and Edo period and the modern
age) :- After the Kamakura period there was no significant
development in Japanese Buddhism due to the influence of
Christianity but in Edo period (1603-1867 A.D) with the
support of the government the Buddhism activities took the
form of scholarly studies in Buddhism which laid the
foundation of modern Buddhist studies and with the Meiji
Restoration(1868A.D) many monks who had investigated
30
the doctrines of Buddhism significantly tried to find a new

meaning in the old doctrines and threw a light on the
modern studies of Buddhism.
The Japanese monk named Jiun Sonja (1718-1804) is intimately
connected with the initiation of Sanskrit studies on traditional
lines in Japan. His importance lies in the fact that he studied
Sanskrit by himself in the pre-meiji period without being
subjected to the influence of Indian pundits. He was from Shigon
sect; this sect was known for its tradition of learning Sanskrit
characters in order to read the Dharanis. He wrote several articles
on Sanskrit grammar and he read the Sanskrit manuscripts of
Horyuji and other monasteries. He published Sanskrit editions of
three sutras namely the Sukhavativyuha, the Bhadracari-nama-
aryasamantabhadra-pranidhana and the Prajna-paromita-hrdaya. He
made a Bongaku-shinryo (A guide to sanskrit study) it was a
remarkable attempt and probably the first of its kinds in the
world. These collections were published in 1953 at Osaka to
commemorate the 150th anniversary of his death.
As a Buddhist country, Japan had encouraged Buddhist studies
throughout the ages, but it was only in 18th century that this
attained wide popularity. Sanskrit studies are among the
important works on this period that show a critical approach. The
study of Sanskrit was introduced in Japan with research on
Mahayana Buddhism. The credit of pioneering Sanskrit research
on modern lines in Japan goes to Banyiu Nanjio (1849-1927). He
introduced Sanskrit classes at Otani University and this marked
the beginning of research studies in Japan. Today the universities
of Tokyo, Kyushu, Nagoya, Osaka, also hold Sanskrit seminars.
Nanjio published a Sanskrit text of Vajracchedika in 1881; his
other publications are Sanddharma-pundurikasutra
(bibliography Buddha, vol 10, 1909) and Suvrna-Prabhasa (Kyoto
1931). U.Wogihara a former professor of Taisho University edited
number of Sanskrit texts along with Nanjio. In this way the Indian
culture of Buddhism was adopted and inculcated in the Japanese
culture.
31
Root of culture cemented with the impact of Indian Pre-Independence in

line with the World War-II….
Culture did create the bonding with the impetutual incidents that
symbolized Indian pre-independent movement during the phase
of World-War II. Many activists escaped from British rule and
stayed in Japan. The leader of the Indian Independence
Movement, Rash Behari Bose created IndiaJapan relations. Future
prime minister Tsuyoshi Inukai, pan-Asianist Mitsuru Toyama
and other Japanese supported the Indian Independence
movement A.M. Nair, a student from India, became an
Independence Movement activist. Nair supported Netaji Subash
Chandra Bose during the war and Justice Radha Binod Pal after
the war. Rash Behari Bose and Radha Binod Pal have been
conferred the highest civilian honor of Japan becoming a legend
of Indo-Japan relationship which has fostered further the cultural
ties between the two countries. Culture thrives with the
monumental events that are instituted by the legends who can
influence both the countries. Other luminaries of India like Swami
Vivekananda went to Japan at the end of 19th century and were
overwhelmed by the Japanese socio-economic culture which had
profound impact on their live hood and the school of thoughts. He
vehemently came forward to support the claim of the myth about
Japan as the “country of sunrise”. Moreover, he pitched for the
Japan culture and advised that Indian culture also needed to be
admired and then follow the Japanese culture and their mental
state of mind which would reflect through their culture.
Japan's emergence as a power in the early 20th century was
positively viewed in India and symbolized what was seen as the
beginning of an Asian resurgence. In India, there was a great
admiration for Japan's post-war economic reconstruction and
subsequent rapid growth. Correspondences between the
distinguished individuals from both nations had a noticeable
increase at the time; historical documents show a friendship
between Japanese thinker Okakura Tenshin and Indian writer
Rabindranath Tagore and Bengali poet Priamvada Banerjee
India and Japan were closely linked during the Indian
32
independence movement. The alliance arose from talks between

Japanese Lieutenant-General Renya Mutaguchi, Japanese War
Minister Hideki Tojo, and Subhas Chandra Bose, who led the
Azad Hind, a militant movement which was dedicated to freeing
India from the British rule, and armed forces. The Azad Hind Fauj
or Indian National Army (INA) was composed mainly of former
prisoners of war from the British Indian Army who had been
captured by the Japanese after the fall of Singapore and Indian
expatriates. At the International Military Tribunal for the Far East,
one of the dissenting judgments in favour of Japan was made by
Indian Justice Radhabinod Pal. The principled judgment of
Justice Radha Binod Pal is remembered even today in Japan. This
became a symbol of the perceived closeness and established
culture of India and Japan.
Augmentation of cultural Relationship on the wake of
India as a Sovereign nation
To mark the relationship and to strengthen in 1949, India sent to
the Tokyo Zoo two elephants to cheer the spirits of the defeated
Japanese empire. Many in Japan also remember India's refusal to
attend the San Francisco Peace Conference in 1951 for the reason
that India was concerned for the limitation on the Japanese
sovereignty and national independence. After Japanese
restoration of sovereignty, Japan and India signed a separate
peace treaty and established diplomatic relations on 28 April
1952, in which India waived all reparation claims against Japan.
This treaty was one of the first treaties Japan signed after the
World War II. There after diplomatic, trade, economic, and
technical relations between India and Japan were well
established. India's iron ore helped Japan's recovery from World
War II devastation and following the Japanese Prime Minister
Nobusuke Kishi's visit to India in 1957, Japan started providing
yen loans to India in 1958, as the first yen loan aid extended by
Japanese government. Relations between the two nations were
constrained, however, by Cold War politics. Japan, as a result of
World War II reconstruction, was a U.S. ally, while India pursued
a non-aligned foreign policy. Since the 1980s, however, efforts
33
were made to strengthen bilateral ties. India's 'Look East' policy

projected Japan as a key partner. Since 1986, Japan has become
India's largest aid donor and remains so.
Relations between the two nations reached a brief low in 1998 as a
result of Pokhran-II, an Indian nuclear weapons test that year.
Japan imposed sanctions on India following the test, which
included the suspension of all political exchanges and the cutting
off of economic assistance. These sanctions were lifted three years
later. Relations improved exponentially following this period, as
bilateral relations between the two nations improved once again.
Modern relations
Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee visited Japan in December, 2001,
where both the Prime Ministers issued "Japan-India Joint
Declaration", consisting of high-level dialogue, economic
cooperation, and military and anti-terrorism cooperation. In
April, 2005, Japanese Prime Minister Koizumi visited India and
signed Joint Statement "Japan-India Partnership in the New Asian
Era: Strategic Orientation of Japan-India Global Partnership" with
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
Japan is currently India's third largest source of foreign direct
investment; Japanese companies have made cumulative
investments of around $2.6 billion in India since 1991. The 2007
annual survey conducted by the Japan Bank for International
Cooperation ranked India as the most promising overseas
investment destination for Japanese companies over the long
term. In recent years, Japan has assisted India in infrastructure
development projects such as the Delhi Metro Rail Project. Both
sides are discussing the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor
Project and Dedicated Freight Corridor Projects on the Mumbai-
Delhi and the Delhi-Howrah routes.[11] . The Japanese
government has also expressed interest to help establish a
Dedicated Freight Corridor in the south, connecting the cities of
Bangalore and Chennai.
In October 2008, Japan signed an agreement with India under
which it would provide the latter a low-interest loan worth
34
US$4.5 billion to construct a railway project between Delhi and

Mumbai. This is the single largest overseas project being financed
by Japan and reflected the growing economic partnership
between the two. India is also one of the only three countries in the
world with whom Japan has security pact, the other two being
Australia and the United States. As of March 2006, Japan was the
third largest investor in India with an estimated total investment
of US$2.12 billion.
Kenichi Yoshida, a director of Softbridge Solutions Japan, stated
in late 2009 that Indian engineers were becoming the backbone of
Japan's IT industry. During Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's
visit to Japan in 2010, both the countries agreed to foster increased
business exchanges, people-to-people contact and signed a
memorandum of understanding to simplify visa procedures for
each other's citizens. Under the memorandum, any Japanese
coming to India for business or work will be straightway granted
a three-year visa and similar procedures will be followed by
Japan. The other highlight of this visit includes abolition of
customs duties on 94 per cent of trade between the two nations
over the next decade. As per the agreement, tariffs will be
removed on almost 90 per cent of Japan's exports to India and 97
per cent of India's exports to Japan
Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force and Indian Navy warships
took part in the Malabar 2007 naval exercises off India's western
coast, one of many such multilateral exercises in which Japan had
taken part by symbolizing close military cooperation between
India and Japan.
India and Japan also have close military ties. They have shared
interests in maintaining the security of sea-lanes in the Asia-
Pacific and the Indian Ocean and in cooperation for fighting
international crime, terrorism, piracy and proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction. The two nations have frequently
held joint military exercises and they cooperate on technology.
India and Japan concluded a security pact on 22 October 2008.
35
Exchange of expatriates between the countries augments the

opportunities of cultural exchanges based on the people to people
contact. India and Japan have been benefited through these
various natures of exchanges and became a symbol of harmony
that have fostered the cultural relationship further.
Trade Partnership Foster Cultural Relationship.........
Culture being the driven force in the human activities, has also an
equal magnitude in form to forming relationship vis-à-vis wooing
the confidence through exchanging of experience eliciting from
the respective divested culture from the two nations. Indo-Japan
relationship has been the striking force to the various forms of
multiple cultural activities paving the way forward for the other
thriving relationship in the different spear.
In recent years, India and Japan have strengthened bilateral ties
through new initiatives and programmes ranging from economic
and cultural linkages to defence and security. The year 2007 was
celebrated as the Year of Friendship between the two countries.
Japan gives 30 per cent of its overseas development assistance
(ODA) to India and remains committed even in the period of the
global economic downturn. For Example, Japan has granted
almost $4 billion for the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor
(DMIC).
Nevertheless, the economic part of the relationship remains far
below potential. Two way trade between India and Japan ($10,177
million in 2007-08) has risen in the last five years, but the figure
still remains way below China-Japan trade ($2,37,193million) or
even trade between India and China ($37,931 million in 2007-
08).Similarly, Japan's foreign direct investment in India for April
2007-March 2008($815 million) is still low when compared to
Japanese investments in smaller Asian countries such as Vietnam
($411 million), not to mention China ($1899 million).
For many countries in the region, the enhanced trade and
investment relations between Japan and India would act as a
counterbalance to the growing influence of China.
36
Stronger economic ties with Japan would also help India establish
its presence in East Asia and get market access for its exports
through Japan's bilateral agreements with other countries in the
region.
Flourishing of Cultural Relationship
The relationship between these two countries traverse through
different streams of scenario from the period of 6th century to the
period of new age technology. Series of laid-down-incidents is the
manifestation of the relationship in various forms of its kind.
Culture is another form which breeds from the other relationship.
The two nations announced 2007 as Japan-India Friendship Year
and held cultural events in both India and Japan.
Osamu Tezuka, kamisama of manga wrote biographical manga
Buddha from 1972 to 1983. Recently, Japan has also supported the
reconstruction of Nalanda University, an ancient Buddhist center
of learning and has agreed to provide financial assistance and
recently approached the Indian government with a proposal.
The cultural exchanges between the two countries created many
parallels in their folklore. Modern popular culture based upon
this folklore, such as works of fantacy fiction in manga and anime,
sometimes bear references to common deities demons (asura) and
philosophical concepts. The Indian goddess Sarawati for
example, is known as Benzaiten in Japan. Brahma, known as
'Bonten', Yama, known as 'Enma', are also part of the traditional
Japanese Buddhist pantheon. In addition to the common
Buddhist influence on the two societies, Shintoism, being an
animist religion, is similar to the animist strands of Hinduism, in
contrast to the religions present in the rest of the world, which are
monotheistic. Sanskrit, a classical language used in Buddhism
and Hinduism, is still used by some ancient Chinese priests who
immigrated to Japan, and the Siddham Script is still written to this
day, despite having passed out of usage in India. It is also thought
that the distinctive torii gateways at temples in Japan may be
related to the torana gateways used in Indian temples.
37
Conclusion
Swami Vivekananda highlighted about Japan way back in 1893.
The contrast between the rapid progress of Japan and the
situation back in India, made him urge his countrymen, whom he
called, "The offspring of centuries of superstition and tyranny", to
come out of their shell and have a look abroad. He suggested that
"Only I want that many of our young men must visit Japan every
year. Especially, Japanese, consider India still the dreamland of
everything pure and good. But relations between the two nations
reached a brief low in 1998 as a result of Pokhran-II, an Indian
nuclear weapons test that year. Japan imposed sanctions on India
following the test, which included the suspension of all political
exchanges and the cutting off of economic assistance. These
sanctions were lifted three years later. The relations improved
exponentially following this period, as bilateral relations between
the two nations improved once again. So, from this descriptive
study it has been found and substantiated that Cultural
relationship between these gigantic giants in Asia has been
evolved and shaped from the ancient times through many
exchanges of cultural importance coined by the noted statesmen
as well spokesmen of both the countries. Other exchange of
relationship in the form of Trade, Buddhism, Religions, and core
cultural programmes are responsible to bring the two gigantic
nations together. On the contrary it is the route of cultural
exchange that can form an untiring bondage between the two
elephants of Asian power house.
38
References
1. Communication Style and Cultural Features in High/Low Context
Communication Cultures: A Case Study of Finland, Japan and India
by Shoji Nishimura1, Anne Nevgi2 and Seppo Tella3.
2. Chellaney, Brahma, “Asia's new strategic partners,” The Japan Times, 11
December 2009b. [http://search. japantimes.co.jp/print/
eo20091210bc.html].
3. Embassy, Embassy of Japan, New Delhi, October 2010.
4. JSG (2006): “Report of the India-Japan Joint Study Group”, June.
5. The Spread of Buddhism in Asia, Berzin, Originally published as part
of Alexander. Buddhism and Its Impact on Asia. Asian Monographs,
no. 8. Cairo: Cairo University, Center for Asian Studies, June 1996
6. India Japan relations on line.com
7. Kagan, Robert, The Return of History and the End of Dreams. London:
Atlantic Books, 2008.
8. UNCTAD (2008, 2007, 2006), World Investment Report, United Nations,
New York.
9. www. economic survey India Japan survey.com
10. www. Indo Japan bilateral trade.com
39
Rabindranath Tagore and Miyazawa Kenji:
A Vision of the Supreme Self
Eiko Ohira
I-A new frame of civilization

Takeshi Uemehara, a distinguished Japanese philosopher, insists
that the survivors of the 3.11 disaster in northeast Japan should
create a new type of civilization, based on the idea of “Soumoku
Kokudo Shikkai Jobutsu,” which means that all trees and plants
attain nirvana (“What is 3. 11 for me?” NHK Education　 March
10, 2012). He suggests that this should be the universal
philosophy to share with people around the world. In fact, this is
not a new idea. Kenji Miyazawa (1896-1933), a revered Japanese
poet and writer of children's stories in the Taisho and early Showa
periods, used it in his stories and poems, showing how animals
and plants feel as human beings do.
Rabindranath Tagore repeatedly denounced the excessive
militaristic and commercial activities in modernized Japan in his
essays of the 1910s and 1920s (The Spirit of Japan 1916; Nationalism
1917, “The Japanese Character” 1925; “On Oriental Culture and
Japanese Mission” 1929) because he believed that the mainspring
of Japanese civilization is “the bond of human relationships” (The
Spirit of Japan 21) and the spiritual bond of both animate and
inanimate nature, which suggests an ecological oneness. Dharma,
according to Tagore's explanation in “Civilization and Progress”
could be translated as “civilization” and he suggested that Japan's
spiritual bonds with the whole of nature should be shared with
others as a universal value. Tagore insisted that the mission of
civilization is to unite people and bring peace and harmony
(“Crisis in Civilization” 725) allowing us to transcend the limits of
modernism and individualism.
So almost a century ago, Tagore and Kenji left us with similar
messages about peaceful co-existence, ecological oneness which
could be realized by enlarging one's consciousness through self-
abandonment and an aesthetic sense.
40
Rabindranath Tagore and Miyazawa Kenji: A Vision of the Supreme Self
II- Friendship between Tagore and Japanese artists and

writers
Hemant Krishan Singh, the Indian ambassador to Japan at the
time, mentioned the friendship between Tagore and Tenshin (the
penname of Kakuzo Okakura, 1862-1913) a Japanese scholar of
arts, in his speech celebrating the 50th anniversary of Indo-Japan
friendship at International Christian University on 2 May, 2007
(“The Significance of Cultural Exchange between Japan and
India”). According to Tatuso Morimoto, a scholar of modern
Indian thought and literature, Tenshin was the first Japanese with
whom Tagore could have a heart-to-heart talk (“Tagore and
Okakura Tenshin,” The Collected Works of Tagore, supplement 186).
The friendship and cultural exchange between Tagore and
Tenshin as well as other Japanese artists and writers such as
Taikan Yokoyama and Yone Noguchi are well known among
both the Japanese and the Indian scholars. However, the
relationship between Tagore and Kenji is not well known among
the Indian scholars. Even the Japanese scholars who know The
Glossarial Dictionary of Miyazawa Kenji and The New Glossarial
Dictionary of Miyazawa Kenji have mentioned that Tagore's
influence on Kenji has not been explored even in their areas of
comparative studies, except for Prof. Hisaya Yoshie, a scholar of
Japanese literature.
III-Tagore Fever in the Taisho period and afterwards
The Tagore fever in the Taisho period (1912-26) conversely caused
a wave of negative reactions by some Japanese writers, which
made them keep away from his literary works. However,
Tagore's ideas and spirit had a great influence on Kenji.
Kenji's poems and stories have been translated into many other
languages and you will find many devotees of his work around
the world. In Japanese textbooks since 1946, you will find extracts
from The Restaurants of Many Orders (1924) Milky Way Railroad
(manuscript 1927) Matasaburo of the Wind (posthumous) and
Spring and Ashura (1924). These have had a great influence on
liberal education in Japan. Phrases from his works are often
41
quoted, for example, in a Japan Railway advertisement: “Let's go

to Ihatov (=Iwate, Kenji's homeland). Ihatov is a word every child
knows, and it connects Kenji to Tagore and also helps us to
understand his utopian world. In The Restaurant of Many Orders
we learn that “Ihatov is a dreamland in the northeast of the desert
of Tepantar”, which is an imaginary name seen in Tagore's “The
Land of Exile” in Crescent Moon (1913).
IV- Tagore and Kenji
In the Taisho period in Japan (1912-26) “vitalism" or "biologism,”
in which “life” was seen as the principle of thought, became a
popular notion. Writers of the “Shirakaba School,” including
Kenji, shared the idea that the whole universe is one living
organism, with individuals as part of it. Kenji was mainly
influenced by Nichiren-sect Buddhism in adopting this view but
some scholars have also mentioned about Tagore's influence. In
Tagore and Kenji (1998) Professor Yoshie argues that Kenji
incorporated most of Tagore's ideas about nature and the will of
the universe in his poems and stories in his own unique way. Here
I would like to focus on The Bears of Mt. Nametoko (manuscript
c.1927) which Professor Yoshie did not deal with in his book and
discuss how Kenji shared Tagore's idea about the harmony of the
universe and how it can be fathomed through an aesthetic sense
and self-abandonment, which leads a man to go beyond the
borders of self to be united with the universe to find divinity
immanent in each innermost heart and realize a unified self ( the
supreme self).
The Bears of Mt. Nametoko is one of Kenji's stories which shows
how a human being is part of the whole universe, one organism of
Life. This is shown by depicting the love and sympathy that exist
between a hunter, Kojuro, the protagonist and the bears of Mt.
Nametoko. Kojuro does not like to go to the town to sell bear
skins and gall bladders, which were valued for medical uses,
because he did not like to negotiate with a sly and cunning
ironmonger who always drives a hard bargain. Some scholars
insist that Kojuro signifies a mountain god who had to cross the
42
border between a mountain and a village or a town because of the

modernization of the nation after the Meiji restoration, which
nationalized the forests, fields and lands. “It's been decided that
my trees belong to the Authorities” says Kojuro, who then goes
down to the village. There, he is doubly marginalized and
trapped in the system of civilized capitalized modern society but
he feels unable to be part of it, half belonging to the mountain
community. Of course he suffers from this Asura-like life,
however he experiences a revelation through the bears' love and
sacrifice for him.
One summer day Kojuro comes across a big bear, and as he is “just
about to pull the trigger”, the bear throws up her arms and calls
out “Why kill me?” He answers “I really hate to do it, but it can't
be helped. But when you question me like this, it makes me feel
like I should just eat chestnuts and acorns and the like and if I die,
then so be it” (13). However, he cannot give up hunting as a way to
make a living. The bear entreats him to wait for two years, saying,
“I really wouldn't mind dying now, but there's some work I need
to finish…I promise that in two years time I will die right in front
of your house.” (13) Kojuro, being “overcome by a strange
feeling” stands there and “remained standing, as if in a daze” (13).
Then, one morning after two years have passed he finds below his
cypress hedge a reddish-black shape lying with “a pool of blood
running out of its mouth” (13). “Without thinking, Kojuro folded
his hands in prayer” (13).
The bear clearly has not failed to keep her word. The sacrifice of
this bear reminds us of the story of Buddha's self-immolation for a
starving tiger. In Kojuro, this arouses divine feeling for the bear.
Some scholars state that the bear resembles the sacrificial one
which personifies God in an Ainu legend. The bear who has kept
her word and died in front of Kojuro's house has not just sacrificed
herself, but showed her own will to die for the other bears, which
subverts Darwinian law. In fact, the bear seems to show the way
to be a bodhisattva.
43
Kojuro not only feels that he can understand what the bears say to
each other but also feels the awe roused in him by the bears. One
day Kojuro happens to head off in the wrong direction and is
surprised at the sight of “a sow bear and her cub, hardly a year
old”, who are “gazing intently at the opposite side of the valley,
holding their paws up to their foreheads as would a person
peering off into the distance” (8) in pale moonlight. It seems to
Kojuro as if halos radiate from the bears' bodies, and he stops in
his tracks transfixed by the scene before him. Then, he hears the
little bear speak. He listens to them talk about the white thing on
the opposite side of the valley-snow or frost? or magnolia
blossoms? Kojuro feels his heart grow full and he retreats slowly,
so that his steps will not be heard by the sow and cub, who are still
absorbed in their conversation. Kojuro sees divinity in them as
they are absorbed in the beauty of nature. Tagore said that the
harmony of the universe would be revealed to us by the
purification of the aesthetic sense and that “beauty is His [God's]
wooing of our heart”(Sadhana 91). The bears might have seen the
reflection of divine will in the white thing, which makes Kojuro
abandon shooting them. This seems to be the moment the bears
set him free from “the self in carnage” (one who kills for a living)
and arouse in him the other self who sees far beyond his present
existence to a larger self, as Tagore says in Sadhana. Tagore states
that there are two birds in man, “the objective one with its
business of life, the subjective one with its disinterested joy of
vision”; “the finite self” and “the infinite being” (The Religion of
Man 123). Kojuro receives a revelation of the infinite being in
himself, being inspired by the bears like “the bird which looks on”
(Religion 123). The reality of struggle for survival (kill or to be
killed) does not change. However Kojuro is conscious of a union
with the bears [a unified self].
Another day Kojuro came across a huge bear, who “had risen up
on its hind legs and was charging toward him” (20). Despite the
crack of his gun, the bear doesn't stumble and keeps advancing
towards him like “a wavering black storm front.” When Kojuro
feels that he is about to die, he hears a voice from afar, “Ah,
44
Kojuro. I didn't mean to kill you” (20) and when he thinks he is

dead already he sees “glittering lights like blue stars around him
and he apologizes to the bears for the shot he made, saying, “This
must be a sign that I am dead…Bears, please forgive me” (20).
The bears mourn Kojuro's death and pay homage. The “large
black forms of bears” gather in a circle around Kojuro's dead
body. On the night of the third day after this, with “a moon like a
ball of ice hung in the sky,” they throw themselves at Kojuro's feet,
and “remained motionless for what seemed like eternity” (20).
The narrator then says, “One might even imagine that Kojuro's
dead, frozen face looked as serene as while he lived and that a
faint smile played across his lips” (20-21). What does this signify?
As some scholars state, it could only mean that death releases
Kojuro from his Asuric life? Does his death set him free from the
world of original sin where living things kills each other to
survive? I think that it is not death itself but his consciousness of
self-abandonment which sets him free. Kojuro's serene face seems
to suggest that he has entrusted his own life to the subsuming life
of the universe through a complete self-abandonment, and like a
wave in the sea he was united with the universal self.
Why do the bears mourn Kojuro's death and pay homage to him?
It seems they also see divinity in Kojuro, who always felt awful
about shooting them, which is why he felt obliged to give up
hunting. Kojuro and the bears are like lovers united through an
ideal projective identification because they see divinity in each
other's existence. According to the Upanishads seeing yourself in
everything will bring you peace.
The affinity between Kojuro and the bears forms a strong contrast
to the enmity between Kojuro and the ironmonger whose
degrading treatment makes him feel miserable. In the story two
different worlds are depicted: one is the community of Mt.
Nametoko, where Kojuro, the master of the mountains, is
respected and loved by the bears; the other is the modern urban
society in which capitalism dominates, and only the fittest can
survive. Kojuro, the weak, feels miserable because the
45
shopkeeper, the strong, thinks of him as a source of exploitation.

There is no hierarchy in the Mt. Nametoko community, no
differentiation between human beings and animals or inanimate
nature. So Kojuro there feels he is part of the animate nature,
while in the town the ironmonger thinks of Kojuro and the bears
only as resources to be exploited.
The critics usually focus on the utopian aspects of Kenji's
children's stories. But this is not a story only of optimistic
harmony between the human beings and bears and the inanimate
nature, but also a story of bloody killings between them. Kojuro
represents the reality that every living thing in this world
depends on the sacrifice of other living things. Thus he makes the
system visible by his way of living. Mt. Nametoko, however,
becomes a space where one human being and the bears can
coexist with mutual respect, love and self-abandonment, a space
in which an individual can go beyond the borders of self to be
united with the universe and can find divinity immanent in each
innermost heart and realize a unified self. This corresponds to
Tagore's idea of self-realization (=Sadhana), which means that an
individual realizes that he is completely united with the universe
(=God, the immortal, the infinite, universal Life the Supreme self).
Tagore states in Sadhana that a man desires to go beyond himself
to dedicate himself to an idea, for example his nation, the human
race, or God. Thus he can enlarge his consciousness through his
self-abandonment, a process of opening the deepest part of the
human soul to be united with the Infinite. For Tagore, a person
who is conscious of such a union will see divinity in everything
under the sun with deep respect and love, and will realize that the
world is not divided, but is a peaceful and harmonious place
controlled by an immortal order.
V-Conclusion
Tagore and Kenji may seem to be too optimistic, however, I do not
think so. In the first place, as we have seen Kenji, let us know the
fatal truth that we cannot live without the sacrifice of other living
things, which awakens the feeling of gratitude for the whole of
46
nature as well as arousing guilty feelings and humility in us.

Everyone knows that wherever human beings live, we can't be
free from the power plays caused by the self-centered dynamism
of some specific ethnic, religious, and political groups as well as
the self-centeredness of the individual existence. However, the
3.11 disaster in Japan showed how people could transcend their
self-centered existence. Many firemen sacrificed their lives to help
the drowning epople; one young staffer at a city hall inundated by
the tsunami did not stop broadcasting emergency radio messages
and failed to escape; one village leader came back to carry older
people to safety on his back; some families came back to help
rescue their dogs and were swept away. In fact, many people
sacrificed their lives for their families and communities. It is often
said that Kenji led a bodhisattva's life through his writing, though
he suffered the serious conflict between the bodhisattva and the
asura life. The 3.11 disaster showed how many people could be
bodhisattvas themselves, which entices us to believe in Tagore's
idea that we have both “the self in carnage” (one who kills for a
living) and a larger self, the infinite being which is aroused by
something beautiful or unexpected, a spirit of love for others.
Tagore and Tenshin, these two talented artists of a rare kind made
a history of cross-cultural friendship between India and Japan.
Kenji, another talented poet of a rare kind who was influenced by
Tagore's ideas and spirit, created stories about a utopian world
where an individual self is united with the universe, thus also
establishing a spiritual bond with Tagore. Their messages of
peace and true prosperity and how an individual self is united
with the universe which could be attained only by transcending
one's self-centered existence, show the way for us who live in the
global age, which ironically is a lost age, with no grand narrative,
to attain our larger self (=a supreme self).
I hope a proper critical perspective on such affiliations can lead us
to a dynamic paradigm shift an eastern alternative to literary
studies which have long been monopolized by the dominant
western ideas of the arts and humanities.
47
References
Amazawa,　Taijiro,　Kaneko　Tsutomu,　and　Suzuki　sadami.　Eds.　
Miyazawa　 Kenji　 :　 Ihatov　 Study　 Encyclopedia. Tokyo: Kobundo,
2010.
Azuma,　Kazuo. Tagore: Poems, Thought, Life. Reitaku UP, Tokyo, 2006.
Bharucha, Rustom. Another Asia: Rabindranath Tagore & Okakura Tenshin.
New Delhi: Oxford UP, 2006.
Estborn,　 Aron　 Sigfrid.　 The　 Religion　 of　 Tagore　 in　 the　 Light　 of　
the　 Gospel.　 Madras:　 The　 Christian　 Literature　 Society for
India, 1949.
Ebe, Oson.Tagore's Thought and Religion . Nichigetsusha, 1915.
Furuya, Tsunatake. “On The Bears of Mt. Nametoko”. The Collected Essays
on Miyazawa Kenji. Vo. 6. Zokuhashi　S. Ed. Japan Book Center, 1990:
159-177.
Hara, Shiro.　 Ed. The Glossarial Dictionary of Miyazawa Kenji. Tokyo:
Tokyoshoin, 1989.
Hara, Shiro. Ed. The New Glossarial Dicitonary of Miyazawa Kenji. Tokyo:
Tokyoshoseki, 1999.
Hay, Stephan N. Asian Ideals of East and West: Tagore and His Critics in Japan,
China, and India. Cambridge: Harvard UP. 1970.
Ishikawa, Yasuaki. Nichiren and Modern Writers. Tokyo: Pikata, 1978.
Kiyosawa, Iwao Ed. The Prominent Figures' View of Tagore. Jonannsha, 1915.
-----Ed. Saint Tagore. Jonansha, 1916.
Komori, Yoichi. The Newest Lecture on Miyazawa Kenji. Asahi Shinbunsha,
1996.
Miyazawa, Kenji. The Bears of Mt. Nametoko. Trans. Karen Colligan-Taylor.
Tokyo: International Foundation for the Promotion of Languages and
Culture. 1934. Trans. of “Nametokoyama no Kuma”. c. 1927.
-----The Restaurants of Many Orders and Other Stories. 1924. Trans. John Bester.
Tokyo: Kodansha, 1985.
-----Milky Way Railroad. 1934. Trans. Joseph Sigrist and D. M. Stroud.
Berkeley, California: Stone Bridge Press, 2009.
-----“Matasaburo of the Wind”. Masterworks of Miyazawa Kenji: Poems and
48
Fairy Tales. Trans. Sarah M. Strong and Karen Colligan-Talor. Tokyo:

Sanmark Press, 2002.
Miyazawa, Seiroku, Amazawa T., Irisawa Y., Okuda H., Kurihara A., and
Sugiura S., Eds. The Collected Original Works of Miyazawa Kenji, The New
Version Vo. 10.　Children's Stories III, Chikumashobo, 1995.
Nakagawa, Ringen. Tagore: The Realization of Life. Shinchousha, 1915.
Nakamura, Gen. The Life of Gautama Buddha. Collected Works of Nakamura
Gen vol.11. Shunjusha, 1969.
-----The History of Indian Thought. Iwanami, 1968.
-----The History of Hindu Religion. History of World Religion Series.
Yamakawa Publishing House,1979.
-----The Thought of Upanishad. The Collected Works of Nakamura Gen. vol.9.
Shunjusha,1990.
-----The Thought of Veda. The Collected Works of Nakamura Gen. vol. 8.
Shunjusha,1989.
Noguchi, Yonejiro. An Indian Poet. Daiichishobou, 1926.
Oh, Sunhwa. The Lotus Sutra Literature of Miyazawa Kenji: The Wandering
Spirit. Tokyo: Tokai Univ. Press, 2000.　
Orui, Jun. Tagore Tokyo :Ushio, 1971.　 Ebihara Tokuo. Roman Roland and
Tagore. Daisanbunmeisha, 1980.　 Azuma, Kazuo. The Intellectual
Heritage of Human Race Series Vol. 61. Koudansha, 1981.
Rabindranath. Tagore, Sadhana: The Realization of Life, 1913. Filiquarian
Publishing, LLC, 2011.
-----The Spirit of Japan, The Indo-Japanese Association, Tokyo, 1916.
-----Nationalism, 1917, Penguin, London, 2010.
-----“The Japanese Character”, 1925. The Collected Works of　 Rabindranath
Tagore, Kora Tomi, trans., Daisanbunmei, Publications, Tokyo, 1981,
501-507.
-----On Oriental Culture and Japanese Mission, 1929, in Sisir Kumar Das, ed, The
English Writings of Rabindranath Tagore, Vol. 3, Sahitya Akademi, New
Delhi, 2008.
-----The Religion of Man. 1931, Rupa & Co., New Delhi, 2005.
-----“Crisis in Civilization”. 1941. The Collected Works of　Rabindranath Tagore,
Kora Tomi, trans., Daisanbunmei, Publications, Tokyo, 1981, 722-26.
49
-----“The Crescent Moon”. The Collected Poem and Plays of Rabindranath Tagore.
1936. New Delhi: Rupa, 2005: 49-86.
-----The Crescent Moon. London: Macmillan, 1913.
Singh, Hemant Krishan. “India and Japan in the 21st Century: Ambassador's
Address at the International Christian University on 2 May, 2007”.
Significance of Cultural Exchange between Japan and India. ICU
Institute of Asian Cultural Studies. 2007: 1-6.
supplement, Daisanbunmei Publications, Tokyo, 1993, 186-205.
Saiki, Sensui. Tagore's Philosophy . Touadoushobou, 1915.
-----Kabir and Tagore. Toukadoushobou, 1915.
-----Tagore's Songs.　Okazakiyashoten, 1915.
Tagore Society Ed. Tagore: Collected Essays to Commemorate the 100th
Anniversary of Tagore's Birth. Committee of Tagore Anniversary, 1961.
Tatsuo. Morimoto, “Tagore and Okakura Tenshin”, The Collected Works of
Tagore,
Umehara, Takeshi “What is 3. 11 for me?” NHK Education　March 10, 2012.
Watabe, Yoshinori. Ed. A Comprehensive Dictionary of Miyazawa Kenji. Tokyo:
Bensei Press, 2007.
Yagyu, Shiro. Tagore Bibliography. Tokyo Univ. Library,1967.
Yamamuro, Shizuka, Noma Hiroshi, Morimoto Tatsuo, and Azuma Kazuo.
Eds.Tagore Studies: Collected Essays on Tagore. Collected Works of Tagore.
supplement. Daisanbunmeisha,1993.
Yamamuro, Shizuka. On the Borderline between Literature and Morality.
Hobunsha, 1958.
-----A Study of Tagore. Daisanbunmei, 1993.　 Morimoto, Tatsuo. Gandhi and
Tagore. Daisannbunnmeisha, 1995.
Yoshida, Genjiro. The Life of Saint Tagore. Tengendoushobou, 1915.
-----Tagore's Philosophy and Literature. Daidokanshoten, 1915.
Yoshie, Hisaya. Tagore and Kenji . Musashinoshoin, 1998.
50
Indo-Japan Cultural Relations, with a Reference to
Urdu in Japan: The Role of Japanese Urdu Scholars
Taiyaba Nazil
The cultural ties between India and Japan existed since the time
immemorial. The history records that Buddhism was carried to
Japan from India in 7th Century A.D, It was spread via China and
Korea. Cultural exchanges between India and Japan began in 6th
century with the introduction of Buddhism to Japan. The Indian
monk Bodhisena visited Japan in 736 A.D for the purpose of
spreading Buddhism and lived in Japan till his death in 760.
Buddhism had great impact on Japanese culture which resulted in
healthy relations between the two nations.
Due to the visits of monks, scholars and students kept coming to
Japan from India. They had been visiting Japan since the 8th
century. The Nalanda University library recorded the arrival of
the scholars and students from Japan to attend the school Tenjiku
Tokubei was the most famous Japanese traveler who visited India
(1612-1642). He was named after 'Tenjiku' the Japanese name for
India which means “Heavenly Abode”. The relation between the
two nations began when Japan established political connections
with the Portugese colonies in India in 16th century, but the direct
political scenario emerged in the reign of Mieji (1868-1912) when
Japan adapted the policy of modernization. Further cultural
exchange took place in the late 20th century when the Indian
cinema and Japanese cinema had their greatest influence on the
Indian and Japanese societies. Films made by Satyajit Ray,
Gurudutt and Rajnikanth in India were immensely liked and
appreciated in Japan and back in India Japanese films by Akira
Kurusava and others had a great impact and influence during
1950's and 1960's.
India admired Japan's post war economic progress and the pace
of growth which reconstructed Japan at the fastest speed. India
welcomed and accepted Japan as an emerging power in the early
20th century. Japan's victory in the Russian- Japanese war in 1905
51
inspired Indians who were then struggling for freedom. Japan

came forward in strengthening the friendship by forming a base
for Indian revolutionaries to take refuge. Many Indian leaders
were provided with the assistance by the influential Japanese
nationalists, who promoted a close relationship between the
Indians and the Japanese.
Japan became an example for its zeal to maintain its
independence along with a continuous and rapid success in
modernizing itself. Hence in (1863-1902)1892 Swami
Vivekananda on his way to World Congress of Religions, at
Chicago (1893) appreciated Japan's progress and had remarked
that India had to learn a lot from Japan.
History maintains that there was friendship between Japanese
thinker Okakaru Tenshin and Indian writer, poet, painter,
philosopher Rabindranath Tagore, O.Tenshin and Priyamvada
Banerjee.
Okakaru Kakuzo and Rabindranath Tagore in India played a
significant role in the exchange of students and scholars between
Japan and India. Baron Okakaru visited India in 1902. He believed
that Asia was one and that the rudiments of all Asian cultures and
countries were same. Thus his thought became a source of
inspiration for political and cultural gurus/heads in India.
Okakaru an artist who belonged to Meiji school of art was quite
instrumental in making the leading Japanese artists to visit India,
who lived with Tagore family for 2 years in Bengal. These artists
influenced the modern art movement in Bengal to a great extent
under the leadership of Rabindranath Tagore. Juijitsu experts
were also sent to Shantiniketan to train students in Japanese
martial arts. Under the students exchange programme Indian
students also visited Japan for training in industries like ceramics
and textiles etc.,The Indian leader who greatly impressed the
Japanese was Gandhi. In the 1930, Japanese scholars visited India
along with Mr.Yori Nogudi, the poet who delivered lectures in
the University of Calcutta. A famous Japanese painter executed a
series of frescos on the life of Buddha.
52
Indo-Japan Cultural Relations, with a Reference to Urdu in Japan: The Role of Japanese Urdu Scholars
Though Sanskrit being a classical language is no more spoken in

India, which is the language used in Buddhism and Hinduism, is
still used by a few ancient priest in Japan and the Siddha script is
also written there .In 1899 Tokyo Imperial University setup a
chair in Sanskrit and Pali, setting up a chair also in comparative
religions in the year 1903. Japan India Association was founded in
1903.
In 1956 India Japan mixed cultural commission was found as per
the agreement between the govt. of India and of Japan for the
purpose of promoting cultural relations between the two nations.
The Commission was founded with the intention of enhancing
cultural relations by conducting cultural events both in Japan and
India, including dance, exhibition etc., visits of distinguished
people and achievers, exchange of scholars and artists.
Great interest was shown by the Japanese scholars in the studies
of medieval, modern and contemporary India. Both the countries
strengthened the relations by opening centres for teaching
language courses. Japanese studies centres have been established
in Indian Universities like JNTU, Delhi University and Vishwa
Bharti University. We look forward to a great cooperation and
exchange in Science and Technology too.
Times of India (a leading English News Paper) reports that the
popularity of Japanese as a language has grown considerably
among the students in the last two years. (Report Aug. 2nd, 2012).
JLPT ie Japanese Language Proficiency Test is recorded to have a
very good number of students in Pune (a city in Maharashtra). A
40% rise has been observed in the number of students taking the
test (JLPT) in Pune, which is the largest as compared to the other
cities of India. Pune had almost 1500 test takers till December
2011. Akitaka Saiki, the Ambassador of Japan expressed, “The
proposed Delhi Mumbai Industrial Corridors came up with
large investment by the Japanese govt. resulting in creation of
opportunities for the people conversant in Japanese”. Projawal
Channagire, Japanese language co-ordinator, Dept.of Foreign
Languages, University of Pune, said. “The popularity is evident
53
also from the no. of institutes that teach Japanese in the city; some
70 to 80 teachers are available in Pune. With the emerging ties
between India and Japan, many young graduates, IT
professionals are learning Japanese to explore their careers
options”. The Indian government has announced special schemes
to promote Japanese language.
The forthcoming paragraphs throw light upon the commendable
contributions made by the renowned Urdu scholars of Japan who
were attached to TUFS and dedicated their services for the
promotion of Urdu in Japan.
About TUFS:- Tokyo University of Foreign Studies has carried
out a wide variety of research on the world of Indian/ Islamic
culture which flourished and emerged by the convergence of the
worlds of India and the West Asia.
Urdu and Hindi, born in India are ranked as the III most spoken
languages in the world. While the tradition of Indian Studies
based on Buddhist philosophy and Sanskrit was encouraged,
modern Indian Studies including languages was also given
importance in Japan. The teaching of Urdu in Japan began when
the Tokyo School of Foreign Studies was established in 1908. In
the beginning it was called “The Department of Hindustani
Language” as the name was in vogue for Urdu in those days. In
1949, the school was upgraded to the status of a university and
two separate departments came into existence which are Urdu
and Hindi departments. According to Prof. Kataoka “Urdu was
introduced in Japan in 1663 when a ship came to Nagasaki from
Vietnam. The captain of the ship was a 'Moor' a Muslim. Professor
Nagashima discovered a polyglot of five languages compiled in
Nagasaki in the year 1971 which gives the synonym of a 'Moorish'
language. That Moorish language is in fact Persian, and the
Persian words are included in Urdu. This polyglot becomes the
first and oldest reference of Urdu in Japan.
The two learned men to whom Urdu owes most of its popularity
in Japan are Prof.Gamon Reiiki and Prof. Suzuki Takishi who are
rightly called 'Baba e-Urdu' means 'Father of Urdu' in Japan.
54
Urdu is taught in three major Universities of Japan besides other

institutions which are Tokyo University of Foreign Studies
(TUFS), Osaka University and Daitobunka University. In the year
2008 TUFS celebrated 100 years of teaching of Urdu. The scholars
associated with these Universities carried a commendable and
research work in Urdu language and literature. Some of them
came out with masterpieces of Urdu translated into Japanese.
Their tireless efforts made modern Urdu literature available in
Japanese making Urdu language and literature popular.
Contribution of Japanese Urdu Scholars:-
A brief introduction of the Urdu teachers/Professors in the
following will help us understand & appreciate their
contributions.
Professor Reiiki :- Who graduated from Tokyo School of
Foreign Languages, a predecessor of TUFS in 1923, joined the
same University in 1925 as a lecturer. He was the first Japanese to
teach Urdu in Japan, became a professor in 1934. It was very
difficult to teach Urdu in Japan without Urdu teaching material.
To overcome the problem, Professor Reiiki compiled some basic
Urdu books for Japanese students. In 1938, he wrote “Urdu Ki
Ibtedai Qavaid” or Basic Urdu grammar which helped
generations of Japanese who wished to learn Urdu.
His another contribution is the translation of Bagh-O- Bahar into
Japanese. His other works are the books on the history and culture
of Iran, Islam and Spoken Urdu. His personal collections of books
are available in TUFS Library
Professor Takeshi:- Prof. Suzuki Takeshi a student of Prof.
Reiiki joined TUFS in 1963. He translated modern Urdu fiction
into Japanese. He wrote many articles on the history and the
development of Urdu fiction, Urdu criticism and Tazkiras. He
presented research papers on Urdu literature regarding 1947
riots, and on Urdu's legendary publisher Munshi Naval Kishore.
His other works include Urdu Qavaid, Urdu Bolchal, Urdu -
Japanese dictionary, Ibtedai Urdu or Basic Urdu, Urdu Ki Aasan
Kahaniyan. Professor Takeshi's greatest contribution is the 20,000
55
word Urdu-Japanese dictionary which is an example of his

untiring efforts. He breathed his last in Jan.2005. AfterwardsS
Prof. Hiroshi Hagitha, an associate of Prof. Suzuki gave a final
shape to dictionary for publication.
Prof. Hiroji Kataoka:- Born in 1941 in Tokyo Prof. Kataoka
was the student of Prof. Suzuki Takishi. Having done his master's
in Urdu from Tokyo, Prof. Kataoka joined Osaka University in
1974 and taught Urdu language and literature. He was the Dean
Faculty of International Relations and Director, Institute of
Contemporary Asian Studies in Diatobunka University. He is
well known for his works on Ghalib, translated Dewan-e-Ghalib,
Iqbal's Baang -e- Dara and Faiz's almost entire poetry in Japanese,
in addition to over 60 papers in the urdu language and literature
and Pakistani culture. Besides translating the works of Faiz and
Minto, he wrote papers on Faiz, Miraji.N .M.Rashid. Akbar
Illahbadi and other poets of Urdu, Prof. Kataoka also intiated the
idea of conducting Mushairas in Japan and presently the
Mushairas are being organized every year in Japan since 10 years,
which are attended by large number of people from Tokyo and
Osaka etc.
Prof. Asada Yutuka:- Chairman Dept. of Urdu who joined
TUFS in 1981, has published many works including ' Muntakhabe
Urdu Adab' “Fasadaat Ka Adab” “Khawateen Ka Adab” and
some Urdu Readers for learners.
Prof.Heroshi:- Prof.Heroshi was also associated with the
dictionary of Prof. Takishi. He wrote on Urdu's fiction writers
such as Ahmed Ali, Hayatullah Ansari and Urdu's Sikh writers.
His greatest contribution is Japanese translation of Shoukat
Siddiquis 'Khuda Ki Basti'.
T.Matsumara:- is HOD of Urdu Dept.at Osaka University,
another Japanese scholar, who is famous for his deep love for
Urdu since he asserts that nobody should speak any other
language in his department except Urdu. Besides working on
modern Urdu literature, he wrote papers on Sir Syed, Haali and
Iqbal. The translation of selected ghazals of Wali Dakani, Mir Taqi
56
Mir, Mir Dard and Nasikh are an addition. Other works include a
very comprehensive book on Urdu grammar and papers on Aabe
Hayat and Delhi and Lucknow schools of Urdu.
The other respected veterans of Osaka University who promoted
Urdu are Prof. Sava and Prof. Hiroshi Kankagaya.
The two important names from the present generation worth
mentioning are Prof. Kansaki Mameyan and Prof. So Yamane
who teach Urdu at Osaka University. Prof. Yamane compiled a
book in 2003, that include 60 research papers on Pakistan's
history, culture, language, Urdu literature Islam and is actually
engaged in further research. He speaks flawless Urdu and
Punjabi, translated the work of Gulam Abbas in Japanese. His
latest published paper is on Urdu Orthography and its history.
His recent work is on teaching of Urdu through internet.
Japan Chalo Japan Chalo
Mr.Mujtaba Hussain is a prolific and internationally acclaimed
Urdu journalist and creative writer, columnist, humorist and
satirist, very popular for his humane and humours style. He has
always portrayed common man in his writings. His very humble
nature, simplicity, down to earth attitude and maintaining a
simple profile always seep through his creations. Though one of
the greatest satirists of the present era, he always portrays himself
as a very common, trivial and struggling soul. That is the mark of
his greatness which makes him laugh at himself. He has
published 25 books over a period of 50 years. He was awarded the
Padma Shri,{2007}India's prestigious President Award.
Khuswant Singh, a renowned author, writer, columnist, satirist
(English) describes Hussain as a “rare among Indian writers of
humour”, while he is unable to say anything unkind about others,
he is equally unable to say anything in his own praise. Whenever
the subject of humour in Urdu writings comes up, the first name
that is mentioned is of Mujtaba Hussain of Hyderabad”.
(Khushwant Singh)
In his article “Meet the Mark Twain of Urdu Humour” dated 31st
August 2012, in “The Hindu”, Mr.J.S.Iftequar writes that Mr.
57
Hussain's satires in Urdu have regaled readers across the world.

His book 'Japan Chalo- Japan Chalo' is a unique addition to Indian
fiction for the originality and beauty in the travelogue genre.
Something unread of in Urdu language. Hussains work has been
translated into Oriya,Kannada, Hindi, English, Russain and
Japanese languages.(The Hindu, 31st Aug.2012). He is still
actively writing at the age of 76, in Sunday's 'Siasat'[Urdu
Daily}making sundays lively and hilarious making the writings
thought-provoking with a subtle satirical touch.
The author of this paper likes to make the feelings of this sensitive
writer make known to all expressed in his travelogue-Japan
Chalo, Japan Chalo which makes a delightful reading.
Mr.Hussain has not only quoted the anecdates, his experiences,
but also created humour out of almost every incident which
happened in Japan during his visit. He has come out with very
heart-touching statements. It is felt that he left Japan with a heavy
heart and tears in his eye which depicts his sensitiveness towards
human values and cultural bondage.
With a light note he started his poor knowledge of Japan when his
officer informed him that he was likely be selected for the visit to
Japan regarding attending a training course in publishing by the
Centre of Asian Cultural Centre of UNESCO to be organised in
Tokyo. After a month he was informed by one of his colleagues
that “Agar tum Japan se mere liye ek transistor lane ka wada karo
to tumhe khush khabri sunata hun”. Then he gave the list about
the details of the transistor which Mr. Hussain was supposed to
bring from Japan. Then he informed Mr. Hussain that the Central
Ministry of Education (India) has selected him to attend the
course and that he was going to Japan. Later he received a very
long list of gifts from his friends which he had to bring from Japan.
His wife made him take a promise that he would not write any
travelogue about Japan , (Japan Chalo- Japan Chalo-1980).
His first encounter with a Japanese was in the aeroplane who was
impressed by his knowledge of Japanese which included only 3
sentences Ohaio gazaimus (Greetings in Japanese) Hai Hai
meaning,yes Later the Japanese traveler befriended him and
58
presented a lot many dry fruits when he came to know that Mr.
Hussain did not eat anything in the plane because the food served
was not suitable to him.
Mrs. Asanu,the Chief of the Book Development Dept. had come to
welcome him on the Tokyo airport. Whenever the writer was
about to face any difficulty, Mrs. Asanu used to solve it, so
Mr.Hussain called her “Mushkilon to asaan (easy) karne wali”In
Urdu “asan means to make things easy- Mrs. Asanu was all smiles
since she already knew the meaning of her name in Urdu. On
Mr.Hussain's enquiry, she informed that a writer from Pakistan
named Ibne Insha used to visit Tokyo and that he told her the
meaning of her name.
There are many Suzuki's in Japan; they are everywhere including
a motorcycle, a car named Suzuki. Even the (the then) Prime
Minister of Japan was called Suzuki, the lady translator in Japan's
University was also called Suzuki “Qadam Qadam par Suzuki
hain”. Incidentally Mr.Hussain's first Japanese friend was also a
Suzuki who (was then) Professor in Tokyo University in (TUFS)
Prof. of Urdu and Head of the Department. Mr.Hussain had met
him in Delhi in 1973, when he came to India in connection with his
research work. It happened so that when Mr. Mujtaba Hussain
was shaking hands with him, the electricity went off and they met
in the candle light only. Immediately Mr. Suzuki read this verse of
Mir Taqi Mir “ Who bazm mein aaye, itna to Mir ne dekha; Phir
uske baad chiraghon mein roshni na rahi” . Next day Mr.Suzuki
had to visit Hyderabad and Gulbarga which is Mr.Hussain's birth
place. Back in 1973 Prof. Suzuki had given him his visiting card
and wished that one day he might visit Japan. Mr. Hussain
considers that statement as a blessing of Prof. Suzuki since he
really landed in Japan. Later Prof. Suzuki's interview was
published in 'Siasat' the Urdu Daily from Hyderabad. Mr.
Sulaeman Khateeb, the Dacchani poet wrote a letter to Mr. M.
Hussain stating that Prof. Suzuki knew about the Sufis of India
more than us (Indians). Prof.Suzuki was working on “The
Contributions of Sufi's to the Urdu Language”.
59
In the evening of his arrival in Japan Mrs. Asanu took Mr. Hussain
for dinner in a Chinese restaurant saying that “Aate hi apke jute
khulwana nahi chahti”{she did not like to get his shoe laces be
pulled out on the very first day of his arrival}, the reason was that
Japanese squat down on the floor to have dinner, the same way
people have “Chowki Dinner” in Hyderabad city. Hussain writes
that those who had had Chowki Dinner should think they have
experienced Japanese style of dining.
The readers are carried away by Husains humour, touching lines
and the sincerity his humour depicts. Sometimes it becomes an
emotional ride which brings tears. His thought provoking
punches make this travelogue not only very interesting but also
reflective drawing attention towards serious issues, his literary
efforts being quite evident in bringing people across the borders
closer.
In another article he hints that Urdu and Hindi are sisters in the
real sense. He stresses the point that in Japan whoever knows
Urdu, also knows Hindi. Mr. Anahara of Japan radio was quite
eloquent in both the languages, Prof.Tanaka, a professor of Hindi
is equally good in both the languages. Both of them stated that
difference of Hindi and Urdu might be an issue in India but there
in Japan they learn both the languages with equal expertise.
When Miss Pareniya, a delegate from Thailand wished him sweet
dreams at bed time, “The rooms here are too small to
accommodate even dreams”-Hussain replied, Miss Pariniya
enjoyed this statement till last. In Japan everything is found in
small size including people due to which it is very difficult to
know their exact age. The writer advised the other travelers to be
careful about it since the size/height might misguide and may
create a problem especially about ladies. While the writer was
seated in Professor Suzuki's chamber in TUFS' Urdu department,
a girl entered with a huge bag of books, introducing herself “I am
Aikuadki, I won't be able to attend the function to be held in your
honour”. When the writer asked which class she was studying in,
she was very shy and replied that she was a Professor of Persian.
The writer enlightens that Tokyo appears to be an Asian City in
60
the real sense since it keeps awake the whole night and the traffic
on roads keeps flowing. It is a well known fact that Japan is the
only nation which has maintained a balance between machines
and culture. All day long Japanese are busy in factories and
industries, creating something new, making gadgets etc. but
when they are home the culture is the priority, they use separate
slippers for separate rooms in their houses and conduct tea
ceremonies. They decorate their dishes beautifully with flowers
and leaves which confuses the writer, as to what to eat and what
not to. Japanese love to give gifts. He cherishes the thought that he
had to cargo the gifts twice during his journey and was
overwhelmed by the practice.
When Professor Suzuki Takishi invited Mr.Hussain for the
welcome ceremony in TUFS,he was astonished to know that
many scholars were doing research on works of Ismath Chuglai,
Krishna Chandar and many more . He also met Professor Asada
of Osaka University (Kyoto). The writer notes that Japanese use a
major portion of their livelihood in thanking each other. They
thank profusely by bending themselves at an angle of 60⁰and had
he continued to stay there a few more days he would have ended
up with a severe back ache.
Japanese trains are fascinating; the accuracy of the timings of
arrivals are exemplary. They are the fastest trains, with most
developed technology, but people sitting there quiet. While
travelling in a bullet train, the writer felt that be mistakenly
entered a library, a mobile library. They are very fond of reading
books and almost all are found reading books. Though he
appreciated the speed and timings of the trains he missed the joy
of travelling in Indian Trains which are noisy, shaky and pushy. It
was very unusual for him that no train stopped for the signal
outside the station; no vendors, were there; no suitcase fell on his
head and that they reached their destinations at the exact time.
Here writer's satirical tone is quite note worthy. While going to
Kyoto from Tokyo, he was mesmerized by the beauty of Japan,
passed by ocean, Fuji Mountain, the fort of Nagoya, which was
bombarded in the World War II.
61
UNESCO KI CHATRI: another article of the travelogue is

very famous. The writer not only narrates the incidents related to
the Umbrella which was given to him by UNESCO, keeping in
view the climate of Japan. But he forgot to carry it and often left it
wherever he went though he received it later every time. The very
touching lines say that “Aaj bhi hamare zahan mein yeh chatri
khat se khul jali hai” and then he deliberately left it in Japan so that
he could visit there again to connect the feelings of oneness, to
strengthen the chain of bondage to string the beads of past
moments and to weave the yarn of desires.
Very adoringly the writer discusses about Japanese art, culture
and paintings. When he went to a village named Mashase
Ronsang he met Maroki Edie and Maruki Pushi and saw their
paintings. Both husband and wife portrayed Hiroshima's
destruction in more than 900 paintings. He became very sad after
looking at them and decided that he would always work for
peace. They decided to paint and depict the disaster of Hiroshima
all their lives. He also saw a painting of the Holy river Ganga in
their room. Japanese is a “Padhaku” (fond of reading) nation.
They are famous in the world for this habit. Reading is their
passion. They are masters in publishing books, and they either
read or write but talk very less. Book shops are found even in
hotels, amusement places, even children are fond of buying and
reading books. It is very intresting to know that the Population
(then) was about 11 crores and nearly 80 crore books were sold
every year.
About the markets of Tokyo, the writer revealed that they were
full of all kinds of things, but he could not buy anything more than
the love and affection of Japanese, because that is the only thing
which is duty free and which custom officers cannot stop from
carrying it. They can't weigh the pure, soft, selfless feelings and
can't tax them and so he can smuggle it without any hassel. The
markets of Japan are packed with all kinds of electronic articles.
The people round the globe know about the Sieka and Citizen
watches, calculators, (there were no mobile phones, lap tops then)
National Panasonic radios and other gadgets, Hitachi and Sony
62
Products, Ishika cameras, Toyota and Datson Cars but they have
very little knowledge about the Japanese writers, artists, fine art
and culture. The scholars should think about it. Japan should not
be identified as an electronic savvy nation only but also be known
for its arts, culture and literature. On the contrary India may not
be very expert in making cars and cameras but is famous for the
creativity and contributions of Kalidas, Rabindranath Tagore,
Kabir, Meerabai, Ameer Khusro, Ghalib and Doctor Iqbal. The
ancient Japan is (was) still alive in the town of Asakusa where
women still wear Kimono: Ghesha girls are also seen there. The
very famous Buddhist Temple of Kanen which was built in 7th
century with wood in Asakusa. The style of prayer in the temple
was found to be same as in India.
The two famous areas of Tokyo are Ganza and Shunjuku .Ganza
means silver (Japanese) and it showcases glittery like silver only.
And Ah! About Shunjuku, the writer feels that his words cannot
express the beauty of the evenings in Shunjuku. He expressed
them as if passing through a dream. Shunjuku's tall buildings
fascinated him, especially the Nomra building. All the buildings
are earthquake proof. He spent all the remaining evenings on the
50th floor of Nomra building. He loved to look at Fuji Mountain
from there; he even spent the evening there and gazed at Fuji
mountain so much that its ice cap might have melted, away. His
heart melted down too and tears blurred his vision.
The writer cannot forget the blessings and affection bestowed
upon him by the Director General Of Centre of Asian Culture
(UNESCO) Riyuji Etoki; often he found gifts on his chair sent by
Mr.Riyuji Etoki when ever he went to attend the seminar.
Mr.Riyuji Etoki had also invited him for a Ghesha party which is
unforgettable. Hussain Saheb also happened to meet the famous
singer of Japan Sagahara whom he met in a ceremony of UNESCO
together with others. Japanese loved to listen to Indian songs. In a
party given by Sagahara, Mr. Hussain was offered “Grasshopers”
as snacks which he tasted and liked and later vomited. Now
whenever grasshopper hops Sagahara's memories too hop in his
thoughts.
63
The Pagodas of Kyoto and Nara are wonderful. Japanese history

and culture peep through them. They are worth watching, their
beauty is enchanting. Japan's progress and development owes a
lot to the Meiji reign. Before 1868 Japan was quite an unimportant
country but the progressive policies of King Meiji brought it to the
limelight and at present its progress and achievement are
incomparable. Law and Order is praise worthy. Police is not seen
everywhere and by and large it is peaceful; the crime rate is at its
lowest. On the contrary police is seen everywhere in India but is
still out of reach.
The writer was greatly impressed by the character of Japanese
people, their cultural behaviour, hard work and honesty. He left
Japan with countless sweet memories and a thankful heart and
emotional bondage. He pleads the visitors that they should go to
Nomrah building, feel the same what he felt, look at Fuji
mountain through his eyes and touch the reeling of the 50th floor
with his hands and sense the presence of writer' finger print with
closed eyes.
Conclusion : The purpose of presenting this papers is to make
the centuries old culture relations notable and to highlight the
contributions made by the scholars, writers, travelers, scientists,
engineers and other professionals in developing beautiful and
long lasting relationship. In the beginning the presenter gave a
brief history about the Urdu scholars of Japan to make people
realize that the Japanese scholars tirelessly worked to make an
Indian language, Urdu popular in Japan, their hard work
enriched the language. Very few in India including Urdu writers
and poets know that Urdu flourishes in Japan.
The second half of the paper presents the excerpts from the
travelogue of the famous writer, satirist and journalist Padmashri
Mr. Mutjaba Hussain. In his book “ Japan Chalo, Japan Chalo” he
has presented a miniature Japan through which not only the
readers peep into the Japanese culture but are also informed
about the tremendous progress Japan has made in various walks
of life. The book is very popular and has also been translated in
64
Japanese by Mrs. Shashore, an Urdu scholar. The remarkable and

style of presenting facts has made this travelogue a masterpiece.
Mr.Hussain tried to bring in every minute detail about Japan and
inspired scholars and people in general to visit Japan and learn
from them. Many Japanese Urdu scholars mentioned in the paper
happened to meet Mr.Hussain in 1980 and confirmed the fact that
the Japanese respect and welcome Indian writers and Indians are
over whelmed by their affection. The writers' exuberant style,
titillating humour, cryptic satire, crisp statements make it one of
its kind.
Hence in the historical perspectives of Indo-Japan cultural
relation, people to people contact will improve and the study
centres of comparative literature will bring both the nations still
closer, carving a niche for each other in their hearts.
Bibliography
HASAN Chisti Editor “Mujtaba Husain ke Safar”, Name Educational
Publishing House New Delhi. s Edition 2007, ISBN 81 -87667-61-3.
Ifequar . J. S The Hindu ; English Daily Hyderabad - Title “Meet the Mark
Twain of Urdu Humour”. Dt. 31st August, 2012.
Rauf Parekh 'Dawn' the Urdu Daily, Pakistan- The Internet Edition,
http://Dawn.com. Jan.2006, 2009. Title Japan : Urdu's other home.
Sagar B.M May 23, 2012 Article, Title :- India Japan, Relations :- Growth and
Future Challenges.
Sunjunkta Das Gupta CSIRD, Nov. 2005- Discussion Paper. Title Cultural
Contacts between BIMSTEC Countries and Japan. An Historical
Survey- (Bay of Bengal Institute for Multi Sectoral and Technical
Economics Co-operation).
Wilkipedia.
Internet (et.al)
65
Elegant Escalation of Indo - Japan Cultural
Relationship through Performing Arts
J. Sankar Ganesh
Introduction
“The best way to build a strong bridge between two countries and its people is
through art and culture” - Masayuki Tsuchikawa , Head of the Japan Consulate
Culture is the reflection of every civilization and it illustrates the
style and deeds of life in the past and present. Development of a
country is graded through the agenda and policies dedicated for
its cultural escalation. Cultural heritage confers face value to a
nation. The status of cultural development of a country decides
the pre eminence of that country in the global map. Cultural
attitude of a country manifests in its economic, social and other
development activities. India has an incredible cultural heritage.
A country like India stands for the plurality and individuality of
its ethnicity. India has one of the world's largest collection of
songs, music, dance, theatre, folk traditions, performing arts, rites
and rituals, paintings and writings that are known as the
'Intangible Cultural Heritage' (ICH) of humanity.
Performing Arts
Performing Arts is an art form which is performed in front of the
audience on stage by using body, expressions, voice etc.
Performing arts includes music, dance, drama, magic, mimicry,
mime, skit, etc… India has a lot of classical performing art forms.
These art forms are originated and developed into classical art
forms in the different regions of this country. 'Bharathanatyam'
(Tamilnadu) , 'Mohiniattam' (Kerala), 'Kathakali' (Kerala),
'Odissi'(Orissa) , 'Kuchipudi' (Andhrapradesh), kathak (Northern
regions), 'Manipuri' (Manipur) and 'Sattriya' (Assam) are popular
classical dance forms of India. These dance forms are unique and
have their own different styles and traditions. The modus
operandi of thematic movements, expressions, makeup
costumes, accompaniment and mode of presentation differs from
66
Elegant Escalation of Indo - Japan Cultural Relationship through Performing Arts
each other. Classical Music of India is divided into two major

divisions which are Carnatic music and Hindusthani music. Carnatic
music is practiced in South Indian states and Hindusthani music is
in northern region of India. A large number of folk art forms are in
practice in India and every region has its own. Kolattom, Bihu, Aliai
ligang , Bagurumba, Garbha, Tippani, Yakshagana, Kavadiattam ,
Puliyattom, Mayilattom, Dollukunitha, Cheraw, Girida, Bhanjara,
Karagattom, etc…, are some of the popular folk dance forms of
India.
Indo-Japan Cultural relationship
“Our relations draw their strength from our spiritual, cultural and
civilizational affinities and a shared commitment to the ideals of democracy,
peace and freedom.” Dr. Manmohan Singh .Prime minister of India [1]
Cultural relationship softens the mind and reduces the distance
between the two nations mentally and emotionally and brings
closeness in hearts. Cultural relationship between two nations is
helpful in understanding each other. Cultural exchanges
involving India and Japan started in the 6th century with the
introduction of Buddhism to Japan from India. [2]. The Indian
monk 'Bodhisena' went to Japan in 736 to spread Buddhism and
performed eye-opening ceremony of the Great Buddha idol built
in 'Todai-ji', upon the request of Emperor 'Shomu', and stayed in
67
Japan until his death in 760. 'Bodhisena' was the great pioneer who
introduced Indian philosophy and culture to Japan. Buddhism
and the basically linked Indian culture had a great impact on
Japanese culture. Between India and Japan, monks and scholars
frequently embarked on voyages between the two nations.
Students and scholars from Japan attended Nalanda University in
the earlier times. The cultural exchanges between the two
countries created much similarity in their folklore and
philosophical perceptions The Hindu goddess 'Saraswati' is
known as 'Benzaiten' 'Brahma' as 'Bonten', and 'Yama' as 'Enma',
in Japan. Sanskrit, is the classical language used in Buddhism and
Hinduism. [3]
The cultural agreement between Japan and India was signed in
1956 and took effect the following year. In 1951, India established
a scholarship system for overseas students. This system provides
a good prospect for young Japanese scholars who are in the
vanguard of Indian cultural studies in India among the other
overseas countries. Indo- Japan cultural relationship picked up
rapidity in the 1980s with the Japanese local governments
becoming involved in exchange of cultural activities. The
traditional Indian performing arts are performed in Japan also.
The performing arts of Japan are performed in India in exchange.
The staging of these performances elevates the face value of both
the nations. The artists and art forms are honored reciprocally. In
January 1994, the Japan foundation opened an office in New Delhi
that is actively engaged in cultural exchanges since 1978. Japan
has been extending cultural grant-in-aid to research institutes,
universities, and cultural faculties to encourage the development
of cultural relationship activities. The two nations announced
2007, the 50th anniversary year of Indo-Japan Cultural
Agreement, as the Indo-Japan Friendship and Tourism-
Promotion Year, holding cultural events in both the countries.
[4][5]
68
Side and front view of the JAPAN FOUNDATION office, New Delhi
The Japan Foundation (Kokusai Kōryu Kikin), established in

1972, is Japan's principal agency for international cultural
relations under the auspices of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It
became an Independent Administrative Institution in October
2003. The mission of the Japan Foundation is to promote
international cultural activities and mutual understanding
between Japan and other countries. Through its headquarters in
Tokyo and 22 overseas offices in 21 countries, the Japan
Foundation conducts a wide range of programs concerning arts
and cultural exchange, Japanese-language education, Japanese
studies and intellectual exchanges. The Foundation operates on
the income from an endowment, annual subsidies from the
Japanese government and donations from the private sector.
Apart from its own activities, the Foundation is also authorized to
extend financial assistance and support to organizations in the
private sector involved in cultural and intellectual exchange or
educational programs by undertaking joint sponsorship
programs or by providing grants.[4][5]
Activities of Japan Foundation in India
The Japan Foundation conducted more than 20 events of cultural
exchange programs throughout India spanning from January to
March 2012, which marked the 60th anniversary of the
establishment of diplomatic relations between Japan and India
with the aim to enhance trustful Japan-India relations toward a
new era through cultural exchange. The cultural exchange
69
festival included traditional cultures, Japanese film screenings,

animation workshop, contemporary art exhibitions by young
leading artists, and performing arts shaped by Japan and India in
collaboration. Some of the subsequent activities are conducted
through out India as cultural exchange activities in the recent past
also.
Origami Workshops - Origami is the traditional Japanese art
or technique of folding paper into forms of animals, plants,
everyday items and more.
Omnilogue Journey to the west - Exhibitions - Japanese art
exhibitions
Japanese Film Screening
Lectures, Demonstrations on 'WAGASHI' (The Art of making
traditional Japanese Sweets)
Animation workshops
Introducing Japanese designs in furniture, vessels, dress, hat etc...
Introducing Japanese popular books from Japan by
organizing book stalls in Book fairs
Wall painting workshops
Photo exhibitions
Japanese Kite workshops
Kentaro (Contemporary Dance Perfromances)
Conducting Language and Culture Courses
Noh Theatre Performances
India Japan Performing Arts Show
The Spirit of Budo : The History of Japan's Martial Art
Exhibition
Conducting Oritai exhibitions etc…
Apart from the above activities, it conducts Traditional Japanese
tea ceremony in a grand manner. Lectures and seminars in
70
connection with Indo Japan relationship on various topics like

Economy, Industrial developments, information technology,
electronics and communication, infrastructural facilities etc…are
frequently conducted by this foundation in various venues and
Universities throughout the country.[4]
Japanese Cultural Heritage
Japanese music culture is rich in tradition and it has been followed
through centuries. There are different kinds of traditional music
played and sung by the Japan artists. Gagaku , Biwagaku, Nohgaku,
Sokyokhu, Shakuhachi , Shamisenongaku etc…and Minyo the
traditional folk song form of Japan. [6]
Gagaku Performance in the Imperial Court
Gagaku is the grand court music which is played in the court of

king. The imperial court of Japan maintained this Gagaku tradition
for more than thousand years. The origin of Gagaku is in China
and the influence of Chinese music manifests in the Japanese
traditional music and dance also. The Japanese Music Bureau is
formed in 7th Century. Later Gagaku was divided according to the
playing techniques into Togaku (Chinese) oriented and Komagaku
(Korean) oriented. 'Gagaku' is specifically smooth and long notes
are played. The interval between the musical notes is based on the
human breathing pattern and not on mathematical rhythm. The
'gagaku' is based on pentatonic scale and it is very much similar to
the scale of raga Suddha Saveri of Carnatic music and Raag Dhurga
of Hindusthani music. The performance based on human breathing
is similar to 'raga alapana' system of Carnatic music which is based
on breathing. 'Vadya Kutapa' is the phrase used for instrumental
orchestra in Indian music.
'Nohgaku' is an exclusive theatre art of Samurai class people. 'Noh'
later got developed into a serious religious art from the military
71
dissension themes and got further refined into court art form.
'Noh' theatre is still in practice and supported by the intellectuals.
Noh performance includes the comic interlude called 'Kyogen'
and it is similar to the 'Sutradhari' charcter found in the Indian
'Geyanataka'. In 'Noh' the vocal music 'Yokyoku' is performed by
both the actor and by the on-stage chorus. This theatre is similar to
our Indian drama in which the actors on stage sing and act along
with chorus. The 'Noh hayashi' is very much similar to 'Patra
vadyas' and 'patra jathis' of Indian theatre music. Like 'hayashi',
the 'paatra vaadyas' play to signify the entry and exit of a particular
character.
Kabuki Performance
'Kabuki' is an excellent art form for wealthy and tasty

entertainment. Elaborate usage of equipment, scenery, costumes
and facial mask properties are indispensable in this art form. In
Kabuki, characters express their feelings through facial gestures
and postures. Kabuki is a folk theatre, a song and dance drama
born during the Edo period (1615-1868) as an art form of the
masses.
Bunraku is a puppet theatre developed in the Edo period and is a
popular art for the common people and Noh is a classical Japanese
mask art form combining th elements of dance, drama, music and
poetry. It is considered as highly aesthetic stage art. 'Bunraku' is
the traditional puppet theatre of Japan, a high-level stage art.
Bunraku was originally the name of the theatre in which this
puppet drama was performed, but gradually it came to be used as
72
the name of the art itself and is today used as the official name of
the puppet theatre. The art came to be known as "Bunraku" only
around the end of the Meiji era (1868-1912).
'Buddhist music' of Japan is analogous to Indian ritual music on
the base of its employment. Both the Buddhist and the Indian
ritual music consist of metallic string percussions and wind
instruments orchestral temperament. Apart from the above 'Noh
mai', 'Bon Odori', 'Nihon buyo', 'Suzume Odori' etc… are popular
Japanese Performing art forms presently in practice. Noh, kabuki
and bunraku may be considered as the three great traditional
national art forms of Japan.[6]
Noh Performance and Face Mask used
Kutiyattom of Kerala the similar type of facial mask is used and this shows the
nearest correlation in the originating point of both the performing art forms.
Noh is a classical Japanese theatre form, a dance-drama in which

the script of the play serves to create a setting for choreographic
movement. It is not primarily concerned with the dramatic action.
73
Bu it rather seeks to express a situation in lyrical form. All Noh

plays are in the form of dance and the lyrics which precede the
dance serve primarily to establish the circumstances. A chorus on
the stage sings the actor's line while he is dancing and narrates
much of the story. [9]
The properties and basic constitutions of Noh and Kutiyattam of
Kerala are very much similar in their silhouette. Both are the
living treasures of their countries respectively and are recognized
by the UNESCO as masterpieces of the oral art and intangible
heritage of humanity. [8]. Reflecting the oriental aesthetic
principle that regards drama as a blend of poetry, music, dance
and mime, they share a sacred similarity as both the theatrical
forms have been much more than mere entertainment, being
inextricably connected with worship and religious ritual. Noh and
Kutiyattam insist on strict adherence to tradition, and deem the
theatrical activity itself as sacred.
The basic plots of Noh and Kutiyattam are derived from the myths
and classical legends belonging to their respective regions, with
both forms extensively employing the use of costumes and masks
in their rendition. But both the art forms reflect a distinct
difference in features and acting methods according to their own
cultures.
Noh, kabuki and bunraku are performed by males. But kamigata-mai
is a female solo performance, born and developed in the 16th
century in Osaka, Kyoto and Kobe which was popular among the
court ladies. It shows the role of women of Japan in developing
the performing arts in the earlier centuries. Performing kamigata-
mai in the lights of candle on stage is a tradition of Japan and it is
generally found in the art forms of Kerala. In kathakali and,
Kutiyattam presence of and performance of an oil lamp on stage
are indispensable and the play is called “Atta vilaku” (lamp of
dance).
74
kamigata-mai Performance
The Japanese love art forms and artists. The people of Japan love
to hear music and Japan was the second largest music market in
the world during 2012 and was the first in 2010. According to The
International Federation of the Phonographic Industry Annual
Report for the year 2012 the total retail value of the music market
of Japan was 4,422 million dollars. The physical music
performances are favored by 80% of the Japanese and only 17%
desire for other electronic types.[10][11].
Similarities found in Indo -Japan folk art forms
Some performing folk art forms of Japan are very vibrant and colorful.
Dance with colorful Japanese caps only similar with the appearance of Karagattam
Drum dance of Japan is similar to the Dollu Kunitha of Karnataka
75
Bon Odori -Awa Odori formation appears similar to the Naga tribal war dance
Yamaga Toro Lantern dance is similar to the appearance of Rajasthan folk dance
The make up process for Kabuki, kathakali and Kutiyattom are identical
Similarity in the way of conveying feelings in Kabuki and Kutiyattam
76
Some of the folk dance forms and the properties used in these
performing art forms look more or less analogous. The popular
traditional 'drum dance' of Japan looks similar to the 'Dollu
Kunitha' of Karnataka. The formations are almost similar to the
war dance of Naga tribals belonging to Nagaland. The properties
used in 'Yamaga- Toro- Lantern Bon odori dance' appear similar to
the 'Rajasthani fire pot folk dance'. The make up process of Kabuki
and kutiyattam, the style of presentational postures and gestures
and the core themes figuring in do have similarity to each other.
These similarities denote some kind of connectivity in the source
of these art forms.
The Japanese are utilizing and enjoying the opportunities
provided through student friendly immigration policies of
Government of India. The Japanese are coming in large numbers
to India to learn with a serious desire of gaining knowledge. The
Japanese made sincere efforts and master the various Indian art
forms. The Gurus of Indian Performing arts of different art forms
have consistently appreciated the sincerity and tireless efforts of
Japanese students during the learning of the Performing Arts
through many testimonials on various occasions.
The Indian performing arts both music and dance are based on
the feelings and expressions (Bhava) and it requires incessant
practice for years together to acquire proficiency. Mastering in
any Indian performing art form requires persistence and
invariable effort. To achieve proficiency in the concerned art form
the Japanese continuously put their endeavors. Surmounting all
the barriers like language, food, and climate etc… many Japanese
now star and perform the arts at par with the Indian artists as
performing artists on the Indian and international prestigious
Performing art platforms.
Most of the Japanese show more interest in learning
Bharathanatyam ,Odissi , Kathak ,Mohiniattom ,Kutiyattam, Bansuri
,Sitar ,Shehnai , Hindusthani vocal ,Yoga, Mridangam, Moursing,
Ghatam, Idakka, Surabhar etc…[14] The Japanese are successively
establishing institutions after mastering the Indian performing
77
art forms to promote them among the Japanese students in Japan.

Many Japanese organizations are popular and successful in
promoting Indian performing art forms through out the country.
The Japanese artists are managing to conduct coaching classes
even in between their busy schedules of overseas stage
performances through out the year. Bharathanatyam, Odissi,
Kathak, Mohiniyattam, Veena, Hindusthani Vocal, Yoga, Tabla, Sitar,
Kutiyattam, Mridangam and Moursing (Jewish harp) are invariably
taught in these institutions. Some organizations bear the same
names of the popular Indian institutions where the organizers
acquired their training. For example, Kadamb Japan, Ashirbad
School of Kathak dance etc. Some of the following are the popular
institutions conducting coaching classes for Indian performing
arts in Japan.
Name of the Institution Name of the Place Official website

President
Ashirbad School of Megumi Tokyo and http://ashirbad2paramita.web.
Kathak dance Hiromitsu Nagoya fc2.com/megumi/Profile.html
SAMPATTI Indian Yuki Sato Naka-ku http://sampatti.daa.jp/index.html
dance company Nagoya
MOPA (Masako Ono Masako Ono Orissa and http://odissi.netfirms.com/
Performing Arts) Japan Tokyo
'Kadamb Japan' Astuko Maeda Tokyo http://www.atsukathak.com/
Mohiniyattam Dance Hiromi Tokyo http://www.mohini-

Company Maruhashi jp.info/modules/school/index.
php?content_id=1
Studio Odissi Kasuko Tokyo, http://www.odissi.jp/index_e.htm

Yasunobu Kumamoto
and Fukuoka
Nrithya Lakshana Saiko Tokyo http://www.lakshana-

Yamamoto japan.com/profile.html
South Indian classical Hori Yukiko Tokyo http://yukiyamini.com/
dance and yoga
Sanat Kumara Fine Art Mayuri Yukiko Osaka,Kobe http://www.geocities.jp/apsarayuki6/
and Kyoto
78
Name of the Institution Name of the Place Official website

President
Natya Manjari, Japan Emi Mayuri Nakaku, http://www.geocities.jp/gameradevi7/
Yakahoma
Kanagawa
& Kurihara
Geethanjali Academy Akemi Sakurai Osaka http://www.geocities.jp/gitanjali1995/
for Dances of India, Katano
Geethanjali Friends'
Society
Marga Unity Mogari Osaka http://manami-f.com/
manami
Abhinaya Labo Irino Chie Tokyo http://abhilabo.web.fc2.com/
Tara
Kannagi Traditional Miyuki Tokyo http://www.kannagi.com/english.html
Indian Dance Institute
Charankamal Hitomi Tokyo http://homepage3.nifty.com/hitomik
Kiriyama /index.html
Miyabi Kathak Dance Masako Sato Tokyo http://miyabi-kathak.com/
academy
Swastika Eiko Tokyo http://ameblo.jp/odissi-swastika
Shinohara /themeentrylist-10037006686.html
Debadhara Odissi Kaori Naka Nara http://www.debadhara.com/
The Eastern Institute Yuko Matoba Tokyo http://www.toho.or.jp/

[South Indian Classical
Music class]
Abhinayalabo Tomoe Tara Tokyo http://abhilabo.web.fc2.com/
Irino
Plana Indian Classical Mako Satomi Warabi, http://www.geocities.jp/planabarata/
Dance Saitama
Ruchika Indian Dance Nalini Osaka and http://www.kathakschool.com/
Academy Toshniwal Kobe
Kamala Yukiyo Kubota Tokyo http://kamala.tv
Glimpses of Indo-Japan Cultural Relationship through

Performing Arts [15]
I . Bharathanatyam - YAMAMOTO SAIKO
Yamamoto Saiko is one of the promoters of Bharathanatyam in
79
Japan and she has conducted Bharathanatyam classes and has

given performances in Tokyo for the past 20 years. She is a senior
teacher and performer in Japan. She is learning Bharathanatyam
from 1993 and till date she is saying “I am learning”. Earlier she
learned Bharathanatyam in Japan and in the year 1995 she came to
India and sought the teaching of the renowned dancer Sri A.
Lakshman, Chennai. She took rigorous training under her Guru for
years together.
She is a frequent visitor and spends 4 to 6 months every year in

Chennai to update her knowledge and skill. Saiko Yammamoto is
a symbol of the elevation of Indo Japan cultural relationship
through performing arts.
KIMIKO OHTANI SOAI University, Japan
80
Ms Kimiko Ohtani from Osaka studied Bharathanatyam, at the

Kalakshetra, school of arts in Chennai, India. She continued her
study with the Dhananjayans at the Bharata Kalanjali, a renowned
institution in Chennai. She has been performing and teaching in
Japan as well as in the USA and UK. She has a doctorate in the field
and presently teaches Bharathanatyam in Soai University, Osaka,
Japan.
Ms. YUWA YOKOTA (Japan)
Ms. Yuwa Yokota belonging to Nerima ward of Tokyo is a

disciple of N.Srikanth and has been training in Bharathanatyam for
the last 10 years. She stays in India for six months every year to
learn Bharathanatyam. She came to India first in 1988 as part of a
theatre group from Japan and was enamored of Bharathanatyam.
She performed in high class theatres and sabhas and is recognized
as a perfect performing artist. She expressed her feelings about
her performance in the church where she was born “Under the
cross…to the gods of the Hindus…and hands clasped in prayer…
to something great that is not visible to the eye …is true art” .
4. ERINA KASAI from Yokohama, Japan
81
Hailing from Yokohama, near Tokyo, Japan, she lives and breaths
the classical dance, as well as Carnatic music, yoga and Hindu
mythology for the past three years. Erina Kasai started her dance
training since 2000. She was awarded a scholarship from
ICCR(2007-2011), and continued her training in Kalakshetra
college which is famous in the field of Bharathanatyam, known for
its noble spirit and artistic tradition. She graduated in her dance
course with first class. Currently, she performs in various dance
festivals in Japan .She has been training in Bharathanatyam under
the several gurus in Chennai. But it was in Japan that she first
began to learn the dance with a “Japanese” teacher. After
watching a Kuchipudi performance of Radha and Raja Reddy in
Japan, she was so fascinated that she wanted to learn it also. She
began perusing Bharathanatyam as a hobby not really knowing the
difference between Kuchipudi and Bharathanatyam. When she
visited Chennai during the December season of music, she was
impressed and wanted to come back for further learning. From
2005-2007, she got trained under Dhananjayan at Bharata Kalanjali.
After her arangetram in Feb.2007, she joined in Kalakshetra. Erina
finds that there are many similarities in the cultures of India and
Japan the reverence for the older generation and the native
culture and similarities in mythology, gods and goddesses, and
artistic symbols. She is one of the promising young upcoming
artists of Bhartahnatyam.[13]
II. Mohiniattam ( Kerala)- HIROMI MARUHASHI
from Tokyo
Earlier she was a performer in the Indonesia Balinese Dance
Company under the able leadership of Guru Sun Ayu during 1989-
1992 and in Japanese Buto Modern Dance Company -Biwakei
during the year 1992-1995 under the leadership of Guru Setsuko
Yamada. She started learning Bharathanatyam in the year 1994 and
from 1996 onwards she started learning Yoga and Japanese
Martial Art, Kempo from Hi Ryu Kai, Tokyo, Japan.
82
Hiromi Maruhashi visited India in 1996 and started learning

Mohiniyattam from Kalamandalam Leelamma and Nangiarkoothu
from Margi Sathi. Meanwhile she completed a short term course
on Mohiniyattam from Kerala Kalamandalam. She was granted the
fellowship by Japanese Government to study in India to improve
and widen her artistic abilities and experiences. After this, she
joined in C.V.N. Kalari Sangham, Thiruvananthapuram for learning
Kalarippayattu, the traditional martial art of Kerala. She also joined
in Samudra Center for Indian Contemporary Performing Arts. She
is a recipient of Indo-Japan Friend Association Cultural Award
for Mohiniyattam 1998. She received 'Narthaupasaki award for
her dedication in Mohiniyattam dance. Now she is a leader of
Mohiniyattam Dance Company. She is guiding the interested
students of Japan for advanced studies in this art form to Kerala.
On her guidance one of her students Keiko Okano came to India
and now she can perform Mohiniyattam in a trendy way in India
and abroad.
III. Kathak - Megumi Hiromitsu (Tokyo) (Kathak)
Megumi Hiromitsu is a disciple of Smti. Srabani Banerjee, a
prominent Kathak dancer of Lucknow Gharana in Kolkata. She has
been doing solo and group performances in India and Japan. Her
performance covers Indian classical dance, Thumri, Ghazal, Tagore
songs and Sufi music. She holds BA in Social Science (Sophia
University, Tokyo) and MA in Peace Studies (Bradford
University, UK).
83
She is fluent in Japanese, English and Bengali. Besides her studies

of dance, Megumi had been working for agricultural training for
poor farmers in rural area of West Bengal and for English
education for the children in the red light area of Kolkata.
ASTHUKO MAEDA from Tokyo
Atsuko is a Kathak Dancer (Lucknow gharana) lives in Tokyo

Japan. She started learining Kathak when she was 6 years old and
every year comes to India with a desire to learn the latest
developments in Kathak. She was awarded a scholarship from
ICCR, Govt. of India. She learned Kathak at 'Kadamb' dance
school in Ahmedabad from Padma Bushan Kumudini Lakhiaji.
After returning to Japan she continued her practice in Kathak and
she also teaches in her own institute called 'Kadamb Japan' in
Tokyo.
IV Odissi (Orissa)- Kazuko Yasunobu (Tokyo)
Kazuko Yasunobu, who is the organizer of Studio Odissi, the
84
Indian Classical Dance Institute, provides lessons in Tokyo,

Kumamoto and Fukuoka.
Kazuko Yasunobu is one of the disciples of the legendary late

Guru Padmabibhusan Kelucharan Mohapatra. She has been the only
Japanese disciple recognized as the prominent student of "Srjan"
since 1993. She visits Orissa every year to develop her knowledge.
She got permission for solo-performance in 1996 from her Guru
she has performed with great successes not only in India and
Japan but also in U.S.A. Kazuko provides lessons in Tokyo,
Kumamoto and Fukuoka as the organizer of "Studio Odissi" in
Japan and also produces several own performing units.
Particularly, "The Kaleidoscope of India" consists of 4 Japanese
artists among whom are one Odissi dancer, one Bharatnathyam
dancer, one sitar player and one tabla player and they have got
great admiration in every performance. Kazuko and her team
performe in most of the festivals in Japan. Under the concept of
“The Unity with the Universe by Feeling Nature", she has given
performances cheerfully both at Shinto shrines and at Buddhist
temples in more than thirty places.
MASAKO ONO (Odissi)
A graduate of Nrityagram, Masako Ono learned Odissi from
Guru Kelucharan Mohapatra, Guru Ramani Ranjan Jena, and
guru Naba Kishore Mishra. She’ s performed all over the world
including Kennedy Centre, Asia Society in New York. Her dance
was appreciated by the Japanese prime ministers, Mr. Koizumi
and Mr. Abe. Her documentary film was broadcast in NHK BS1 as
85
"First Japanese”. Mosako was selected as one of the 100 most

respected Japanese in the world by the Newsweek. She directs
MOPA (Masako Ono Performing Arts). Ono also trains other
Odissi dancers and directs Masako Ono Performing Arts (MOPA)
in India and Japan.
In 2010, she launched the MUDRA Foundation to support the

efforts of international artists working to help the
underprivileged children in India. She has performed and given
lecture-demonstrations and workshops in India, Japan, USA,
Canada, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia, and Sri
Lanka.
V. Irino Chie Tara Abhinayalobo (Kutiyattam Folk art
form of Kerala)
Abhinaya Labo is a group based in Tokyo, teaching, researching,

performing, and organizing events and performances of the
traditional art forms of South India. Specialized in classical
86
theatre 'Kutiyattam'(the classical Sanskrit theatre), 'Nangiar

Koothu'(the female solo classical dance-theatre), dance and
percussions of Kerala. She is known for her teaching folk art forms
of Kerala in Japan
VII. Hindusthani Vocal - YUKI TANIGUCHI
After finishing studies in the University in Tokyo, she went to San
Francisco to study Psychology and started Yoga after realizing its
powerful effect on the mind. Starting with Ashtanga Yoga, and
later training in Anusara Yoga with Katchie Ananda, she later went
to New York and completed 200 hour teacher training with Sri
Dharma Mittra. Through yoga she began Kirtan and mantra
chanting and reunited it with the joy of singing. Later as her
interest in sound became deeper, she came to India to study yoga
and music. She now spends half the year in India studying Mantra
Yoga in Rishikesh and Dhrupad (Indian Classical Vocal) in
Varanasi. Yuki also learns Butoh from Yoshito Ohno in Japan. In
addition to her yoga practice, Yuki finds Butoh as an another way
to connect body and spirit.
Teaching Nada Yoga to Students
VIII. Japanese Star Indian Instrument Players

Tomoe Tara Irino (Idaikka folk instrument) She was born in
Tokyo,Japan. Her father YOSHIRO IRINO was a famous music
composer who died in 1980. Her mother REIKO also works on
music. TOMOE studied the theory of western music and clarinet
from her childhood. She joined "Yokohama Boat Theatre"
87
(Kanagawa,Japan) as a musician and also an actress in 1986 and

participated in several international art festivals with this theatre
group (Edinburgh 1989, New York 1991, Hong Kong 1994,
Singapore 1997). She is also a member of "Bamboo Orchestra
Japan", a music group which uses both original bamboo
instruments and Japanese traditional bamboo instruments. She
mainly plays percussions and has many performances with this
group throughout Japan. She studied Bharathanatyam (South
Indian classical dance) from Smt.Kyoko Nobi for 4 years in the
early 1990's. She is learning Mridangam from Sri Sheejit Krishna
in Chennai,India. Since 1994, she studies Nangyar Koothu and
Kutiyattam (Sanskrit classical theatres)in Irinjalakuda, Kerala as a
student of Natana Kairali and Ammanur Chachu Chakyar
smaraka gurukulam under Padmabhushan Guru Ammannur
Madhava Chakyar. She finished her arangettram (the first
performance) on Nangyar Koothu in January 1996 and performed
the first role of kutiyattam (Vijaya in Toranayuddham) in
February 1997.
Tomoe Tara Irino accompanying Nelluvai Krishnankutty Marar
She performs Nangyar Koothu in Japan as well as in Kerala. She

also teaches Nangyar Koothu in Japan. Tomeo, a graduate in
electrical engineering, has her own unit for the manufacture of
eco-friendly bamboo instruments in Tokyo. She is also an
exponent of Marimba, a traditional Japanese drum.[16]
88
Yasuhiro Minamizawa (Sitar)

Mr. Yasuhiro Minamizawa was born in Shiga, Japan in 1986. He
currently lives in the historical city of Kyoto, Japan. Minamizawa
experienced the Indian classical music in the holy place of
Varanasi for the first time. He started his education on the Sitar
and the theory of Indian classical music under the tutelage of Dr.
Shrawani Biswas. He then relocated to Varanasi and continued
musical studies under his mentor's supervision for several years
and with his teacher's recommendation he started to perform in
live concerts in India and Japan.
His raisins include not only classical Indian music but also a
variety of musical and spiritual dance theme genres on many
performing arts venues including temples, galleries, and
auditoriums. In 1995, he became the founding member of 'Tenkoo
Orchestra', a well recognized group in Japan which is
internationally, famous for its 'tribal rock' style of music
performed mostly with the tribal instruments.
As a concert soloist, he also performs Indian classical music in
numerous venues, especially at Japanese Shinto shrines and at
Buddhist temples such as TODAIJI in Nara, Honen and Kyoto,
etc.
Tadao Ishihama (Sitar)
Tadao Ishihama, a versatile sitar artist was born in Osaka in
1979.He always had a propensity for fine arts. He could draw
pictures beautifully even at the age of 5 and later on he graduated
89
in Japanese ceramic arts. So it seems that it was natural for him to

develop a taste for music also. Ishihama started playing on the
sitar from the tender age of 15. After a period of intensive training
in Japan , Tadao came to India in 1997. He started learning the
sitar under the tutelage of the eminent sitar guru, Pandit Monoj
Shankar of the famous Maihar gharana(also known as the Senia
gharana), in Kolkata. Ever since Tadao Ishihama has been giving
stage performances at various important functions and venues
not only here in India and in Japan but has played the sitar in the
other Asian countries also. In 2001 he appeared on the popular
television channel ETV Bangla and enchanted the viewers with
his innovative rendering of the sitar. He has performed a duet too
accompanied by the Manipuri Pung (mridangam of
Manipur)instead of the traditional tabla.
Tadao returned to Japan in 2003. Presently he is very busy with his

concerts in Japan and abroad.
Ito Koro - Sitar Player
Ito Koro was born in a Zen Temple in Ehime Prefecture. In 1977 he
came to India. He got apprenticed to the spiritual master, Swami
Dr. Paravatikar (Veena Maharaji) in the sacred land of Badrinath
in the Himalayas for nada yoga, a form of musical meditation.
Following his Guru Yogi Vina Maharaj both in playing Sitar and hair style
90
In 1982 he came to Hyderabad, the Capital of Andhra Pradesh

State and Studied Sitar at the State Music University under the
Tutelage of Master K.Atmaram. He is very spiritual and is
currently residing in the forest in Yamanashi prefecture, actively
performing and composing traditional Indian music.
TARO TERAHARA (Bansuri Player)
Taro Terahara is one of the leading musicians in Japan. He was
born in 1968 and from his early age he enjoyed playing flutes and
whistles while walking home from school. At the age of 10 he
began playing on trumpet in the athletics carnival brass band. In
1991, the world-renowned master of Bansuri Pt. Hariprasad
Chaurasia came to Japan and performed in the all-Night Concert
at Xebec Hall, Kobe. Terahara heard the voice of the Bansuri and
immediately decided to master that flute.
1992 he became a student of Mr. Hiroshi Nakagawa (a long-time

disciple of Pt. Hariprasad Chaurasia) and in the following year he
quit graduate school to devote himself entirely to the practice of
Indian classical music. He came to India to take lessons from Pt.
Hariprasad Chaurasia. From 1997 he began studies under Mr.
Amit Roy (disciple of Pt. Nikhil Banerjee) who has guided and
refined Terahara's musical talents. Taro has performed the Indian
classical music across the whole of Japan and India. He is
performing concerts in Australia since 2006. He regularly
performs in Woodford Folk Festival, Festival of Tibet and in
numerous concerts around the country. Moreover, he has proved
his versatility by fusion performances with Odissi dance, Arabic
91
and Chinese music, jazz, etc, He also teaches Bansuri and Indian
classical vocal music to Japan students.
YUKO MATOBA Veena Artist
She is an Ethno musicology student of Tokyo National University
of Fine Arts and Music. She was impressed by attracted to the
music of Sitar Maestro Pt. Ravi Shankarji, who visited Japan in
1970. Prof. Koizumi, who popularized Indian music in Japan
suggested her to go to South India to learn Carnatic music which is
the pure Indian music. Matoba took his advice and joined in the
Central College of Carnatic
Yuko Matoba learned Veena classes as a visiting student of Ms.

Kalpakam Swaminathan and Ms. Rajalakshmi Narayanan. But the
college classes were group lessons and she could not follow the
classes very well. Hence Yuko Matoba started learning from Sri
Mokkapati Nageswara Rao privately, who was Prof. Koizumi's
colleague at Wesleyan Univ. in USA. After Nageswara Rao passed
away, Yuko continued with her daughter Mokkapati Sarada. Yuko
Matoba wants to be a musician, a Veena player. So she learned
continuously for 40 years to achieve the heights in Carnatic music
which shows her immense interest. She voluntarily retired from
her job to learn Veena without break. Now she is teaching music
and Veena classes in The Eastern Institute of South Indian
Classical Music.
92
Moursing (South Indian Jews Harp)- KOICHI

TAKEHARA
He lives in Tokyo and is impressed by the instrument played in

the Sakthi Band orchestral music headed by Vikku Vinayagram, a
renowned Ghatam player in Japan. He got trained under the
guidance of Sri Vikku Vinayakram and his student. He completed
his course in Jaya Ganesh Tala Vadya Vidyalaya and got awarded
a course completion certificate from the hands of the Tabla
maestro Ustad Zakir Hussain. He participated along with his guru
in many music and dance concerts in South India including the
world famous Tyagaraja Aradhana festival at Thiruvaiyyaru. He
regularly accompanies the popular Bharathanatyam artist cum
actress Shobana in her dance tours in India and abroad. His
performances on the rhythm instruments like Arai Toshiya-
Mridangam and Kuno Takaaki - Ghatam are very popular in Japan.
Conclusion
The above glimpses are some perfect examples for the statement
music and art have no language and boundaries. It is also evident
that the Indo - Japan cultural relationship through performing
arts is stronger than the other modes. As a result of several
cultural exchange programmes a good number of Japanese artists
are shining in various areas of Indian Performing arts. In the
beginning stage they learn it as a hobby and later make it their
main business for leading life. Some Japan performing artists
received many scholarships and awards from the Government of
India and Japan. Indian performing art forms provide a good
93
social value and economical status for all the Japanese who
learned them. Indian music and dance schools are now very
popular in Japan and many Japanese now evince great interest to
gain knowledge of them.
The learning of performing arts is a continuous journey and
because of the ICH of India, Japanese are visiting their Gurus
frequently to refresh their knowledge and to learn the latest
inclinations in the field. Some Japanese regularly stay in India
continuously for 6 months in a year to develop their skills. This
helps the development of Indian economy through foreign
money exchange. Development in the Performing Arts and the
Indo- Japan cultural exchange programs appear to be more
beneficiary to the Japanese. The strength of India is its incredible
cultural Heritage and it geared up the Japanese to respect and
salute our country by cheering 'Namaste India'.
Similarly Indians are also passionate for learning Japanese
martial and fine art forms. But due to the non-student friendly
attitude and the rigid immigration policies of Japan the number of
Indians going to Japan for education has been dwindling. The
rules and regulations regarding guarantor, sponsor, scholarship
and accommodation are not acceptable for the Indian students
and also for any international (including Indian) student who
wants to seek education in Japan. The cost of living is also
comparatively higher than in India. Only if the defects in the
foreign student policy of Japan are rectified, further development
will continue both in Indian and Japanese cultural arenas during
the forthcoming years.
94
References
1. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, (2008) 'Japan India Relations (Basic
Data), retrieved on 8th November 2008.
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/india/data.html
2. Press Information Bureau, Govt. of. India (2013), (Prime Minister's
address to Japan-India Association), Prime Minister's Office, 28th May,
2013. http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=96257
3. Leupp, Gary P, (2003), Interracial Intimacy in Japan, Continuum
International Publishing Group. 2003. p. 37. ISBN 0-8264-6074-7
4. Japan Foundation , New Delhi, Sharing the Wonder of Japanese Culture
with the World http://www.jfindia.org.in/?page_id=12
5. Ministry of External Affairs, Govt. of India (2012), India Japan Relations,
November 2012. http://www.mea.gov.in/Images/pdf/
indiajapanrelationsnov2012.pdf
6. Malm, William P. (1959). Japanese Music and Musical Instruments (1st ed.),
Tokyo & Rutland, Vt .C. E. Tuttle.
7. Hughes, David W. (2008). Traditional folk song in modern Japan: sources,
sentiment and society. Folkestone, UK: Global Oriental Ltd. 2008. ISBN
978-1-905246-65-6.
8. The Japan-India Traditional Performing Arts Exchange Project (2004)
Noh and Kutiyattam Treasures of World Cultural Heritage, Tokyo, 29th
November, 2004. http://noh.manasvi.com/program.html
9. Yasuka, (2011), Noh: Japan's Oldest Traditional Theater, International
Japan Language School, KCP Window, Tokyo 7th October 2011.
http://www.kcpwindowonjapan.com/2011/10/noh-traditional-
theater/
10. Oricon (2013) Yearly Charts. Albums, Tokyohive, 6 Theory Media, LLC.
15-12-2013. Retrieved 16-12-2013. http://www.tokyohive.com
/article/2013/12/oricon-2013-yearly-charts-albums
11. Oricon (2013) Yearly Charts , Singles, Tokyohive. 6 Theory Media, LLC.
15-12-2013. Retrieved 16-12-2013. http://www.tokyohive.com/article
/2013/12/oricon-2013-yearly-charts-singles
12. Suhani Singh (2011), Kalakshetra, The Bharathanatyam institute in Chennai
completes 75 years, Timeout, Mumbai, 16th November 2011.
95
13. Neeraja Murthy, (2009), Her Heart Beats for Bharathanatyam, The Hindu,
Hyderabad edn.18th April 2009.
14. Ministry of Culture, Government of India, (2013), Annual Report (2012-
2013), 2013. http://indiaculture.nic.in/hindi/pdf/Culture-
Annual%20Report-2012-13(English).pdf
15. Tokio Hasegawa, (2012), (Message of the Chairman, Namaste India
Executive Committee), the 21st Namaste India Festival, Tokyo, 2012.
http://www.indofestival.com/indexE.html
16. G.S. Paul, (2010), Rhythmic beats, The Hindu, June 10, 2010.
http://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-
review/music/rhythmic-beats/article451637.ece
96
India-Japan Relations through Buddhist culture for
Promoting Economic Development and World Peace
M. Deenadayal and V. Sudarshan
Introduction
Throughout history, India-Japan relations have always been
strong. For centuries, India and Japan were engaged in cultural
exchanges, primarily as a result of Buddhism which spread
indirectly from India to China and then to Japan.
Cultural exchanges between India and Japan began early in the
6th century with the introduction of Buddhism to Japan from
India. The Indian monk Bodhisena arrived in Japan in 736 A.D to
spread Buddhism and performed the eye-opening ceremony of
the great Buddha built in Tōdai-ji, and remained in Japan until
his death in 760 A.D.. Buddhism and the intrinsically linked
Indian culture had a great impact on Japanese culture which is
still felt today and it resulted in natural amicability between the
two nations. As a result of the link of Buddhism between India
and Japan, monks and scholars often embarked on voyages
between the two nations. Buddhist monks from India had been
visiting Japan from the 8th century. The ancient records from the
now-destroyed library at Nalanda University in India describe
the scholars and the pupils who attended the school from Japan.
One of the most famous Japanese travellers to the Indian
subcontinent was Tenjiku Tokubei (16121692 A.D),named after
Tenjiku ("Heavenly Abode"), the Japanese name for India1.
The arrival of Buddhism in Japan is ultimately a consequence of
the first contacts between China and Central Asia, where
Buddhism had spread from India. These contacts occurred with
the opening of the Silk Road in the 2nd century BC, following the
travels of Zhang Qian between 138 and 126 BC. These contacts
culminated with the official introduction of Buddhism in China in
67 AD. The historians generally agree that by the middle of the 1st
century, the Buddhist religion had penetrated into the areas north
of the Huai river.
97
According to the Chinese historical treatise 'Liang Shu', which

was written in 635A.D five monks from Gandhara traveled to
Japan in 467 A.D. At that time, they referred to Japan as the
country of Fusang (Chinese: Fusō: "The country of the extreme
East" beyond the sea) and they introduced Buddhism to the
residents of the island nation:
Fusang is located to the east of China, 20,000 li (1,500 kilometers)
east of the state of Da Han [Korea] (itself east of the state of Wain
the modern Kansai region in Japan). (...) In former times, the
people of Fusang knew nothing of the Buddhist religion, but in
the second year of Da Ming of the Song Dynasty i.e., in467A.D,
five monks from Kipin [Kabul region of Gandhara] travelled by
ship to Fusang. They propagated Buddhist doctrine, circulated
scriptures and drawings, and advised the people to relinquish
worldly attachments. As a result the customs of Fusang changed.
Monk Hui Shen in the book Liang Shu, 7th century Asuka Period
(538 to 710A.D) and Nara Period (710 - 794 A.D)
Although there are records of Buddhist monks from China
coming to Japan before the Asuka Period, the "official"
introduction of Buddhism to Japan is dated back to 552A.D in
Nihon Shoki when Seong of Baekje sent a mission to Nara that
included some Buddhist monks or nuns, together with an image
of Buddha and a number of sutras to introduce Buddhism. The
powerful Soga clan played a key role in the early spread of
Buddhism in the country. Initial uptake of the new faith was slow
and the Buddhism started to spread only some years later when
Empress Suiko openly encouraged the acceptance of Buddhism
among all the Japanese people.
In 607A.D, in order to obtain copies of sutras, an imperial envoy
was dispatched to the Sui Dynasty in China. As time progressed
and the number of Buddhist clergy increased, the offices of Sojo
(archbishop) and Sozu (bishop) were created. By 627A.D.there
were 46 Buddhist temples, 816 Buddhist priests, and 569 Buddhist
nuns in Japan.During the Heian period the capital was shifted
from Nara to Kyoto. The monasteries became centers of powers,
even establishing armies of Sōhei, warrior-monks.
98
India-Japan Relations through Buddhist culture for Promoting Economic Development and World Peace
Shinto and Buddhism became the dominant religions,

maintaining a balance until the Meiji-restoration.
The Kamakura period was a period of crises in which the control
of the country moved from the imperial aristocracy to the
samurai. In 1185 A.D the Shogunate was established at
Kamakura.
This period saw the introduction of the two schools that had
perhaps the greatest impact on the country. The Amidist Pure
Land schools, promulgated by evangelists such as Genshin and
articulated by monks such as Hōnen, which emphasize salvation
through faith in Amitabha and remain the largest Buddhist sect in
Japan (and throughout Asia) and the more philosophical
Zenschools, promulgated by monks such as Eisai and Dogen,
which emphasize liberation through the insight of meditation,
which were equally rapidly adopted by the upper classes and had
a profound impact on the Japanese culture2.
In addition to them, it was during the Kamakura period that the
influential monk Nichiren began teaching devotion to the Lotus
Sutra. Eventually, his disciples formed their own school of
Nichiren Buddhism, which includes various sects that have their
own interpretations of Nichiren's teachings.In Muromachi
period, the Zen school, particularly the Rinzai sect, obtained the
help of the Muromachi shogunate and the Emperor and
accomplished considerable development.
After the Sengoku period of war, Japan was re-united in the
AzuchiMomoyama period. This decreased the power of
Buddhism, which had become a strong political and military
force in Japan. Neo-Confucianism and Shinto gained influence at
the expense of Buddhism, which came under the strict state
control. Japan closed itself off to the rest of the world. The only
traders to be allowed were Dutchmen admitted to the island of
Dejima. New doctrines and methods were not allowed to be
introduced, nor new temples and schools were allowed. The only
exception was the Ōbaku lineage, which was introduced in the
17th century during the Edo period by Ingen, a Chinese monk.
99
Ingen had been a member of the Linji school, the Chinese

equivalent of Rinzai, which had developed separately from the
Japanese branch for hundreds of years. Thus, when Ingen
journeyed to Japan following the fall of the Ming Dynasty to the
Manchus, his teachings were seen as a separate school. The Ōbaku
school was named after Mount Ōbaku (Ch. Huángbò Shān), which
had been Ingen's home in China. Also notable during the period
was the publication of an exceptionally high quality reprint of the
Ming Dynasty Tripitaka by Tetsugen, a renowned master of the
Ōbaku school.
With the Meiji Restoration in 1868 A.D, the new government
adopted a strong anti-Buddhist attitude and a movement had
risen to eradicate Buddhism and bring Shinto to ascendancy
throughout the country due to the strong connections of
Buddhism to the Shoguns.
During the Meiji period (18681912A.D), after a coup in 1868A.D,
Japan abandoned its feudal system and opened up to Western
modernism. Shinto became the state religion. Within the
Buddhist establishment the Western world was seen as a threat as
well as a challenge to stand up to. Buddhist institutions had a
simple choice of adapt or perish. Rinzai and Soto Zen chose to
adapt, trying to modernize Zen in accord with Western insights,
while simultaneously maintaining a Japanese identity. Other
schools and Buddhism in general, simply allowed their influence
waning.
During the Second world war, most Buddhist schools (with the
exception of the Sōka Gakkai) strongly supported Japan's
remilitarization. During the post World War, there was a high
demand for Buddhist priests who glorified fallen soldiers and
gave funerals and posthumous names, causing a strong revival.
However, due to secularization and materialism, Buddhism and
religion in general, continued to decline.
Buddhism has had a major influence on the culture and
development of Japan over the centuries and it remained an
important part of the culture. About 90 million people in Japan
100
claim to be Buddhist practitioners and or believers, which

accounts for about 70% of the population. Due to syncretism in
Japan, many Buddhists also profess adherence to Shinto these are
not exclusive, and there is substantial overlap. In the modern
times, Japan's most popular schools of Buddhism are
Amidist(Pure Land), Nichiren Buddhism, Shingon Buddhism
and Zen Buddhism3.
Buddhist Temples in Japan
Buddhist temples are the most numerous, famous and important
religious buildings in Japan. The Japanese word for a Buddhist
temple is tera and the same kanji also has the pronunciation ji, so
temple names often end with ji or dera. There is also another
ending -in normally used for minor temples. The famous temples
like Enryaku-ji, Kiyomizu-dera, and Kōtoku-in illustrate the
naming patterns.
As in the case of a Shinto shrine, a Buddhist temple is not
primarily a place of worship. Its most important buildings are
used for the safe keeping of sacred objects and are not accessible to
worshipers.There are specialized buildings for certain rites but
these are usually open only to a limited number of participants.
The religious mass gatherings in the style of Christian churches
do not take place regularly and are not held inside the temple. If
many people are involved in a ceremony, it will assume a festive
character and will be held outdoors.
The temple building in the 8th century was focused around the
Tōdai-ji in Nara. Constructed as the headquarters for a network
of temples in each of the provinces, the Tōdaiji is the most
ambitious religious complex erected in the early centuries of the
Buddhist worship in Japan. Appropriately, the 16.2-m (53-ft)
Buddha (completed in 752A.D) enshrined in the main Buddha
hall or Daibutsuden, is a Rushana Buddha, the figure that
represents the essence of Buddhahood, just as the Tōdaiji
represented the center for Imperially sponsored Buddhism and
its dissemination throughout Japan. Only a few fragments of the
original statue survive today and the present hall and central
Buddha are the reconstructions from the Edo period4.
101
Shinshoji Temple at Naritasan is a temple complex worth the

visit. There are many temples in the complex with a beautiful
garden with a pond and koi fish to feed in the rear of the complex.
The burn ceremony is 5 times a day and the only temple to
perform it today. I went to the temple of 2 pm. Before the start of
the ceremony you can buy for 500 yen a wood stick to write on it
what blessings you need. You can also have the monk bring your
purse up to have it blessed so that you are protected. Photos are
not taken inside the temple. It is very dark inside anyway. There is
also a vending machine that you can get a blessing from, if you
don't like it you can tie it up across the walk way and get another.
Please see this temple with a guide only5.
Buddhist Architecture in Japan
Buddhist architecture in Japan is not native but was imported
from China and other Asian cultures over the centuries with such
consistency that the building styles of all six dynasties are
represented in it. Its history is as a consequence dominated by
Chinese and other Asian techniques and styles (present even in
Ise Shrine, held to be the quintessence of Japanese architecture) on
one side and by Japanese original variations on those themes on
the other.
Partly also due to the variety of climates in Japan and the
millennium encompassed between the first cultural import and
the last, the result is extremely heterogeneous but several
practical universal features can nonetheless be found. First of all is
the choice of materials, always wood in various forms (planks,
straw, tree bark, etc.) for almost all structures. Unlike the both
Western and some Chinese architecture, the use of stone is
avoided except for certain specific uses, for example temple podia
and pagoda foundations.
The general structure is almost always the same-post and lintel
support a large and gently curved roof, while the walls are paper-
thin, often movable and in any case non-carrying. Arches and
barrel roofs are completely absent. Gable and eave curves are
gentler than in China and columnar entices (convexity at the
center) are limited6.
102
The roof is the most visual impressive component, often

constituting half the size of the whole edifice. The slightly curved
eaves extend far beyond the walls, covering verandas, and their
weight must therefore be supported by complex bracket systems
called tokyō. These oversize eaves give the interior a characteristic
dimness, which contributes to the temple's atmosphere. The
interior of the building normally consists of a single room at the
center called moya from which sometimes emerge other less
important spaces, for example corridors called hisashi.
The inner space divisions are fluid and the room size can be
modified through the use of screens or movable paper walls. The
large, single space offered by the main hall can therefore be
altered according to the need. The separation between inside and
outside is itself in some measure not absolute as the entire walls
can be removed, opening the temple to visitors. Verandas appear
to be part of the building to an outsider, but part of the external
world to those in the temple. Structures are therefore made to a
certain extent part of their environment. The use of construction
modules keeps proportions between different parts of the edifice
constant, preserving its overall harmony.
But in cases as that of Nikkō Tōshō-gū, where every available
space is heavily decorated, ornamentation tends to follow and
therefore it emphasizes rather than hides the basic structures.
Being shared by both the sacred and the profane architecture,
these architectonic features made it easy to convert a lay building
into a temple. This happened for example at Hōryū-ji, where a
noblewoman's mansion was transformed into a religious
building7.
Buddhist Art in Japan
Buddhism played an important role in the development of
Japanese art between the 6th and the 16th centuries. Buddhist art
and Buddhist religious thought came to Japan from China
through Korean peninsula and the Buddhist art was encouraged
by Prince Shōtoku in the Suiko period in the sixth century and by
Emperor Shomu in the Nara period in the eighth century. In the
103
earlyHeian period the Buddhist art and architecture greatly

influenced the traditional Shinto arts and the Buddhist painting
became fashionable among the wealthy Japanese. The Kamakura
period saw a flowering of Japanese Buddhist sculpture, whose
origins are in the works of Heian period sculptor Jōchō. The
Amida sect of Buddhism provided the basis for many popular
artworks. The Buddhist art became popular among the masses
via scroll paintings, paintings used in worship and paintings of
Buddhas, saint's lives, hell and other religious themes. Under the
Zen sect of Buddhism, portraiture of priests such as Bodhidharma
became popular as well as scroll calligraphy and sumi-e brush
painting8.
India-Japan Relations: Throughout history, India-Japan
relations have always been strong. For centuries, India and Japan
have engaged in cultural exchanges, primarily as a result of
Buddhism which spread indirectly from India to China and then
to Japan. During the Second World War, the Japanese Imperial
Army employed Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose's Indian National
Army in battles against British forces. India-Japan have stood by
each other in critical moments in their history.
The political relations between the two nations have remained
warm since India's independence. The Japanese companies, such
as Sony, Honda, have manufacturing facilities in India and with
the growth of the Indian economy, India is a big market for
Japanese firms. Japanese firms were, in fact, some of the first firms
to invest in India. The most prominent Japanese company to have
an investment in India is the automobiles giant Suzuki, which is in
partnership with the Indian automobiles company Maruti
Suzuki, the largest car manufacturer in India and a subsidiary of
the Japanese company.
Landmarks of India-Japan relations
1916: Rabindranath Tagore, the Nobel winning philosopher-
literateaur visited Japan and wrote an inspiring travelogue
titled "Journey to Japan".
104
1944: The Indian National Army (headed by Subhash

Chandra Bose, Supreme Commander)
o took part in the Imphal Operation in 1943 alongside the
Japanese Troops.
1945: August 15, World War II came to an end.
1947: August 15, India gained independence after nearly 200
years of British rule.
1949 Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru presented Japan with
a baby elephant "Indira", named after his daughter.
1951: The Treaty of Peace between the Allied Powers and
Japan was concluded. India did not take part in the Confer
Treaty of Peace between Japan and India.
1952:Diplomatic relations between Japan and India
established. The Treaty of Peace between Japan and India
concluded.
1957: Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi visited India, the first
visit made by a Japanese Prime Minister.Prime Minister
Jawaharlal Nehru visited Japan.
1969: Vishva Shanti Stupa in Rajgir was inaugurated on the
Ratna giri hill near Gridhakutta at Rajgir with the
cooperation of Ven. Fuji Guruji, a Japanese monk. It is an
another attraction of the region is the ropeway that leads
uphill to the Vishwa Shanti Stupa (Peace Pagoda).
1982: Prime Minister Indira Gandhi and Foreign Minister PV
Narasimha Rao visited Japan.
1985: Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi visited Japan.
1988: Festival of India organized in Japan. Prime Minister
Rajiv Gandhi was present at the opening ceremony.
1991: The Shanti Stupa was built by both the Japanese
Buddhists and the Ladakh Buddhists. The original idea was
mooted by Nichidatsu Fujii (Fujii Guruji) in 1914. The
mission of Nichidatsu Fujii was to build Peace Pagodas and
105
temples over the world and try to resurrect Buddhism back in

India. The 14th and current Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso
inaugurated the Shanti Stupa in August. Construction of the
Shanti Stupa began in April 1983 under the supervision of
Bhikshu Gyomyo Nakamura and Kushok Bakula, a lama of
Ladakh from New Delhi, a member of the Minority
commission of Govt of India, former statesman and former
international diplomat of the Republic of India. The project
was built with the help of Ladakhi Buddhists, who offered
voluntary labour, and the Japanese Buddhists who consider
India as the "sacred" birth place of the Buddha. Then prime
minister of India, Indira Gandhi, sanctioned the construction
of a vehicular road to the stupa in 1984. The state government
also provided some financial assistance for the construction
of the Shanti Stupa.
1992: Prime Minister P. V. Narasimha Rao and Finance
Minister Manmohan Singh visited Japan.
In December 2006, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to
Japan culminated in signing of the "Joint Statement Towards
Japan-India Strategic and Global Partnership". Japan has
funded many infrastructure projects in India, most notably
the Delhi Metro subway system. Indian applicants were
welcomed in 2006 to the JET Programme, starting with just
one slot available in 2006 and 41 in 2007. Also, in the year
2007, the Japanese Self Defense Forces took part in a naval
exercise in the Indian Ocean, known as Malabar 2007, which
also involved the naval forces of India, The year 2007 was also
declared as "India-Japan Friendship Year."
In August 2000, Japanese Prime Minister Mori visited India. At
this meeting, Japan and India agreed to establish "Japan-India
Global Partnership in the 21st Century." Indian Prime Minister
Vajpayee visited Japan in December, 2001, where both the Prime
Ministers issued “Japan-India Joint Declaration”, consisting of
high-level dialogue, about economic cooperation, and military
and anti-terrorism cooperation. In April, 2005, Japanese Prime
Minister Koizumi visited India and signed Joint Statement
106
"Japan-India Partnership in the New Asian Era: Strategic

Orientation of Japan-India Global Partnership" with Indian Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh. Japan is currently India's third largest
source of foreign direct investment Japanese companies have
made cumulative investments of around $2.6 billion in India since
19919.
India-Japan Friendship: India-Japan Friendship Center is a non-
government, non-political and non-profit making voluntary
organization primarily which aims at identifying areas of
convergence for mutual cooperation and brotherhood between
the two countries in a constructive manner, contributing to the
advancement of overall bilateral relations. It further reaffirms its
determination to strengthen cooperation and coordination
between India and Japan for comprehensive reforms at grass-root
level.
It works to harness social, cultural and secular values of India and
Japan through mutual understanding, fellow-feeling and
interacting with each other in cordial and reciprocal manner at
grass-root level to foster friendship driven by converging long-
term social, economic and strategic interests, aspirations and
concerns and underpinned by a common commitment to
democracy, open society, human rights, rule of law, and free
market economy based on deep respect for each other's
contributions in promoting peace, stability and harmony through
comprehensive economic engagement, scientific experiment and
research, greater technological cooperation as well as working
towards a quantum increase in cultural ties, tourism packages,
educational linkages and people-to-people contacts to harness
the vast potential of bilateral relations between Indian and Japan,
as the two largest and most developed democracies of Asia with a
mutual stake to each other's progress and prosperity.
The Centre should put the best of its endeavours to facilitate ties
between people, or people to people exchanges which are of vital
importance, in addition to political and economic relations. The
Japanese and Indian people share ancient bonds and a proud
107
civilization and heritage, and thus, have a large potential to

deepen their interaction.
Japan amd India have been cultivating their friendship through a
long cherished history. It is well known that an Indian Buddhist
priest, Bodhisena, inaugurated the Great Buddha of Todaiji
Temple in Japan in the 8th Century. Indian & Japanese people
bear vivid memories of their friendship and the frequent
interactions between the greatest Indian poet, Rabindranath
Tagore and the Japanese thinker, Tenshin Okakura, and of the
stormy lives of Ras Bihari Bose and Subhas Chandra Bose who
fought for the Independence of India and the then Japanese
support to turn the dream into a reality.
Our economies are highly complementary to each other. Japan
has an advantage in hardware, on the other hand, India is well
known for its software expertise. Let's have an initiation to boost
the commerce of both the countries. Both the countries have
articulated their shared conviction that this partnership must be
based on the foundations of close people to people links to help
elevate our traditionally friendly and co-operative ties to a higher
level. Intuitive initiatives shall contribute substantially to this
noble objective. To reduce the communication gap to a
formidable extent, schools and other educational institutes shall
be adopted to introduce Japanese language in Odisha & other
states of India as the language linkage between the two countries
will be a step ahead. Some traditional & cultural programmes
must be organized to attract Indian & Japanese classical and folk
artists to perform stage shows in both the countries. A cultural
amity can be ensured. Let's have amazing vacations amidst the
tourists of either of the countries and participate in programmes
like "Japan year in India" and "Indian festivals in Japan". Let's
have more & more celebrations and participations10
A 24 hour, round-the-clock help-line has been organized by India-
Japan Friendship Center to extend its friendly help & support for
any kind of enquiries, queries, problems, disadvantages of the
Japanese tourists, during their stay in India. Retirement tips,
guidelines and on-time help shall make them feel at home & boost
108
the traditional contacts. Besides that, the India-Japan, Friendship

Center also works as an information centre for the native Indians
who intend to go to Japan for business, studies, traveling, research
work etc.
These are the fundamental steps in promoting mutual
understanding and appreciation of each other's cultures &
civilizations. We are hopeful that with these types of initiations
we can convey a picture of two dynamic and friendly countries
which have fast growing economies. Thus we can promote
knowledge & cultural hubs and work for universal brotherhood
and world peace in both the countries which have emerged as the
pillars of strength in Asia as well as the rest of the World.
Conclusions:
The ancient cultural exchanges between the two countries created
many parallels in their folklore. The modern popular culture
based upon this folklore, such as the works of fantasy fiction in
manga and anime, sometimes bear references to common deities
(deva), demons (asura) and philosophical concepts. The Indian
goddess Saraswati for example, is known as Benzaiten in Japan.
Brahma is known as 'Bonten', and Yama, known as 'Enma' who
are also part of the traditional Japanese Buddhist pantheon. In
addition to the common Buddhist influence on the two societies,
Shintoism, being an animist religion, is also similar to the animist
strands of Hinduism, in contrast to the religions present in the rest
of the world, which are monotheistic.
Sanskrit, a classical language used in Buddhism and Hinduism, is
still used by some ancient Chinese priests who immigrated to
Japan, and the Siddham scriptis are still written to this day, in
Sanskrit. It is also thought that the distinctive Torri gateways in
temples in Japan, may be related to the Torana gateways used in
Indian temples.
Japan and India maintain strong cultural connections. The two
nations announced 2007 as 'Japan-India Friendship Year', and
held cultural events in both India and Japan.
Osamu Tezuka, kamisama of manga wrote the biographical manga
109
Buddha from 1972 to 1983. Recently, Japan has also supported the
reconstruction of Nalanda University, an ancient Buddhist center
of learning and has agreed to provide financial assistance and
recently approached the Indian government with a proposal.
The Japanese monastery, situated in Bodh Gaya, marks the
philosophies of the Zen Buddhism and its practices in
India.Basically a firm believer in devotional practices based on
meditation, the Japanese monastery of Bodh Gaya conducts
individual and group meditation programmes for monks and
other people as well. Through meditation, they aim for the
purification of one's heart to attain salvation or nirvana.
Japan has seen a decline in the Buddhist practice in the 21st
century, with about 100 temples closing every year. However 70%
of Japanese people still follow Buddhism in some form and 90% of
Japanese funerals are conducted according to Buddhist rites.
Japan will assist India in building roads and airports to improve
access to Buddhist sites in India, helping it attract more tourists.
The Indian government estimates that Rs.55.7 billion, or $1.2
billion, needs to be invested to build facilities to promote tourism
and conserve the sites linked to the Buddha, according to an
Indian Tourism Ministry statement in New Delhi. India is trying
to attract more tourists from countries other than the United
States and Britain, its traditional markets. Buddhist sites in states
like Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha and Andhra Pradesh will
help the country offer overseas tourists more destinations beyond
the beach resorts of Goa and the Taj Mahal at Agra in northern
India. Both the governments are promoting socio, economic and
cultural developments to bring peace in the world.
110
References
1. Archaic smile, “Britannica Online Encyclopedia”, 2009,
Chatfield Pier & Garrett, “Temple Treasures of Japan”, Kessinger
Publishing, 2005.
2. Jagir Singh Bajwa & Ravinder Kaur, “Tourism Management” APH
Publishing, 2007.
3. Bhasin, Sanjeev Kumar “Amazing land Ladakh: places, people, and
culture”, Indus Publishing,2006.
4. Arpitha Mathur, “India Japan relations-Drivers ,Trends and
Prospects”, RSIS Monograph-23, S. Rajaratnam School of International
Studies,Singapore,2012.
5. Rajamohan, P.G.,Dil Bahadur Rahut,Jabin T Jacob, “Changing
Paradigm of Indo-Japan
Relations: Opportunities andChallenges”, Indian Council for
Research on International Economic Relations (ICRIER), New
Delhi,2008.
6. FPRC Journal-12 India -Japan relations.
7. Sengupta, Nilanjana, “ A Gentleman's Word: The Legacy of Subhas
Chandra Bose” in Southeast Asia,Singapore: Institute of Southeast
Asian Studies,2012.
8. Sisodia, N.S and Naidu,India,N.V.C, “India Japan Relations:
Partnership for Peace and Security in Asia”, Promilla & co, New
Delhi,2012.
9. Ankit Pandaina, “Japan come Together, Indian Decade? Inside
Asia's other Giant”, 2012.
10. Sagar.B.M., “Indo-Japan Relations: Growth and Future Challenges”
International Policy Digest, May 2013.
111
Buddhism: A Comparative Analysis between
Dalits and Burakumin
Zeba Siddiqui
Introduction
India and Japan go a long way in terms of their cultural relations.
Traditional practises enjoy a distinct position in both these
civilisations.
There are plenty of elements that constitute this synthesis; one of
the prominent dimensions of this is the aspect of religion that
binds the two countries from very ancient times.
Since both the countries give immense importance to their
cultural heritage and religious practises, the aspect of Buddhism
as faith can be seen as a major thread that runs across both the
civilisations.
As P.A.George points out, during the ancient times there wasn't
much cultural exchange between the two countries until the
arrival of Buddhism and the interaction was to a great extent
influenced by Hinduism too. The time when Buddhism had
ushered on the shores of Japan, it had already witnessed a decline
on the Indian land due to mighty resurgent of the Indian culture.
The Lord Buddha arose in northern India around 500 B.C. as an
ethical reformer, a rationalist and what some writers have called
an atheist. He swept away caste, rituals, superstitions and
privileges of all sorts. To him there was little that was good in the
traditional Hinduism. He was, of course, a Hindu, of the princely
or warrior caste (i.e. not a Brahmin) and his followers during his
own lifetime were all Hindus. And yet his great permanent
following, the Buddhist world of today, is found in China and
Japan, Tibet, Siam, Indo China and Burma.
The Indian monks, who visited China and other Southeast Asian
countries, unknowingly introduced Hindu culture also to those
countries. The Japanese scholars who visited China to seek higher
112
Buddhism: A Comparative Analysis between Dalits and Burakumin
studies in Sanskrit and Buddhism also therefore got introduced to

Hinduism.
India's attitude towards Japan, during the first quarter of the 20th
century was that of admiration and respect. Japan's victory in
Russo-Japan war in 1905 inspired the Indians greatly in their fight
against their tormentors, the British colonialists.
Great Indian leaders like Dadabhai Naoroji , Gokhale, Tilak,
Tagore etc. called upon the fellow Indians to learn and evolve the
Japanese style of work and dedication.
George points out that there was not much change in the
relationship of India and Japan after the Second World War too,
though there was a spurt in the Indo-Japanese relations for a short
period of about a decade after the war. The relations took a
setback by 1960s due to differences in their respective
international outlooks and priorities. In his opinion a major
impediment or catalyst in building a healthy relation between the
two countries is to have a good communication by having an
understanding of language of each other's country.
The following sections would focus on the cultural dimension
primarily through the lens of Buddhism.
Durkheim & Buddhism:
Durkheim' s conceptualisation of religion states that :
“a religion is a unified system of beliefs and practises relative to
sacred things , that to say, things set apart and forbidden-beliefs
and practises which unite into one single moral community
called a church.”
Durkheim in his work ELEMENTARY FORMS OF RELIGIOUS
LIFE (1912), offers to us a brief discussion of Buddhism in the
beginning of his book. Durkheim relied on his interpretation of
Buddhism to support two crucial claims in his definition of
religious phenomena: that gods or spirits are not essential to
religion, for Buddhism has no meaningful gods or spirits; and that
the sacred-profane dichotomy is characteristic of all religions,
since it is found even in an atheistic religion like Buddhism.
113
The concept of sacred became central in Durkhemian analysis and

such central criterion allowed him to characterize the belief in
supernatural beings as non essential to religious phenomena. The
sacred easily replaced the supernatural.
Durkheim's idea of sacred and profane also exists in Buddhism
but contrary to his claims, they aren't central to this religion.
Rather in Buddhism the dharma of both the physical and the
transcendental worlds is similarly characterised by emptiness,
the singleness and the desirelessness.
The element of sacred precipitates down to the FOUR NOBLE
TRUTHS which are central to Buddhism. The four noble truths
concern pain, the cause of pain, the cessation of pain and the way
that leads to the cessation of pain. Enlightenment, is the main
driving force for pursuing the religion. This cannot be achieved if
one doesn't have a well purified insight into these four truths.
The three major forms that the religion took were: Archaic,
Scholastic and Mahayana Buddhism.
In his Buddhist Thought in India, Conze has described the archaic
Buddhism as a progressive detachment from the world is
accompanied and facilitated by the constant application of the
three marks : impermanent, ill, and not-self to all worldly events.
Conze also argues: "Once he has achieved perfect indifference to
all worldly things, the Yogin can automatically make Nirvana
into an object"
In concern with the Scholastic Buddhism, it was argued that, the
Sthaviras (literally, the Elders) stood for tradition and orthodoxy
in Buddhism. Scholastic Buddhism identifies three classes of
increasingly enlightened individuals: the Arhat, the
Pratyekabuddha, and the Buddha. The Arhat, at the lowest level,
is "one who has eliminated all ill." At the next higher level is the
Pratyekabuddha, of whom Conze writes: He is a Buddha for
himself alone, who, unlike the Arhat, has ... won his
enlightenment by his own effort without instruction from others,
114
but who, unlike the Buddhas, does not proclaim the truth to
others.. “
The Buddha, in Mahayana doctrines, is characterized as a
metaphysical principle, identified with the absolute Dharma:
"The true Buddha is trans-mundane, the historical Buddha is a
mere apparition of him."
The Mahayana broadened the access to enlightenment to include
all individuals, whereas the Sthaviras schools had a more
selective interpretation of who could achieve Buddhahood.
In archaic Buddhism, "a person becomes supra mundane on
entering the Path," and entering Nirvana requires transcending
the god of death. In scholastic Buddhism, the Buddha is clearly
described as a supernatural being and a supernatural force with
supernatural powers; the Buddha is also the only one who can
proclaim the truth of Buddhism to others. While one could
identify a variation in the centrality of beliefs in supra-human
beings in the three phases of Buddhism, it is nevertheless evident
that the belief in supra-human beings is present throughout
Buddhist religion.
Buddhism, A Potent Force for the Dalit and The
Burakumin:
If one were to look at the Indian society, the system of Caste comes
out as a prominent element in the understanding of the Indian
scene.
As Deepankar Gupta efficiently pointed out that the system of
caste is muddled with hierarchy and inequalities. The community
that, in the contemporary times, seems to be the worst hit with the
age old practise of Caste hierarchy and the Varna system are the
Dalits.
When one closely examines the Japanese society, he is met with
similar instances of discrimination based on hierarchical
distribution of occupations in society. The community called the
'Burakumin' have a history that runs on similar lines as that of the
Dalits in India. This section therefore offers to draw an analogy
115
between the roles of Buddhism in the lives of the two

communities. Since, if one sets out to draw commonalities that
bind the two cultural systems together, it is also imperative, for
him, to take into account the discriminatory practises that exist in
both the societies.
In the course of the last thousand or so years saints and reformers
have sought to ameliorate the lot of the Untouchables none of
them with any great success. The latest and the most heroic of
these attempts was made by Dr Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar,
himself an Untouchable by birth, who came to the conclusion that
there was no salvation for the Untouchables within Hinduism
and that they would have to change their religion.
Apologists of the caste system try to represent it in terms of a
division of labor, as a force making for social stability and
cohesion. Speaking at the time of his conversion to Buddhism,
Ambedkar declared that he felt as though he had been delivered
from hell, An Untouchable is one who cannot be touched, and he
cannot be touched because his touch automatically pollutes the
one who touches him or whom he touches.
The bitter discrimination stems from the notion of untouchability
that surrounds these people. If one were to enquire into the nature
of untouchability it exists due to the idea of 'PURITY AND
POLLUTION' that strongly governs the Hindu religion. The
traditional answer to their impurity is that contact with these
people pollutes since he is a creature of filthy personal habits and
low morals who engages in unclean occupations such as the
removal of faeces and the disposal of the carcasses of cows and
other animals. It is believed that it is their God given dharma or
religious duty to engage in these vocations. But strangely
enough, what was brazenly ignored, is the fact that it was due to
these people that the surroundings of the 'clean upper caste'
Hindus was rendered clean and livable. If they did not perform
these 'polluting' jobs , everything else would have been defiled.
Sixteenth century poet Tulsidas, whose Ramacarita manasa retorts,
'a Brahmin possessed of all the vices is to be worshipped, and a
116
Shudra endowed with all the virtues is to be despised.'

Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (1881-1956), is regarded as one of the
iconic figures who rose in order to emancipate the untouchables
from the clutches of the oppressive caste system.
While one task of a leadership is to integrate potential supporters
and create a distinctive political community, another task is to
define that community in contradistinction to some other.
Ideologies and cultural identities thus serve the dual purpose of
unity and opposition. Ideological discourses are constructed
from the ensemble of traditional elements that a leadership
reinterprets, imbued with new meaning and offers as an
explanation of social reality.
The dominant group attempts to appropriate culture by defining
the identity and reality (past and present) of all social groups.
Non-hegemonic groups resist by rejecting the imposed reality
and reconstructing their own identity. Ideology, therefore, does
not refer solely to the ways in which meaning is mobilized to
sustain relations of domination, but also refers to the ways in
which non-hegemonic groups reinterpret their past in order to
meaningfully interpret their present. Ideology and cultural
identity, in other words, are just as much "weapons of the weak".
The hegemony as reckoned by Antonio Gramsci existed in two
forms of leading and domination; wherein the hegemonic class
would lead the other classes that are allied to it and would
dominate the classes that are juxtaposed against it.
Buddhism was regarded as an emancipator force for the
oppressed castes.
Ambedkar focused on the heterodox tradition associated with
Buddhism and linked it to ideas of social democracy. The Buddha
had provided one of the earliest critiques of orthodox
Brahmanism, which for centuries propagated the social and
spiritual inferiority of women and the lower castes. The Buddha
attempted to counter Brahmanism with a philosophy of spiritual
equality and a notion of atheistic morality as the essence of social
and religious duty.
117
Ambedkar converted himself to Buddhism on October 14, 1956.

He had designed his Buddhism with a holy book, a conversion
ritual with 22 "Buddhist Oaths" and a dress code while swearing
these oaths. The convert should reject Hindu deities as well as
rituals and fight for an equal and just society.
He criticized the conjunction of religion and law that legalized the
oppression of Untouchables under Hinduism, and advocated a
secular state, an egalitarian society, and a religion based on ethics.
Mahars in Maharashtra have been the primary support of
Ambedkar's movement and have accepted his principles of
secularism and egalitarianism. They have signalled their rejection
of religious orthodoxy and caste hierarchy by converting to their
own syncretic form of Buddhism and adopting the casteless term
Dalit.
Buddhist Dalits have discarded their idols of Hindu deities and
have replaced esoteric notions of god with an emphasis on moral
living: "Just keep your mind pure. Don't steal. If you see a cripple
or a blind one, help them cross the street. If a child falls, pick him
up. That's god, and whoever does that is god's man".
Ambedkar meant his Navayana Buddhism - as it is nowadays
called- to be a total rejection of Hinduism. To abjure Hinduism
was for him the only solution to escape the caste system and
establish equality. Agra's dalits responded to Ambedkar's mass
conversion drive in 1957 and subsequently removed the Hindu
deities from 22 temples and converted them into Buddhist
temples.
Kanpur city in the State of Uttar Pradesh , can be exemplified to
show the major shift in religious beliefs and faiths of people as a
response to the historically institutionalised form of oppression.
The 1990s were a time of radical social and political change in
Kanpur .Suddenly, the erstwhile independent and self reliant
shoe manufacturers saw themselves as "broken people" -dalits,
crushed and denigrated. Globalisation and the booming leather
industry in Muslim hands made it obvious that they had missed
118
the train to prosperity long time back. They refused to qualify in

their traditional craft and rather moved into white collar jobs.
According to the Census of 1991, Kanpur had 1,253 Buddhists.
These comprised mainly of people engaged in the occupations
like bank employees, lecturers, employees in the telephone
exchange, teachers and clerks with the municipal corporation and
doctors, who were singularly devoted to Navayana Buddhism.
They hold that Navayana Buddhism has a rational and scientific
approach to religion. The core teachings are the rejection of
superstition, the rationality of insights and the internalisation of
beliefs. The followers of Navayana Buddhism have refuted
Hinduism and the caste system, the concepts of karma- fate - and
rebirth with the same zeal as Ambedkar. The political discourse
instigated by the Sangh parivar - the Hindu fundamentalists -
centred around the question of whether Buddhism is a part of
Hinduism or not.
It took a long time until Navayana Buddhism got firmly
established in Kanpur. Only in the 1980s Navayana Buddhism
became institutionalised with a Buddh vihara, specific public and
private rituals and public arena activities. Finally, Navayana
Buddhism was seen as a social protest and as the only alternative
to subjugating and enslaving Hinduism. Kanpur's practising
dalit Buddhists on the other hand feel a need for meditation.
It is often claimed by the Buddhists that the very acceptance of this
religion marks a departure from aligning with the Hindu
ideologies and beliefs. But Dhammachari Lokamitra, seems to
differ in this regard and opines that by worshipping the old gods
one is thus continuing to wear the old religious shackles with all
their psychological effects that have been worn for centuries.
More than that, belief in god, being based on superstition, opens
one to all manners of exploitation. Ambedkar felt so strongly
about this that he said in 'The Buddha and His Dhamma', "belief in
god is the most dangerous thing”. But the sad fact is that many
Buddhists still worship the old gods, thus unwittingly
maintaining the old religious condition.
119
Another modern designation for the Untouchables is Harijans or

'Children of God'. This rather sentimental and patronizing term
seems to have been coined by Mahatma Gandhi, but although
enshrined in legislation it has found little favour with the
Untouchables themselves, especially when used by Caste Hindus
who, in practice, continue to treat them as Untouchables.
Japanese Buddhism has no sacred scriptures accepted as the
canon common to all Japanese Buddhist sects.When Shinran
(1173-1263) first established Pure Land Buddhism in Japan it
liberated those who were oppressed by any restraint and
discrimination. (In fact, most Burakumin belong to his Buddhist
group even now.) Nevertheless, later the followers of Shinran
organized themselves into denominations (called Jodoshinshu, or
Shin Buddhism), they gradually became tarnished by
discrimination and incorporated into the feudal system of Japan.
Also, in this past half century, Shin Buddhism has had a number
of incidents showing discriminatory administrative practices that
reveal a misunderstanding of Buddhism.
For many centuries Buddhism was patronized by the rulers of
Japan, but the reasons were political rather than religious or
cultural. They wished to use Buddhism as a means of securing the
peace of the country. They believed that the chanting of sutras
would drive away enemies and make their country prosper. The
first time Japanese Buddhist sects cooperated with each other was
when the Meiji government suppressed Buddhism. Western
Sectarian Shinto sects, which were formed towards the end of the
Tokugawa period, became powerful enough to deprive the
Buddhist sects of some of their votaries.
For the original source of discrimination against the Burakumin,
there are three different opinions. The first opinion is that it
originated from their occupations, namely, certain people
experienced prejudice because they did "impure" tasks from
ancient times. These tasks specifically dealt with various
unpleasant, fearful, or mysterious events such as killing animals,
bleeding, and child birth. It became a sacred prohibition to avoid
120
contact with such conditions or with the people responsible for

handling them. Otherwise, one might become contaminated by
pollution, thereby bringing disasters to the community.
When political authority was used to ensure the continuity of
these occupations within certain family lineages, particular
groups were formed in Japanese history called "Burakumin."
Second opinion is that the Burakumin had its origin in religious
traditions. Buddhist ideas of "non-killing" and karma were used
as tools of discrimination against those who were engaged in
those impure jobs. Karma was understood as the fate which
people received because of evil actions in previous lifetimes and
those born into such families were assigned to the lowest
occupations and were considered to deserve the life of impurity.
These ideas were popularized in Japan, creating the negative
image of "Buraku-min".
The third opinion is that discrimination against Bukarumin had
its origin in racism. It was said that certain groups represented
different nationalities and races from China and Korea, and that
they differed from the purity of the Japanese race.
During the Modern Edo period (1603-1868), these discriminatory
attitudes were institutionalized. The Tokugawa government
organized the feudal system as a social order based on the
preconditions of discrimination. The feudal system is a social
system in which a ruler divides and possesses the land, dominates
and controls the people, and builds a class hierarchy (shi-no-ko-
sho-eta-hinin): from the highest class to the samurai, farmers,
craftspersons, tradespeople, impure people, and non-human
people (the last two lowest classes were regarded as Buraku-min).
The differences in their occupations meant differences in their
human values. In addition, their family genealogy and residence
determined their ranking in that class system. The ruler had
divided each class and tightened up its regulations, and culturally
used Confucianism to preach to the people the virtue of serving
under the higher classes. This system even worked among the
121
Buraku-min who were divided into two classes. A particular

political concern of great importance was to control the farmers
who represented eighty percent of the population in Japan at that
time. So, it was said: "force them to pay taxes as much as possible,
while not letting them die and not letting them live." Therefore,
Buraku-min were used to ease the minds of farmers by showing
that at least their status was not the lowest.
There is a tradition that people carve a religious name for the dead
on the face of a tomb as a sign of worship. That is a practice for
many Buddhist religious organizations. The name for the dead is
Kaimyo, posthumous Kaimyo is given by a Buddhist priest and is
recorded in a post-memorial-notebook at the temple where the
dead belonged to. The discriminatory names and characters in the
notebooks and on the faces of the tombs exist. These were given
by Buddhist priests to the dead who were of Buraku origin.
A prominent theory that is forwarded to account for buraku
discrimination is precisely that they historically did those tasks
(butchering, leather-work, and so forth) that no one else wanted
to do and, as a result, they were classified as lower class and so
began a tradition of societal discrimination. In regard to marriage,
the burakumin have historically been endogamous
Buddhist temples that were located in Buraku communities "were
called 'impure temples' (eta-dera) and were not allowed to
communicat e wit h t emples in non-Burak u areas."
Further, as the Dalits were told from the Hindu perspective, the
burakumin were taught that it was their karma that placed them
in this unsavory life and that forbearance was necessary if the next
life was to be favorable.
In the Middle ages, Shin Buddhist followers in the Hongwanji
denomination had a huge membership since it attracted the
support of those who were oppressed by the ruling class and
reorganized them under the flag of freedom. But in the 16th
century, the political powers divided the Jodoshinshu into two:
the Shinshu Otani-ha and the Hongwanji-ha. In order to protect
122
themselves, the two Jodoshinshu groups themselves became very

political in order to maintain their own movement. Later when
the state forced all people to belong to a Buddhist temple, it was
said that "the imperial family is in Tendai, the peerage is in
Shingon, the nobility is in Jodo (Honen's followers), the Samurai
is in Zen, the beggar is in Nichiren, and Shin Buddhists (Shinran
followers) are at the bottom." This sharp hierarchy is something
that is very closely similar to Varna system in India.
Historically, the villages of the Buraku-min were widely
distributed in the western area of Japan. In this region people
have received discriminatory treatment because they are from
those villages. In fact, as a consequence there has been a loss of
employment and a rejection of intermarriage even up to today.
Japanese society as a whole is called a mura-shakai (village-
society), which means that it is closed to outsiders. Each
community passes on ancient, unwritten customs and rules that
are carried on to the next generation. Every person must belong to
a temple or shrine organization and must cooperate with its
members. They are very conscious of their own territory, and in
that sense they exclude others. As a result, a pattern of
discrimination continues to exist in their minds.
The burakumin tend, as the Dalits of India, to be found in selected
occupations. Many burakumin are employed in small factories
connected with their traditional occupations, such as butchering
and leather and fur processing. Others are farmers, fishermen,
and unskilled laborers. Although many individuals have become
economically or socially prominent, the average standard of
living is far below that of the non-burakumin.
Just like the Hindu society, even Japanese society has a very
pronounced notion of purity and pollution. As Buddhism
permeated its way through Japanese society, the notion of
pollution came to include the idea that it could be caused by
contact with the bodies of dead animals, and thus came to be
associated with leather work and even the eating of meat.
Gradually the Shinto concepts of imi (taboo) and kegare (pollution)
123
which were associated with human death became linked to the

Buddhist prohibition on taking any life.
This gap between the pure and impure was exacerbated during
the Heian Period (794-1185), where the lowest in the society were
termed senmin (as opposed to the ryomin [the good]). These
senmin, during the tumultous Sengoku jidai (“warring period” of
the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries) came to populate the leather
workers that assisted the daimyos (warlords) in supplying them
with leather “armor” and other battle equipment.
It was during the Tokugawa Period (1603-1867) that specific
discriminatory policies arose toward the burakumin, and it is here
that it is generally argued that the burakumin became established
as a discriminated-group. During the period of the 16th and the
17th centuries, the ruling class placed these groups at the bottom
of the social hierarchy. The feudal lords assigned to them some
duties as petty officers, while forcing them to contribute leather
goods as tax.
There were many reforms that were often introduced to better the
existing sorry state of the Burakumin in Japan.
In the Meiji period (1868-1911), the government made radical
social innovations. In 1871, with the Meiji Emancipation Edict
(Ordinance No. 61), the Japanese government did take steps to
discontinue the lowest social ranks and removed their official
status by renaming them the etaas shin heimin (new common
people). However, no real financial or educational support was
provided to make this emancipation a reality and similarly, no
change had been effected in the Shinto-Buddhist views of the now
“new common people”. As a matter of fact, a new class order had
been built in the society, namely, the highest class, the emperor,
the peerage, the Samurai, citizens, and the new citizen. Although
the government announced new regulations to release the
Buraku-min, it just meant a new label for them as the "New
Citizen, " while their situation remained the same.
124
In fact, the Japanese constitution has three main principles:

Renunciation of War, Political sovereignty, and Fundamental
human rights. Therefore, the political basis to enable the
liberation of the Burakumin has been improved theoretically.
However, it was impossible for people to deny their history with
the Burakumin and to be reborn without prejudice. Instead, the
reality and consciousness of discrimination became hidden deep
in the people's minds and the topic of the Burakumin and using
any discriminatory words about them became taboo.
In 1922, the National Equality Society (Zenkoku-suiheisha) was
founded in Kyoto, Japan by the Burakumin to do away with their
inequality.
Most burakumin in the community follow Pure Land Buddhism
(Jodo-shu) and that this sect had, in the past, supported the
burakumin rights.
John Donoghue, in his study of the burakumin entitled, 'Pariah
Persistence in Changing Japan', noted that the more educated and
socially sophisticated persons in Shinmachi stressed the fact that
the Buraku people were very religious. They pointed out that
everyone in the community belonged to a Buddhist sect. They
also indicated that their Shinto beliefs, rituals, and ceremonies
were the same as those found in communities throughout Japan.
when we consider the role of Japanese Buddhism in casting the
burakumin down, it is surprising that they tend not to blame
Buddhism. Rather, as Donoghue further observed, "they
[burakumin] were convinced that religion was wholly unrelated
to their lowly position in the society.”
In the past, Shin Buddhism had been one of the major offenders of
burakumin human rights and had compounded its discriminatory
policies and actions with more recent discriminatory public
remarks. Changes began to take place in this structure later.
Shin sect was taking to change this structure; he replied that
education of members was a central concern. Twice a month the
temple sponsored workshops to educate members and four times
a year there were public fora to educate the larger public.
125
The Burakumin may be aided by Japanese religiosity in their

search for increased freedom from discrimination. It is here that
Buddhism may be most pertinent, as this is precisely what
Engaged Buddhism argues for: a Buddhism that concomitantly
supports the Buddha and dharma, and views the sangha in such a
fashion that it legitimately expands its efforts in placing a
premium on the physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being of
all human persons.
Conclusion
Japan and India are two prominent and upcoming nations of the
Asian continent. The dimension of religion, Buddhism in
particular, has been discussed here in order to establish this fact.
Also the discriminatory practises that exist at par, in both these
societies, amplify the argument offered by Social Anthropologist,
Claude Levi Strauss, who opined that humans have a
“classification”. Which implies that, people in order to make
sense of their surroundings, tend to classify almost everything
into neatly defined categories.
This also in turn implies that we tend to discriminate and
hierarchize everything, including human population on various
parameters (say birth, and occupations) and therefor create a
stratified society.
Our approach should not be to align the differences vertically but
align them parallel to each other as co-existing systems.
Similarly one could opine that Japan and India can together , by
the means of cultural exchange find common grounds in order to
reach a solution to the problem of this historically approved and
institutionalised form of discrimination.
126
References
Orrù, Marco and Wang, Marco;1992; Durkheim, Religion, and Buddhism;
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, Vol. 31, No. 1; pp.47-61
Schempp, Maren Bellwinkel; Jun. 9-15, 2007; From Bhakti to Buddhism:

Ravidas and Ambedkar; Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 42, No. 23 ;pp.
2177-2183
Lokamitra,Dhammachari; May 18, 1991;Ambedkar and Buddhism;

Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 26, No. 20 ;pp. 1303-1304.
Alldritt, Leslie D; March 1999; The Burakumin : The Complicityof Japanese

Buddhism in Oppressionand an Opportunity for Liberation (first part);
Buraku Liberation News.
Kasahara, Toshinori; October 17, 1996; Shin Buddhism and the Burakumin;
Higashi Hongwanji Headquarters, Honolulu
Contursi,Janet A.;Aug., 1989;Militant Hindus and Buddhist Dalits:

Hegemony and Resistance in an Indian Slum ;American Ethnologist, Vol. 16,
No. 3; pp. 441-457
Ives,Christopher;Spring, 1999;The Mobilization of Doctrine: Buddhist

Contributions to Imperial Ideology in Modern;Japanese Journal of Religious
Studies, Vol. 26, No. ½; pp. 83-106
Davids,T. W. Rhys;Oct., 1900;Buddhism;The North American Review, Vol.

171, No. 527;pp. 517-527.
Sangharakshita;1986; Ambedkar and Buddhism; Windhorse Publications
Sheean,Vincent;Jan., 1951;The Buddhism That Was India;Foreign Affairs,

Vol. 29, No. 2;pp. 287-299
Murano,Senchu; Dec,1960, Japanese Buddhism and World Buddhism;

Contemporary Religions in Japan, Vol. 1, No. 4 pp. 76-81.
Winemiller,Shin; Mar., 1965;Shin Buddhism;Contemporary Religions in

Japan, Vol. 6, No.1 pp. 75-101
127
Challenges to Japan's Foreign Policy in the Twenty
First Century: Placing of India
Lalima Varma
Since 1952 when Japan regained its sovereignty till the end of the
Cold War in 1990-1991 and to some extent even after that, often
the question was raised if Japan had a foreign policy. Such
comments were made largely because during the Cold War era
Japan was closely aligned with the United States of America [U.S].
In the international environment that was prevailing at the time it
was practical and almost imperative for Japan to opt for close
relations with the U.S. A 'Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and
Security' signed by Japan and the U.S. came into effect in 1952.
Since then Japan is dependent on the U.S. for its security.
Moreover, Japan's pacifist constitution [article nine] prevents it
from using force to settle any international crisis. Politically,
strategically and economically the U.S. was an important ally and
it was regarded as an important pillar of Japan's foreign policy.
Hence, more often than not Japan tended to follow the guidelines
set by the U.S. while formulating its foreign policy. Thus, during
the Cold War era for Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
challenges confronting it were not very complex. It is, hence, not
surprising that often Japan was not considered to be a very crucial
factor in international relations.
However, the beginnings of the matureness of Japan's foreign
policy were apparent during the Cold War itself. A gradual
change in Japan's perception on foreign policy matters was visible
in the early 1970s after Japan got the Nixon Shocks. [1] The oil
crisis of 1973 also compelled Japan to formulate a foreign policy
which was more multidimensional. However, the need to play a
proactive and an independent role in world affairs became more
necessary mainly after the end of the Cold War. Japan was aware
of the uncertainties which would follow as a consequence of the
changes in the world order. With the disintegration of the
128
Challenges to Japan's Foreign Policy in the Twenty First Century: Placing of India
erstwhile Soviet Union, Japan was not sure of its relevance for the
U.S. in the changed international environment. Japan's equation
with the U.S. had undergone significant change as it emerged as
an economic power. The U.S. response to Japan's contribution
towards the Gulf war of 1991 provides an evidence of the distance
which had crept into the relations between the two countries. [2]
Japan took several steps to bolster its role in international affairs
such as adopting the law in 1992 which would enable the Self
Defense Forces [SDF] to participate in the United Nations peace
keeping missions. During the 1990s Japan also made an extra
effort to stabilize its relations with China with whom it shares a
bitter past and several other problems. Thus, till the end of the
1990s the main challenge for Japanese foreign policy makers was
to manage relations with the U.S. and focus on maintaining,
engaging and promoting relations with the East and Southeast
Asian countries. Relations with the countries located in the South
Asia which includes India and West Asia were not a priority in
Japan's foreign policy considerations.
Japan and India as is well known have always had cordial
relations. In 1952 India was among the first countries to conclude
a Peace treaty with Japan. Developments in the relations between
the two countries in the 1950s indicated that this relationship was
heading towards a strong partnership. However, as the Cold War
rivalry progressed the relations between the two countries
though always cordial did not see much improvement. India and
Japan were in different camps during the Cold war. Japan was
closely aligned with the U.S. and India though a nonaligned
country was considered to be a close ally of the erstwhile Soviet
Union. Expanding the economic relations was also difficult with
both the countries that were pursuing economic policies which
were rather diverse.
Relations between the two countries began to improve with the
beginning of the 1990s. Improvement in the relations was mainly
spurred due to the end of the Cold War and India's decision to
liberalize its economic policies. India was attractive both as a
129
destination for Japanese investments and as a market for its

manufactured goods. Japan's main focus during the 1990s was
mainly to expand economic ties with India. Strategic and political
relations were always on the agenda in the discussions between
the two countries, however, differences of opinion on issues such
as Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [CTBT] and Nuclear Non
Proliferation Treaty [NPT] posed obstacles in the development of
political relations between the two countries. India's nuclear tests
at Pokharan in 1998 brought relations between the two countries
to a standstill. Japan's reaction to the tests was severe and it
imposed economic sanctions on India. Moreover, as mentioned
earlier Japan's main focus in the early 1990s was to consolidate its
relations with China, Republic of Korea and the Southeast Asian
countries. These countries were the main recipients of Japan's
Official Development Assistance [ODA]. China for long was the
topmost recipient of Japanese ODA.
As the 1990s closed China and India in Asia witnessed rapid
economic growth. Strategic issues such as the security of the sea
lanes, piracy, terrorism, environment etc posed challenges which
could not be dealt with by any one single power. These problems
are now global in nature which necessitate regular cooperation
and dialogue between the different countries. U.S. and other
western countries which had like Japan strongly condemned
India's nuclear tests were quick to repair relations with India.
Japan also watched with apprehension the changes in the US
foreign policy stances. The fact that it cannot entirely rely on the
U.S. for securing its national interests was quiet apparent to
Japan. Reformulating its foreign policies objectives to deal with
the new challenges and uncertainties caused by a fast changing
world was essential.
The Twenty First Century: Attempts to Restructure Foreign
Policy in the Absence of the military Power: Regaining
Economic Strength:
The stature of any country in global affairs is determined by its
military strength, economic power and technology and culture.
Japan due to its constitutional constraints is unable to occupy a
130
position of strength in international affairs as a military power.

Japan's importance and role in world affairs has depended largely
on its economic strength and technological expertise. Till 2010
Japan was the second largest economy in the world when China
took its place. Japan is a member of important international
organizations such as the United Nations [UN]; G 8 etc and has
been appreciated for its contribution. Since 1989 till the turn of the
twenty first century Japan was the topmost provider of ODA to
the developing countries. ODA served as an important tool in
achieving its foreign policy goals. It helped Japan strengthen the
bilateral relations with several countries and play a leading role in
the preservation of environment, eradication of poverty, disease
etc.
Economic strength undoubtedly has its advantages but to be
recognized as 'real' power it has to be coupled with military
might. A very direct thinking on Japan's foreign policy was
encouraged with the publication of Ozawa Ichiro's “Blueprint for
a New Japan: The Rethinking of a Nation” in which the author
discusses the need for Japan to become a 'Normal' nation.
'Normal' nations have an independent foreign policy and more
importantly an option to have a military. [3] The main barrier in
Japan's tryst to being a 'Normal' country is Article 9 of the
constitution.
Since the start of the twenty first century committees have been
formed to study the possibilities of amending the constitution.
The new administration inaugurated under the leadership of Abe
Shinzo in December 2012 is keen to explore ways to strengthen
Japan's defense capability. During the pre election campaign he
said, “With the US defense budget facing big cuts, a collapse of the
military balance of power in Asia could create instability,” In such
a situation he said that Japan must, “foster an alliance with the US
that can hold up under these circumstances”. [4] Advisor to the
Japanese government on defense issues and director of the
security and international program at Tokyo's National Graduate
Institute for Policy Studies, said that Japan “should stand tall in
the international community”. He added, “We are second to none
131
in Asia. So the idea is why don't we start using this. We don't have
to go start going to war. We can use it more effectively as a
deterrent. If we get rid of legal, political, and psychological
restraints, we can do much more. We should start playing a larger
[role] in international security affairs”. [5] Such opinions are often
heard now.
Japan increasingly seems to be serious about removing the
hurdles which restrain it from becoming a military power.
Japanese Prime Minister Abe in his address to the Upper House
lawmakers said,” I will start with amending article 96 of the
constitution”. [6] Article 96 states that, “Amendments to this
constitution shall be initiated by the Diet, through a concurring
vote of two-thirds or more of all the members of each House and
shall thereupon be submitted to the people for ratification, which
shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of all votes cast
thereon, at a special referendum or at such election as the Diet
shall specify”. [7] The process of amending the constitution is
very difficult. Nevertheless, despite the limitations Japan is
making efforts to strengthen its defense capabilities and protect
its interests.
Challenges to Foreign Policy and Domestic Issues: Since
possessing and using military might is not whether the option
Japan should depend more on its economic stature to pursue an
effective foreign policy. However, even as an economic power
since the 'bubble' burst in the early 1990s Japan's economy has
been sliding down. The triple disaster in March 2011; tsunami;
earthquake and Fukushima nuclear power plant leak have added
to Japan's economic woes. The total damage caused to the
economy is difficult to ascertain. Japan has to bring about some
structural changes at the domestic level so as to boost up its
economy.
At the domestic front Japan is confronted with several serious
problems such as fast aging society, falling birth rate,
unemployment, etc which Japan has to address urgently. The
poverty problem in Japan is also becoming a matter of concern.
132
According to the Welfare Ministry as of June 2010, 1,907,176

people in 1,377, 930 households were on welfare, receiving
livelihood assistance [seikatsu hogo]. This according to the
ministry statistics was the highest since fiscal 1955 when 1.93
million people were receiving livelihood assistance every month.
[8]
The economic recession also has an adverse impact on other facets
of the society. The financial constraints have led to budgetary cuts
in different areas such as education, pensions and social security
etc. One area in which Japanese government needs to invest and
restructure is the education system. It is important that Japan
prepare the youth in a manner that they can adjust to the fast
changing world and play a leadership role. The Japanese youth
seem to be shy, contented and not that forthcoming. An article
which appeared in The Japan Times has very succinctly described
today's youth in Japan. It states that “Younger Japanese, however,
are more inward looking. Brought up in a nation that ranks at the
top of league tables in wealth and technology [and in the number
one slot when it comes to infrastructure and cleanliness] they
never lived through poverty- bombed-out cities which defined
the formative years of their elders. Staying at home, enjoying the
comforts of Japanese civilization and the predictability of a career
in a big corporation or in government is perfectly satisfying to
them”. [9] Polling data showed that a growing number of new
hire would rather not work overseas. [10]
Considering that Japan is one of the largest contributors to world
bodies such as UN, statistics show that all the positions are not
filled up which is due to Japan's inability as one of the largest
contributors to fill up those posts. In the long run these things
make a difference to the image of the country. Expressing your
opinion in forums helps in giving it a stature in international
affairs and in the decision making. Lack of confidence in English
language is one of the reasons. This drawback has to be overcome.
As a scholar opined, “It's incredibly important for Japan to have
global managers. I think global management education
133
experience is a very important contribution to that, knowing

people from all over the world, learning from them and learning a
foreign language”. [11] In comparison the Chinese and the
Koreans are doing better.
A large pool of well trained and articulate personnel who
represent Japan in the various international forums and
diplomatic missions would contribute to Japan's visibility and
proactive role in the decision making of the world bodies. During
the Cold War era the Japanese public was largely indifferent to
international affairs satisfied as they were to be closely aligned
with a super power i.e. U. S. However, since the end of the Cold
War and simultaneous decline of the economy it has become more
important that the public is not only well informed about the
foreign policy matters but its support is sought in the
implementation of the foreign policy. To regain its economic clout
it has to play an active role in the organizations which determine
international rules and regulations for trade, investments etc.
Stability and peace in the region and at the global level are utmost
important for the strengthening of its economy. Japan in the last
few years has taken an active interest in the resolution of issues
which relate to 'human security'. The 'human security' concept
promoted and supported by Japan includes environmental
protection, abolition of poverty etc.
To create public interest in foreign policy during the last one
decade the government has attempted to finance studies on areas
which are crucial for its national interests. For example, projects
on the study of India, China and Africa are encouraged by the
Japanese government. The public interest in Japan on foreign
policy has increased in the last one decade. The Ministry of
Foreign Affairs interacts with Non Government Organizations
and Non Profit Organizations [NGO/NPOs] especially with
those that deal with development assistance programmes.
However, considering the role which Japan aims to play in world
affairs much more needs to be done. The Japanese government
has to further intensify dialogues with various sections of the
134
society, such as the business class, academics and media.

The political stability is essential not only internally to assure the
smooth functioning of the administration and implementation of
the policies initiated by the previous government but also to
project positive image of Japan to the outside world. During the
last few years [2006-2012] frequent changes in the leadership has
presented a somewhat negative image of the country to the
outside world. Since 2006 Japan has had seven Prime Ministers.
Abe Shinzo [ September 2006- September 2007], Fukuda Yasuo
[September 2007-September 2008], Aso Taro [ September 2008-
September 2009], Hatoyama Yukio [September 2009- 8 June 2010],
Kan Naoto [ 8 June September 2011], Noda Yoshihiko [September
2011-2012], Noda Yoshihiko [incumbent] [December 2012-
onwards]. Change in the leadership means changes in internal
and foreign policy. It also enhances crisis at home due to delays in
legislating important laws.
Japan, so far could to some extent withstand criticisms regarding
not being a very active or vocal participant in world affairs as long
as it was the second largest economy and could afford to
contribute monetarily to the international organizations or
towards any other international efforts to deal with a crisis. ODA
helped Japan in strengthening its bilateral relations with several
countries which were important for its national interest.
However, due to its economic problems Japan gradually has
reduced its ODA. Since the beginning of the twenty first century
Japan from being a topmost provider of ODA gradually slipped
down to the fifth position. Moreover, increasingly using ODA as
leverage to influence a particular country seemed to lose its
effectiveness. [12] Hence a strong economy and stable
environment at the domestic level are very crucial for Japan to
cope up with the challenges posed by the outside world.
External Challenges: The challenges confronting Japan at the
regional and global level are as complex as the domestic
problems. Japan has to adjust to the rise of countries like India and
China in the region. Managing relations with China is most
135
important and difficult for Japan. Close relations with the U.S.
continues to be one of the important pillars of Japan's foreign
policy. However, the nature of the relations has been undergoing
several changes over the decades. The relations with the U.S. have
to be balanced judiciously. Other issues which pose concerns for
Japan are relations with the Republic of Korea and the growing
nuclear capability of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Japan- China relations: Foremost Challenge: In a public opinion
poll survey conducted in November 2012 by the Japanese Cabinet
Office a record of 80.6 per cent of the Japanese said, “do not feel
close to China”. The figure is up by 9.2 per cent compared to the
2011 figure. This is the highest since the Cabinet started taking
opinion polls in 1975. [13] The percentage of Japanese who did not
feel close to South Korea also rose sharply to 59 percent up by 23,7
percent from the previous survey.[14]
A downslide in the political relations between the two countries
became very apparent during the period when Koizumi Junichiro
was Prime Minister [2001 - 2006]. Koizumi visited the Yasukuni
shrine where the Japanese war martyrs are enshrined. China
protested but the Japanese leadership did not stop their visits to
the shrine. In April 2005 a large scale anti Japan movement was
witnessed in China against Japan's aspirations to become a
permanent member of the UN and against the visit of the leaders
to the shrine. Since this incident a gradual change in Japan's
attitude towards China is apparent.
The relations between Japan and China deteriorated with speed
after 7 September 2010 when the Chinese fishing boats collided
with Japanese coast guard near Senkaku/Diaoyu islands and
China's captain was arrested by Japanese coast guards. China
reacted very strongly to the arrest of the captain. Japan released
the captain quickly but the situation has only worsened since
then. China decided to cut its rare earth exports to Japan after the
incident, though the decision Beijing claimed was not linked to
the controversy. China produces almost 95% of the rare earth
minerals used in mobiles and other high tech goods and Japan
136
imports from China a large percentage of its rare earth

requirement. Since September 2010 there have been incidents
which have only led to the deterioration of relations between the
two countries. In September 2012 the worst anti Japan
demonstrations and violent attacks on Japanese factories, firms
and stores of well know business firms such as Honda, Mazda,
Panasonic, Toyota etc took place in several provinces of China.
[15]. This strong anti Japan sentiment not only frightened the
Japanese residing in China but it created a mood in Japan not to
submit to China on the territorial issue.
It is often argued that sound economic relation between two
countries contributes to cordial political relations as well. China is
Japan's topmost important economic partner. The total volume of
trade between the two countries in 2011 was about $340 billion. In
2012 China's trade with Japan fell by 3.9% to $329 billion. This was
the first drop in three years. [16] This decline in trade was
attributed to the rivalry between the two countries over the
territorial issue which led to the boycott of Japanese goods by the
Chinese. China is also a major destination for Japanese
investments. However, tense political relations can probably be
related to clash over economic interests. Demand for energy is
topmost on the agenda of most countries in the world. As its
economy grows China has become one of the biggest energy
consuming countries along with India, Japan and other countries
of the region. China, in fact has overtaken even the US and has
become the largest consumer of energy resources.
China's conflict with Japan over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands to
some extent is linked to the oil reserve deposits in the islands.
China's conflict with some of the Southeast Asian countries such
as Philippines, Vietnam, is also to some extent regarding China's
claiming rights over exploitation of oil reserves in the region.
China is also strengthening its presence in the India Ocean.
Almost 85% of China's oil imports, and large proportion of its gas
imports come by sea through the India Ocean, Malacca Straits,
and Singapore in Southeast Asia, and the South China sea. It is
137
energy which is also the driving force behind China's rapid

inroads into Africa. For several other countries including Japan
the main source of energy also comes from the Middle East
Countries. Thus, a powerful presence in the region assures safe
passage of their energy imports. So the security of the sea lanes is a
primary concern of the countries of this region.
Japan believes that one of the most important reasons for China to
modernize its army is not just to show its muscle power to reclaim
Taiwan but to a great extent it is to protect its maritime trade
routes and secure access to off shore energy, minerals and
fisheries resources in the nearby seas, including the East China
Sea. Japan is very much concerned with China's maritime
ambitions. On the other hand China believes that Japan is
becoming more aggressive in its maritime territorial disputes. It is
correctly stated that energy security is the twenty first century's
version of the arms race. Hence it has become very essential that
no one country can dominate in the region. It is increasingly
becoming important for nations in the region to clearly define
their interests since there are clash of interests.
Japan's problems with China are likely to continue for a long
period of time. Till the beginning of the twenty first century
Japan's policy towards China was basically geared towards
seeking to find ways of maintaining a long term friendship with
China. However, in recent years Japan has realized that winning
over China's friendship is a difficult task to achieve. Since 2010
Japan's response to the Senkaku/Diaoyu incident clearly reveals
that it is determined not to be bullied by China. Japan's intention
to 'resist' and 'balance' China in the region is more apparent than
ever before.
It is not only the Japanese who do not feel cordial towards China
but their feelings are reciprocated by the Chinese. Strong anti
Japanese mood in China can be gauged not only by the boycott of
Japanese made goods but also by the decline in Chinese tourist to
Japan. The largest number of tourists which Japan receives is from
China. However, trends since 2010 indicate that the Chinese
138
tourists are moving away from Japan and heading towards other
destinations i.e. Europe, U.S. and Australia. Due to the island
dispute tours to Japan have been suspended. Advertisements for
Japan holiday packages are also few. [17]
Japan-US relations: U.S. President Barak Obama in a joint news
press conference during Prime Minister Abe Shinzo's visit to U.S.
in February 2013 stressed that, “Japan is one of our closest allies,
and the U.S-Japan alliance is the central foundation for our
regional security and so much of what we do in the Pacific
region.” [18] Japan leadership also has always asserted that
relations with the U.S is an important pillar of their foreign policy.
However, there is no doubt that the 'strong' relationship between
the two countries which was apparent during the first two or
three decades of the Cold War period has somewhat weakened
since the end of the Cold War. The discussion of Japan enjoying a
“Free Ride” at the expense of the U.S. as in the 1980s is again being
raised in the U.S. as its economy faces numerous problems. [19]
Opinions within the U.S. such as Japan must end its defense
dependence on U.S. are gaining support. The U.S. involvement in
Iraq and Afghanistan has placed a considerable amount of strain
on the U.S. finances. Consequently even though Japan regards its
relations with the U.S. as very important, still considering the
developments in the region and the changing contours of its
relations with U.S. it is clear to Japan that it needs to develop
strong relations with other countries to safe guard and promote
its national interests. Developing close relations with India is one
of the options which Japan hopes will serve its national interests
well in the future.
Japan-India: Aiming at Long Term Partnership: Several major
developments have taken place since the end of the 1990s and the
beginning of the twenty first century which have promoted Japan
relations with India from being peripheral to central to its
strategic and economic interests in Asia. India and Japan more
than ever share their common interests, values and concerns.
There are bound to be areas and issues on which both the
139
countries don't agree still both the countries realize that strong
bilateral relations will eventually be mutually beneficial. On the
question of NPT issue both hold diverse opinions. During the
annual summit meeting in December 2011 in New Delhi the Joint
Statement stated, “PM Noda stressed the importance of bringing
into force the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty [CTBT] at an early
date. Prime Minister Singh reiterated India's commitment to a
unilateral moratorium on nuclear explosive testing”. [20]
However, India not being a signatory to the NPT and the CTBT is
no more a major barrier to the development of relations between
India and Japan.
The relations with India which had received a setback due to the
nuclear tests conducted by India in 1998 were brought back to
normalcy with former Japanese Prime Minister Mori Yoshiro's
visit to India in August 2000. The two countries signed an
agreement entitled “Global Partnership with India in the Twenty
First Century”. Since then continuous dialogue, cooperation and
agreement have been concluded which have enhanced the
strategic and political relations between the two countries.
An important landmark agreement was signed during the former
Prime Minister Koizumi Junichiro's visit to India in April 2005.
An Action Plan entitled “Eight Fold Initiative for Strengthening
Japan-India Global Partnership”, called for enhancement of
bilateral security dialogue and cooperation. It was decided to
strengthen service to service exchanges between the defense
establishments of the two countries. Both countries agreed to
work to ensure the safety and security of the maritime traffic
through joint exercises against piracy and annual Japan coast
guard and Indian coast guard talks. The agreement also included
building up cooperation between the Japan Maritime Self
Defense Forces and Indian Navy in recognition of the importance
of Maritime security. Since 2005 the strategic ties between the two
countries have been advancing at a fast pace. In 2006 the Joint
Statement by Indian Defense Minister and Minister of State for
Defense of Japan again emphasized on the necessity of having
close defense cooperation. A Joint Roadmap for New Dimensions
140
to the strategic and Global partnership was agreed upon by the

leaders of the two countries in August 2007. It was decided that
dialogue for security cooperation was to be held at various levels.
In 2007 the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Forces participated in
the multilateral maritime exercise 'Malabar 07-2' in the Bay of
Bengal. Another important agreement was concluded in October
2008 which called for joint defense exercises, policing of the
Indian Ocean and military to military exchanges on counter
terrorism.
During former Japanese Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio's visit
to India in December 2009 a 'Joint Action Plan to Advance
Security Cooperation between Japan and India' was concluded
which can be regarded as a major development in the expansion
of security relations between the two countries. This Action Plan
laid out a comprehensive plan for security dialogue at various
levels, both formal and informal. At the fifth strategic dialogue in
Tokyo on 29 October 2011, the foreign ministers of the two
countries agreed to hold Ministerial level economic dialogue,
trilateral dialogue between Japan, U.S. and India [ Director
General level]. In May 2012 the sixth round of strategic dialogue
was held between India and Japan. Both countries are set for
cooperation in maritime and cyber security. For Japan, India is
situated at an important place on the sea lanes of the
communication which links Japan with West Asia. The geo
politics of India for Japan are very crucial and important.
Japan is also strengthening ties with the Southeast Asian
countries which have problems with China. During the Japanese
Foreign Minister Gemba Koichiro's visit to Vietnam from 13-14
July 2012, the two countries agreed to promote cooperation in
defense and maritime security. The strategic importance of the
Southeast Asia region is becoming very crucial for Japan as its
relations with China deteriorate. It is no wonder that Abe Shinzo
soon after his becoming Prime Minister in December 2012 set
about the task of strengthening relation with the Southeast Asian
countries.
141
The economic relations between India and Japan have moved

over the years but they are so far not very satisfactory. The trade in
2012 was about $14 billion which is miniscule when compared to
Japan's total trade with China which is more than $300 billion. In
fact the total trade between India and China was about $70 billion
in 2012. The same is the case in the area of investments. The
number of Japanese companies in India has increased from about
250 in 2005 to about 850 in 2012. Increasingly Japanese companies
view India as the most promising country for overseas business.
With the ratification of the Comprehensive Economic Partnership
Agreement in 2011 a rapid development of the economic relations
between the two is expected.
Japan is also exploring alternatives to its reliance on China for raw
materials and other important items such as rare earth minerals.
India is one of the countries with whom Japan seeks to cooperate
in the mining of rare earth minerals. India is regarded as an
important destination for Japanese investments in the future. Due
to the anti Japan mood in China in recent years and attacks on
Japanese properties and business complexes, Japanese
businessmen are more inclined to move away from China. In
October 2012 a steep decline in Japanese investments in China
was recorded. According to the China's Ministry of Commerce,
direct investments by Japanese companies totaled $416 m. in
October 2012 down almost a third compared to the year 2011. [21]
Japan is increasingly making an effort to gradually shift its
economic interests in China to other countries. This is known as
China + one theory. India is an attractive alternative to China.
India since 2004-2005 is the largest recipient of Japanese ODA.
One of the areas in which Japan is extending aid is in the
infrastructure sector. Lack of adequate infrastructure has for long
been one of the reasons which has prevented Japanese business
houses from investing in India. It is, hence, not surprising that the
sector in which Japan is keen to cooperate is in the development of
infrastructure. The Delhi Mumbai Industrial Corridor [DMIC},
Dedicated Freight Corridor and Chennai- Bangaluru Corridor are
142
projects in which Japan is very much interested. Japan is an

interested party and an important contributor in the development
of these two huge projects.
Japan is also looking at India as a base for exports to other
countries. Thus, improvement in transport facilities ports etc will
contribute to the economic cooperation between the two
countries. India will serve as a base for exports to other regions
such as Africa. Japanese automakers Honda Siel cars are planning
to make India its South Asia manufacturing hub. It will also
export locally made premium cars to Africa and other overseas
markets. Honda's manufacturing operations in India are
expected to emerge as alternative to Thailand, which currently
feeds 'City' and other cars to Africa and other countries. [22]
Japan is also keen to cooperate with India in other regions of the
world. Africa is a continent which is increasingly becoming a
focus of major countries as a source of minerals and energy
resources and market. Historically India has had good relations
with several of the African countries. Indians for long have settled
in various African countries. Japan and India have started the
process of exploring ways of cooperating in Africa. The third
round of the India-Japan Dialogue on Africa was held in Tokyo in
November 2011. China is already pursuing its interests in the
region with vigour.
Another country where Japan and Indi have common interest is
Afghanistan. As the U.S. withdraws from Afghanistan it is
important that stability and development are encouraged and
supported in this strategically located country. India has had
close relations with Afghanistan for a long time. India is also an
important investor in Afghanistan. Japan held a conference for
Afghanistan in July 2012. Afghanistan has received a pledge of
$16billion in aid. This amount will be given to Afghanistan
through 2015.
India- China Relations: Though there are several problems
which pose an obstruction in the development of relations
between India and China still relations have not deteriorated to
143
the low level as have Japan's relations with China. Resolution of

some of the problems such as the border issue is not likely to
materialize in the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, both India
and China are keen to take the relationship forward. From
September 2 -4, 2012 Chinese Defense Minister General Liang
Guanglie visited India. Most important was that this visit came
after eight years. India also gave a grand red carpet welcome to
the Minister. During this meeting the two parties reached an
agreement and consensus on exchange and cooperation between
the two militaries in various fields, including high level visits,
exchange of young officers and personnel training. And also
intercollegiate exchanges in non traditional security field such as
maritime security cooperation”. The two parties also discussed
US ' look East Policy” which included shifting a part of its navy to
Asia-Pacific region. Another concern is the situation in the
strategically located Afghanistan after the withdrawal of NATO
forces. A significant decision was taken that both the countries
would “work together to maintain peace and stability of the Asia-
Pacific region. [23] Improved India China relations is indirectly
an advantage for Japan for it helps to restrain and engage China
leading to some kind of stability in the region. India also has a
stature in international affairs and often takes independent stand
on matters in international world bodies. It has a fairly strong
navy and military. It is a regional power and has the potential of
playing a powerful role in the regional and world affairs
However, despite the mutual interest and the vast scope for
developing relations at every level, most scholars, diplomats and
business people in both countries often tend to agree that given
the potential both India and Japan have not even scratched the
surface yet. Nevertheless, considering the fast pace and the
conviction with which relations between the two countries have
been developing since the beginning of the twenty first century
the possibility of this relationship becoming a very important one
in the region in future seems to be quite certain.
144
Footnotes
1. U.S. changed its policy towards China without consulting Japan.
Japanese business houses were disturbed with the economic policies
announced by the U.S government i.e.; floating the dollar; a ten percent
import surcharge and wage price freeze.
2. Varma, Lalima, “Japan-United States Security Arrangements and
Northeast Asia: Its Relevance in the Post-Cold War Period”, China
Report, [Sage Publications] vol.35, no.1 1999, p.86]. 3. Read, Ozawa
Ichiro.
3. “Blueprint for a New Japan: The Rethinking of a Nation”, [Publisher,
Kondansha International, Tokyo, New, London, 1994.
4. “Abe bid to Boost Military this time around may resonate.” Japan Times,
26 December 2012.
5. ibid.
6. Asia-Pacific News on-line, “Japanese Prime Minister says to Change
Post War Constitution”. Accessed on 31/01/2013.
7. For text of the constitution see, Facts about Japan, Code No. 05202-0396,
The International Society for Educational Information, Inc, Tokyo, Japan.
8. “Japan's Poverty Problem”, Japan Times, 20 October 2010.
9. Japan Times, 14 June 2012.
10 Ibid.
11. Mizuho Aoki, “Study Abroad Key to Japan's Future”, Japan Times, 19
October 2010.
12. See, Varma, Lalima, “Japan's ODA and Foreign Policy Goals”,pp 156-
177, in Kesavan, K V and Varma, Lalima {Edited], 'Japan-South Asia:
Security and Economic Perspectives” [Publisher, Lancer's Book, New
Delhi, 2000.
13. Daily Yomiuri Online, “Record 80 percent Don't Feel Close to China,
Poll Says”, www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/national/T121125003606htm.
Accessed on 26 November 2012.
14. ibid.
145
15. Kazunori Takada and Chris Buckley, “Japan shuts factories, stores in
China as island disputes turn violent”, Financial Post, 17 September
2012, Accessed on 20 March 2013.
16. “Trade with China falls first time in three years”, Japan Times, 11
January 2013.
17. Asia-Pacific-News,www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/eastasia/view
/1239009/html. Accessed 22 November 2012.
18. “Abe-Obama Talks set Stage for TPP Entry”, Japan Times, 24 February
2013.
19. Read, East Asia Strategic Review 2012, The National Institute for
Defense Studies, Japan [ Publishers: The Japan Times, Tokyo, Japan,
2012], pp.221-222.
20. “India, Japan to improve nuclear ties”. Hindustan Times, 29 December
2011.
21. Ben McLannahan and Mure Dickie, “Japanese Investments in China
Falls Sharply”, Financial Times,
20. November 2012, Accessed on 22 November 2012.
22. Chanchal Pal Chauhan, “Honda to Serve South Asia, S. Africa from India
Plants”, Economic Times, 7 August 2012.
23. Bagchi, Indarani, “India, China to work for peace in Asia Pacific”, Times
of India, 8 September 2012.
146
China-Japan rift and Implications for India
D.S. Rajan
The long persisting China-Japan confrontation, a product of

historical animosity between them, is affecting the strategic
equilibrium in the Asia Pacific region. While the simultaneous
rise of India and the People's Republic of China (PRC) has a
significant impact on the region's geo-politics, the power of the
third Asian giant, Japan, is weakening; it has lost its position of
No.2 economic power in the world to China. This being so, Tokyo-
New Delhi relations have witnessed a remarkable progress in
recent years on the basis of a perceptional consensus reached
between the two sides on a variety of regional issues. There is thus
a state of asymmetry in India-China-Japan triangular relations.
This anomaly has to be rectified in the interest of regional peace
and prosperity. For the same purpose, the US, a pacific power,
also has a heavy responsibility.
This paper makes an attempt to trace the roots of confrontation
that has now come to exist between China and Japan. First
among the roots is the up and down witnessed in the cultural
relationships of Japan and China. Though Japan is culturally a
'daughter' of Chinese civilisation, it could develop a unique
creative culture with no need for any imitation.1 This uniqueness
indeed provided a backdrop to the formation of a Japanese
growth model resulting in an economic miracle for the country,
while setting up an example for East Asian economies in general.
Japan's cultural identity though different from that of China, has
however came to be questioned when the PRC, also following the
East Asian model could outpace Japan in growth.
The second root concerns the security outlooks of China and
Japan which have come to be congronted historically. It may not
be wrong to say that the geographic factor of its being an oceanic
1
“Japan, the Story of a Nation”, Edwin O.Reischhauer
147
nation surrounded by seas in contrast to China being a

continental nation influences Japan's security thinking.2
Japanese fears of invasion from North, i.e China, always seemed
to be real. As an instance, it considered Mongolian invasions from
China in the end of 13 century, as serious threats and to ward
them off chose to invoke the “Divine wind' (Kamikaze'). In the
modern era, Tokyo's threat perceptions largely stemmed from its
assessment that Beijing's strategy is to combine the country's
development imperatives and the requirement for defence
modernisation. The 2012 Japanese White paper on Defence
reflected this point. It expressed a serious concern over China's
rapid defence build up in the Pacific Ocean and indirectly accused
Beijing of its intentions to improve its ability to deploy the
country's naval forces in international waters. It suppressed
serious concern over the party-army relationship in China. It
found that the Chinese military has become more assertive in
expressing its views on issues related to state sovereignty and
maritime interests. It was for the first time that a Japanese defence
document made such comments on civil-military relations in
China. Notable have also been the White Paper's references to
various 'unspecified contingencies'. They imply threats from
China and North Korea. It makes a remark that Japan's “Dynamic
Defence Concept” extends to the country's South West islands
chain including Okinawa. The motive behind the remark appears
to be countering China's maritime challenges, particularly
around Senkakus.3
China's historical security outlook has been a result of foreign
occupation of the country, which occurred especially in the post-
opium war period. Beijing's security philosophy demands a
priority to protect Han core areas of the country by strengthening
the Centre's hold on the periphery, like Xinjiang and Tibet which
are vulnerable to foreign pressure. Specifically with regard to
2
“Ocean Lapped Japan Wary of China's Continental Power”, Lian Dequi,
Global Times, 8 August 2012. .
3
East Asia forum “A New Trend in Japan's Defence White Paper”, Toshiya
Takahashi
148
Japan, China found a security challenge in the Japanese invasion

and creation of Manchuko, a puppet kingdom in the North, in the
thirties. The period since the end of World War II, has been
marked by China's strategic rivalry with Japan which is
concerned with its war time role and declaration of that role in the
Japanese text books, and the visits of Japanese leaders to the
Yasukuni shrine where the souls of Japanese war veterans are
enshrined. In the post- cold war era, the PRC 's biggest worry has
been about Japan's 'militarism' and the growing Japan-US
alliance which is perceived by China as directed against it only.
Coming out clear is Beijing's current sense that the US-Japan
strategic alliance is the biggest challenge to China's national
security and that Japan, the second largest economy till 2010,
retains potentials to convert its economic power into military
power.4
The China-Japan stand off on the question of sovereignty over
the gas-rich Senkakus islands (called Diaoyu by Chinese) in East
China Sea is undeniably a manifestation of the historical rivalry
between the two. The immediate causes for provocations on
each side need to be taken note of. The islands came into the
possession of Japan as an outcome of its war with China in 1895.
The US took over the islands after the World War II and returned
them to Japan in 1960 as provided in the US-Japan Treaty of
Mutual Cooperation. In the year 1969, large oil and gas deposits
were discovered in the sea bed surrounding the islands. This
motivated Japan and China to make their claims over Senkakus
more assertive than in the past. This has to be seen in the
background of energy imperatives that have emerged fresh for
both the countries.5 Positive signs were seen in 1972, when the
two nations established diplomatic ties and reached an
understanding that the question of ownership of the islands
should be left to future generations to decide. Tokyo and Beijing
4
“China's Defence Policy and Implications for Sino-Japan Relations”, Yu
Tiejun, 26 October 2012, Associate professor, Peking University,
www.tokyofoundation.org
5
“The Senkakus island dispute; Risk to Rebalancing in Asia-Pacific”? , USNI,
Carlyle A. Thayer, 16 October 2012,
149
even agreed to conduct joint exploration for oil in the Senkakus in

2008. However, Tokyo-Beijing confrontation aggravated in
September 2010 with Beijing viewing the arrest by Japan of the
captain of a Chinese fishing boat as a Japanese violation of the
2008 understanding and in retaliation, it banned the Chinese
exports of rare earths to Japan.
China acted tough on the Senkakus issue in 2012 mainly in
response to the Japanese 'nationalisation' of the islands on 10
September 2012., following Tokyo's purchase of the islands from
private owners for US$ 26 million. The US confirmation6 that
Senkakus are covered by the Japan-US Defence and Security
Treaty, committing the US to come to the aid of Japan on the issue,
also provoked China..7 Understandable therefore are the PRC's
concerns over the possibilities of an external interference in the
otherwise bilateral issue. The Chinese official media have
assessed that the Japanese and US positions on Senkakus will
change the 'legal foundation of the international order in the Asia-
Pacific region in the post -World War II era, set up on the basis of
the Cairo Declaration of 1943 and the Potsdam proclamation of
1945'.8 The existing situation is contributing to the rise of
nationalist feelings both in Japan and China. Many anti-Japanese
demonstrations have occurred in 85 Chinese cities including
Beijing, with indirect official blessings.
Worth paying attention is the PRC's modus operandi to assert its
claim over Senkakus. It includes sending maritime surveillance
vessels to Japan's territorial waters for patrolling and
encouraging Chinese nationals including 'grass root' activists
from Hongkong, to go to Senkakus. China's assertiveness is also
manifesting in a form, not seen before- domestic channels of the
PRC's National TV have begun to broadcast from end August
2012 weather reports for Senkakus, as a firm message to the
6
US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta, Tokyo, September 2012
7
US Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell .
8
Commentary captioned “ Japan's Purchase of Diaoyu islands Challenges
Post-WWII Order in Asia”, Xinhua 12 September 2012
150
Japanese side that Senkakus is China's internal part.

Among the other reasons influencing the Senkakus situation are
the domestic situations in Japan the necessity of Prime Minister
Noda to win the impending general elections at a time when the
popularity ratings of both the ruling DPJ and the LDP are falling
and the expectations that the next Japanese government will be a
coalition one incapable of reaching a consensus on the Senkakus
issue and in China the power transfer at the scheduled party
Congress. Under such circumstances, the present leaderships in
the two nations may feel it inappropriate to be soft on a sensitive
issue like that of Senkakus at the time of transition in both the
countries.
What is likely is that the two sides may prefer to keep the conflict
over Senkakus within manageable limits, in view of the mutual
economic and trade interests (The two way trade in 2011 was to
the tune of US$ 340 billion). Japan is China's largest trade partner.
The Chinese economy has problems as exports to the US and EU is
declining and major Asian markets including that of Japan are
assuming greater importance in global business). Interestingly,
China refrained from imposing economic sanctions on Japan this
year unlike its rare-earths-ban in 2010. Japan and China are also
engaged in taking diplomatic initiatives to diffuse the mutual
tensions. Japanese Vice- Foreign Minister Kawai has visited
China. What China is doing to address South China Sea issue
may be relevant in discerning its overall priorities. “Shelving the
disputes and working for common development”, is China's
formula for solution to the territorial issues, as evidenced during
the visits of the diplomatic visits of Chinese Foreign Minister
Yang Jiechi to Indonesia, Brunei and Malaysia in August 2012;
also conveyed during the visits is China's stand that the maritime
issues in East Asia need to be solved bilaterally between the
concerned nations. The US, on the other hand, wants a
multilateral solution. Under the circumstances, the Chinese
diplomacy seems to be operating with a limited aim- reducing
tensions, leaving solutions to a later date.
151
China is a rising giant in the region; its military capabilities are

getting enhanced, but there is no transparency about the
intentions of the PRC for the long term. Beijing's regional
strategy, in such situation, requires to be fully understood. To suit
to its grand strategy of achieving modernisation of the country by
the middle of the century and to convey to the outside word that
its rise will be peaceful, China is implementing a foreign policy
model which, as it visualises, would create a 'win-win 'situation in
international relations. However, with the introduction of the
'core interests' principle in external relations in the post-2009
period, which gives equal priority to the need for protection of the
country's sovereignty and disallowing any compromise and even
suggesting the use of force for the same, an assertive character is
getting more and more pronounced in the model, somewhat
diluting its original benevolent goal. Since 2010, its impact is
being felt in three prominent areas - Taiwan reunification,
ownership of Senkakus islands in East China Sea which are
under Japan's control and sovereignty over the resources-rich
South China Sea island chain. Beijing explains its stand, seen by
others as assertive, by saying that all the concerned nations
should “accommodate each other's core interests and understand
each other's strategic interests”9 and that the PRC stands for
“shelving disputes and seeking joint development” as well as
pursuing bilateral cooperation and participation in regional and
sub-regional cooperation. Hidden in the term “Shelving” is the
PRC's tactical line in favour of a temporary truce in the disputes,
without indicating any change in its fundamental positions on
territorial claims. If China's assertiveness is subjecting the
countries including Japan and India, having sea and land
territorial disputes with China, to a high degree of uneasiness, the
same is not a surprise.
The factors responsible for China's assertive external behavior
are as follows- (a) Beijing's growing confidence internationally
9
General Liang Guanglie's address at Shangrila Dialogue, Singapore, 5 June
2011, www.iiss.org
152
especially after its success in holding the Olympics and in

maintaining high growth rates despite the global recession, (b)
China's feeling that due to its enhanced position in the world, an
opportunity has arisen for itself to increase its influence globally,
at a time when the world balance of power is shifting from the
West to East and a multi-polar world is emerging gradually, (c)
The PRC's compulsions to protect land and sea trade routes in the
interest of the much needed import of resources from abroad and
(d) Maintaining high growth rates despite the global recession, e)
Beijing's perceptions on threats to internal security, making it to
think that without China's assertive approach in this regard , the
task of finding a permanent solution to the sovereignty-related
issues of Tibet, Xinjiang and Taiwan may get complicated in
future.
China's territorial assertiveness has five dimensions policy-
making, administrative, military, economic and diplomatic
approach. The Chinese official media calls them as “combination
punches” (People's Daily, 13 August 2012). It can be seen that
while China is finding it necessary to resort to an aggressive
posture in asserting about its sea boundaries in the East Asia, in its
overall geo-political interests, it is inclined at the moment towards
adopting a low-key approach towards land border issues, like the
one with India. But, sensing its long term needs and given its
consistent position of 'no compromise' on all sovereignty-related
issues, it would be prudent not to rule out the possibility of the
PRC vigorously asserting its position on land border claims also
at an opportune time,.
The administrative dimension is getting manifested in China's
new form of assertiveness taking administrative measures to
gain jurisdiction over the claimed regions, for e.g. upgrading the
status of Sansha city in Yongxiung island of Hainan province to
Prefecture level to administer the claimed South China Sea Island
groups- Paracel and Spratly. The establishment of a military
garrison in Sansha represented the military dimension. The
Chinese decision to open nine off-shore areas in the South China
Sea represents the economic dimension. The visits of Chinese
153
diplomats (Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi's visits to Indonesia etc in

August in 2012) represent the diplomatic dimension of its
territorial assertiveness.
Important is the policy dimension of China's territorial
assertiveness in South and East China seas regions. It cannot be
denied that the assertiveness is a result of policy consensus
reached at high levels, which in the main convey China's
unambiguous commitment to protect the country's 'core interests'
and implement the policy of not giving any 'concession' on issues
concerning its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Premier Wen
Jiabao has himself declared it (10 September 2012). China's
Defence Minister Liang Guanglie has stated in an interview
(December 2010) that “in the coming five years, China's military
will push forward preparations in every strategic direction”. The
editorials in the PRC's official press including in the PLA Daily,
are also making repeated stress on the need for the country's
diplomacy to maintain 'uncompromising' territorial positions.
The Japan-China row on the Senkakus and the continuing
assertiveness policy of Beijing, have implications for India, which
has an unresolved border dispute with China. India has
developed a broader concept of security for itself, which
somewhat challenges China's security interests centering round
the need felt by Beijing to be the regional leader. New Delhi's
“Extended Neighborhood” concept, taking into account the
required mix of trade, energy, security and military interests for
the country, puts the entire region ranging from Suez Canal to
South China Sea encompassing West Asia, Gulf, Central Asia,
Southeast Asia, East Asia, and Asia-Pacific, within India's
strategic scope and range.10 The concept provides justification for
India's Look East policy; but Beijing's conflict with Tokyo may
cast its shadow on that policy under the former's suspicions of
India-Japan collusion against China. In their comments on
10
“India' s Extended Neighborhood Concept- Power Projection for a Rising
Power”, India Review, Volume No. 8/ Issue No.2, 2009,
www.tandfonline.com, 20 May 2009
154
Japanese prime minister's visit to India, the Chinese official

media11 have accused Japan of following a strategy of alliances
with Asia-Pacific nations to prevent the rise of the PRC. This year,
two Chinese experts have assessed that as India-China border
dispute is yet to be resolved, New Delhi views a stronger
relationship with Japan as a way to counterbalance the growing
influence of China in the Asia-Pacific region.12 Also relevant is
China's objection to New Delhi's cooperation with Hanoi on oil
exploration in the South China Sea and reservations on India
playing a leading role in the East Asia integration process (Beijing
wants ASEAN plus 3 to lead).
New Delhi should not get itself caught in the territorial row
between China and Japan. To address the existing perceptional
differences with Beiing, India should engage the PRC in bilateral
talks. The consensus reached by India and China on promoting
bilateral ties looking beyond the complex border dispute is
significant. But the question is how long their strategic rivalry can
be kept under the carpet? India should not lower its guard vis-à-
vis China, which aims to fully modernise itself, including the
military field, by the middle of the century. New Delhi should not
lag behind in its defence preparedness while engaging China and
Pakistan, the two powers which have established a nexus, posing
a challenge to India's security. India should also begin building
firm bridges with Japan, South Korea and ASEAN nations which
all welcome India's participation in the regional cooperation, to
counter balance China's rise. The ASEAN-China free trade pact
proves more advantageous as terms to the regional nations than
what India's recently signed similar pact does. The “services”
sector is still outside the purview of India-ASEAN FTA. India
needs to fill this gap. Also, India can offer assistance to regional
powers in building capabilities to protect the sea lanes of
communication. There is also tremendous scope for India's
11
China Daily, Global Times 28 December 2011
12
China Institute of International Studies, Profs Zhang Guihong, Qiu
Changying, Fudan University, Times of India, 20 September 2012.
155
cooperation with Southeast Asian nations in the non-traditional

security fields. The present momentum in India's relations with
Japan is a good sign; Chinese opinions have taken note of the
declarations of the two that their cooperation is not directed at
'containing' China. Whether India and Japan say openly or not,
their partnership certainly has the potential to serve as a
deterrence to China, which is becoming increasingly assertive in
the Asia-Pacific region.
156
The Sino-Japanese Territorial Dispute and its
Implication for India
Michimi Muranushi
2012
The intense dispute between China and Japan over the issue of the
Senkaku (Diaoyu in Chinese) islands since the summer of 2012
meant a critical juncture in the evolution of the Sino-Japanese
relations since the creation of the People's Republic of China in
1949. Instead of celebrating the 40th anniversary of the
normalization of diplomatic relations in 1972, the two nations
plunged into a series of relentlessmutual denunciation. Prime
Minister Noda's decision to purchase the Senkaku (Diaoyu)
archipelago、which for the Japanese was a legitimate part of the
Okinawa prefecture of Japan, from their current Japanese owner
infuriatedPresident Hu Jintao. The Chinese Communist Party in
preparation for the 18th Party Congress permitted, encouraged,
and orchestrated anti-Japanese demonstrations in more than 100
major cities.The demonstrations sometimes turned into looting
and destruction of Japanese-owned stores and factories. The
leaders of the demonstrators were sometimes identified as
members of the police, which meant that the power in China was
acting in the name of the people. Transportation was arranged so
that requested people can join the demonstrations from distant
places. In the face of the uncivilized acts reminding the world of
the Cultural Revolution, China announced that Japan was solely
responsible for the situation. It is only several months after these
aggressive mass demonstrations that China issued restraining
comments such as 'we should uphold civility and the rule of law
as our bottom line when expressing our patriotic fervor.1
How can the road to this clash between the two nations in Asia be
explained? What is possible in the future? What options does
Japan have? What do the options imply for the rest of Asia?
1
RMRB Commentator Urges Rational Approach to Handling Island Dispute
With JapanStaff
157
History
The history of the Sino-Japanese relations, since the days of the
Qing dynasty (1644 - 1912) of China and the Edo Shogunate(1600 -
1868) of Japan concerning the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands and
Okinawa is a process of the expansion of modern states towards
much smaller tributary states. The geography in the center of the
triangle of mainland Japan, Taiwan, and the Chinese continent as
well as the history of the Second World Wardid not permit this
area to remain as anautonomous political entity.
The Ryukyudynasty (1429-1879) which had extended its control
over the Okinawa archipelago including the Sakishima islands
near Taiwan was paying tribute both to the Edo Shogunate of
Japan and to the Qing dynasty of China. The Satsuma clan (1600-
1871), the southernmost clan of Japan, colonized Okinawa in 1609
by force and terminated the independent statehood of Okinawa.
However, the Ryukyu dynasty remained in Okinawa and kept
paying tribute to both China and Japan. The Satsuma clan
tolerated this odd situation in which a colony of a clan paid tribute
to the master of the clan and China, because the Satsuma clan
could profit from Okinawa's trade with China. When foreign
trade was officially prohibited by the Edo Shogunate in what is
now called the city of Tokyo, Okinawa was one of the loopholes of
the national policy of seclusion,through which the Satsuma clan
could make money.
After the Meiji Restoration of 1968, the new government in Tokyo,
while abolishing all the old clans, set up the new Okinawa clan for
the sake of its more direct control of Okinawa. A question for the
new Meiji government in Tokyo was whether the Qing Empire
was willing to recognize Okinawa as a part of Japan despite its
tributary status in the past. It was not entirely impossible that
China regarded a state paying tribute to China as a part of China.
No matter what China may think, however, most of the
commentator: Demonstrate China

s Power in a Civilized and Rational Manner
RenminRibao Online Thursday, November 15, 2012 World News Connections
(WNC)
158
The Sino-Japanese Territorial Dispute and its Implication for India
inhabitants in Okinawa at that time descended fromthe people of

Kyushu, the major southern island of Japan. The language of
Okinawa was not comprehensible to ordinary Japanese in
mainland Japan, but it was a dialect of Japanese keeping the
characteristics of ancient Japanese.
In 1879, the Meiji government of Japan took by force the palace of
the Ryukyu dynasty, and ordered the royal family to move to
Tokyo. The government turned the Okinawa clan into the
Okinawa prefecture of Japan. Some supporters of the Ryukyu
dynasty asked the Qing Empirefor help in vain.
In 1880, Japan tried to appease the Qing Empire by proposing to
give it the Sakishima Islands, the western part of the Okinawa
archipelago, in return for China's giving Japan Most Favored
Treatment in the proposed Sino-Japanese Treaty. Qing refused to
deal with Japan. The Sakishima Islands are located in the south of
the Senkaku (Diaoyu)Islands.
In 1885, the government of Japan conducted a research on the
Senkaku (Diaoyu)islands and found the area to be no man's land,
and the Okinawa prefecture requested the Japanese government
to announcethe possession of the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands, but
the Japanese government procrastinated, perhaps fearing
objection fromthe Qing Empire. A question here is whether there
was any thought on the part of Japan at that time that the area
might be a part of China.
Japan officially announced in 1895 the possession of the Senkaku
(Diaoyu)islands as a part of the Okinawa prefecture of Japan,
when the Sino-Japanese War was ending toward Japan's victory.
With the exception of a tiny islet, the ownership of the Senkaku
(Diaoyu) islets was given to a Japanese businessman from
Kyushu, who began his fishing and other industries in the islands
in 1895. More than 200 Japanese settlers started living in the
biggest island and stayed there until the islandswere totally
vacated in 1940 after the start of the Second World War. The
Republic of China which succeeded the Qing Empire officially

regarded the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands and Okinawa as Japan's.
159
After the Sino-Japanese war, China agreed to render Taiwan to

Japan in 1895.
In the last stage of the Second World War, the Cairo declaration of
1943requested that all the territories Japan took from China
should be returned to the Republic of China. The territories were
Manchuria, Taiwan, and the Pescadores. Okinawa, of whichthe
Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands were a part, was not a part of these
territories to be returned.
The San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951 announced Japan's
renunciation of Taiwan and the Pescadores. Okinawa was put
under the UN trusteeship by the treaty and the occupation of
Okinawa by the US continued. The US used the Senkaku (Diaoyu)
islands for military exercise during its occupation, but neither the
PRC (People's Republic o China) nor the ROC (Republic of China)
protested against this military exercise. Okinawa was returned
from the US to Japan in 1972. Since 1940, no one has lived on any
of the Senkaku (Islands) and the situation remained the same
even after the return of Okinawa to Japan.
In the 1950s, the People's Daily, the newspaper of the Chinese
Communist Party, described the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands as a
part of Japan, using only the word 'Senkaku', instead ofits Chinese
name (Diaoyu). In the 1960s, in the map the PRC printed for the
Red Guards, the Senkaku (Diaoyu)area was described as a
Japanese territory.2
In 1969, the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific of the UN, based on the research conducted in 1968,
published a report that the area of Senkaku (Diaoyu) had natural
gas comparable to the oil reserve of Iraq.
A Chinese (PRC) geography map in 1970 indicated the islands as
'Senkaku' and drew a border line between China and the islands.
But in the 1971 edition, the islands were written as 'Dyaoyu' and
the border was moved to the other side. It is around this period
that the islands began to be a focus of international relations.
2
http://sankei.jp.msn.com/world/news/120928/chn12092821580008-n1.htm
160
In April 1971, Taiwan (ROC) publicly announced its possession of

the Senkaku (Diaoyu)islands. The government in Taipei rewrote
its geographic textbook for high school students, renaming the
islands Diaoyu and shifting the border between the ROC and
Japan.3
When China(PRC) and Japan normalized diplomatic relations in
1972, China's position was to shelve the issue to let the issue be
decided by future generations. Japan did not take issue with this
attitude of China, but this understanding did not mean for Japan
any concession from its previous position.
In 1978, more than 100 armed Chinese ships violated the
territorial water of the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands. China
responded to Japan's protest and promised that this would not be
repeated.
In 1992, China made the Territorial Water Act and stipulated that
the Diaoyu is lands were a part of China. For Japan this was
against the past mutual understanding between China and Japan
since 1972. By 2012 China seized 750000 problematic maps in
China, which printed information contradictory to the current
position of the PRC on the issue of the territory.4
The chain reactions between the two nations in September 2010
are worthy of closer attention.
2010
In the summer of 2010, a large number of Chinese fishing boats
began to mass in the Senkaku (Diaoyu) area to fish. In early
September, the Japanese Coastal Guard chased a Chinese fishing
boat in Japan's territorial water, and the Chinese boat rushed into
the coastal guard boat.The coastal guards arrested the Chinese
crew not on account of territorial violation, because Japan knew
that China would object to that account, but on account of
obstructing the public of work of the Japanese police, i.e. on
3
http://sankei.jp.msn.com/world/news/120928/chn12092821580008-n2.htm
4
http://news.searchina.ne.jp/disp.cgi?y=2013&d=0110&f=politics_0110_010.shtml
161
account of the fact that the Chinese boat intentionally rushed into
the boat of the Japanese coastal guard. On this account, China had
no reason to protest, but China objected. Japan soon returned the
boat and all the crew except the captain. Perhaps this decision,
which was already a mistake, added fuel to China's boldness.
The video of the scene of the clash was leaked to the youtube, on
the internet, without official permission, by one of the members of
the coastal guard. This video was leaked apparently because the
government of Japan hesitated at that time from publicizing the
evidence of the Chinese fishing boat's attack, in spite of China's
repeated contention that the arrest was unjust. The video actually
left little doubt about the fishing boat's intent to rush into the coast
guard boat.
China did not merely demand. Its export of rare-earth to Japan
was halted, although it did not officially announce that it was an
economic sanction. Japan was heavily dependent on China in
rare-earth import. China then arrested four Japanese engineers
who were in China to work on the problem of the disposal of the
old chemical weapons left by the Japanese army. The official
reason for the arrest was that their activities were in the militarily
restricted areas. But it was extremely likely that China linked the
arrest of the Japanese to the captain's release.
It was not officially a deal, but Japan succumbed probably earlier
than China had expected. The Japanese government of the
Democratic Party surreptitiously ordered the Okinawa
prefecture attorney to release the captain, and the prefecture
attorney announced that the decision to release the captain was
made by the Okinawa attorney office alone, considering the Sino-
Japanese relations, without consultation with Tokyo. No
Japanese believed this poorly-made farce. The captain, for whom
China charted a plane to go home,was received in China as a hero.
Through this unprofessional capitulation, the government of
Japan sent to China a dangerously false message about Japan's
attitude toward the territorial dispute and Japan's vulnerability to
intimidation. China had to camouflage its excessive diplomatic
162
success in diplomacy by saying that there was no victor in this

conflict.
The Japanese public began to call for concrete measures to protect
the territorial water from intruders of China. In the middle of
April 2012, Tokyo governor Ishihara, who often made anti-
Chinese, even racist remarks, said that the metropolitan
government of Tokyo would purchase the Senkaku (Diaoyu)
islands from their current owner, a Japanese family in Kyushu. He
asked for donation from the public for this purchase. Many
Japanese responded to his call. Perhaps governor Ishihara really
wanted the islands. Perhaps he simply wanted to move the
government of Japan toward buying the islands.
Anyway, China's anger at the success of Ishihara's plan was so
predictable that the government of Japan aborted the announced
plan by its own purchase of the islands. Because the Japanese
government had no legal power to prohibit the
Tokyometropolitan government's purchase of the islands, Japan's
own purchase was almost the only way left to Japan under that
circumstance, so long as the current private owner was willing to
sell. The current owner agreed on this new deal with Japan.
Governor Ishihara did not look happy. For the Japanese
government, it was an action necessary to prevent the worst case
of the China-Japan relations. For China, the whole sequence of
events may have looked like a farce acted by both the Tokyo
governor and the prime minister. China may have seriously
misunderstood the considerations behind the decision of the
Japanese government.
For China, Japan's audacity in 2012 may have been a little beyond
imagination, especially in the backdrop of the events in the fall of
2010, in which Japan capitulated to China and set free the Chinese
criminals. For Japan, especially for the Tokyo governor, it was
necessary to recover its own reputation that damaged the
humiliating release of the crew of the Chinese fishing boats.
For the Japanese side, it was China that broke its own word to
shelve the issue for future generations, but for China, it was Japan
163
that took the blatant step to 'nationalize' the islands, despite its
previous understanding of shelving the issue. For Japan,
however, the nature of Japan's sovereignty over the islands did
not change a bit, whether the islands were owned by a private
person in Japan, by Tokyo, or by the state. This is the nature of
possession in capitalism.
For President Hu Jintao, the 'nationalization' was out of question
not only because the decision was made immediately after his
brief meeting with prime minister Prime minister Noda at the
APEC summit in which Hu Jintao gave a warning to him, but also
because the Chinese leaders were engaged in a factional struggle
for power toward the 18th Party Congress. To look weak before
Japan was a serious disadvantage for any competitor in this
critical period of factional struggle. Demonstrators in Chinese
cities, who may be otherwise arrested, were quite safe to do so
when they rally for the cause of fighting back the rise of 'Japanese
militarism'. Not a single day passes in China without an ordinary
TV station airing a war drama in which the Chinese bravely fight
the demonic Japanese army.
The events in September 2012 aroused of course a great interest
among the Chinese people, and China used active censorship to
control public opinions. Any view or evidence casting doubt on
China's official position on the issue was erased from the public
eye. A Chinese citizen put up an evidence on the internet that the
People's Daily used to see the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands as a part
of Japan, using only the term 'Senkaku'. It was surprising that this
blog was able to live at least for a few days. Some people were
busy writing, while others were busy deleting.
Contention
China says that the Senkaku (Dyaoyu) islands have belonged to
China since ancient times. China obfuscates the fact that the
concept of statehood and sovereignty was imported into the
empire of China not long before the Xinhai Revolution of 1911.It is
true that the islands had a Chinese name in the late 19th century,
but this has little to say about the national boundaries between
164
China and Japan. Japan once proposed to give the Sakishima

islands to the Qing Empire and Qing refused. If Qing had agreed
on this at that time, China could have been better able to claim
later the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands, which, though negligibly
smaller than the Sakishima islands, are located closer to the
Chinese continent than the Sakishima area.
It is true that Okinawa used to be a kingdom paying tribute to
China, but it was also paying tribute to the Edo Shogunate of
Japan, and became a colony of the Satsuma clan, a part of Japan.
China cannot say that Okinawa was in the Chinese sphere of
influence. The Ryukyu dynasty was terminated by the Japanese
government by force. This fragile fortune in the vortex of
international politics does raise a question on the identity of the
people of Okinawa, and it does raise a question on the legitimacy
of Japan's integration of Okinawa, but it does notgive any excuse
for China to claim Okinawa.
It is true that the Senkaku (Diyoyu) area was not a Japanese
territory from ancient times, but Japan integrated the area upon
the judgment that it had been no man's land. And no one
protested the move for a long time between the announcement
and the return of the administrative power of Okinawa from the
US to Japan. Japan was ordered to return to China the territories
which it obtained from China before, but the Senkaku (Diaoyu)
area was not seen as a part of such area by the victors of the Second
World War. Okinawa was most clearly not such a territory to be
returned, and the Senkaku (Diaoyu) was consistentlya part of the
Okinawa prefecture of Japan.
Since the end of the Second World War, both the ROC and the
PRCexplained to their own peoples that the Senkaku
(Diaoyu)area was a part of Japan, using only the Japanese name
'Senkaku' instead of 'Diaoyu'. It is only after the U.N. research on
natural gas in the late 1960s that the ROC changed its view, which
the PRC followed immediately. Views in the ROC, however, seem
divided now. According to the ROC's former Prime Minister Li
Denghui, who articulates that the Senkaku (Diaoyu)area belongs
165
to Japan,'Even if your neighbor's wife is beautiful, you cannot say

she is your wife.'This truth must be even more true when the wife
became more beautiful after marriage.
Japan had kept effective control of the islands since 1895 until the
US occupation of Okinawa, and the PRC, which began to claim
over the islands, proposed to shelve the issue before the more
important interest of normalizing the Sino-Japanese relations.
China befriended Japan and the US to confront the USSR. After
the dissolution of the USSR, however, China broke its own word
by adopting the territorial water law stipulating that the Senkaku
(Diaoyu) belonged to China. If this is 'shelving', for China, the
issue of the sovereignty of Tibet will be still being shelved now.
China does not agree on taking to the International Court of
Justice.
The relations between Taiwan and China are complex. Taiwan,
claiming over the islands, has no intention to cooperate with
China on this issue. China, which claims Taiwan as a province of
China, cannot withdraw its claim over the Senkaku (Diaoyu)
islands. It is possible, however, that China still claims over the
islands even when Taiwan no longer claims them. An interesting
question without much meaning is which province, Fukien or
Taiwan, the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands are supposed to belong,
according to the PRC.
Another question with more importance is whether the Senkaku
(Diaoyu) is China's ultimate goal. It is possible that China's goal
extends toward another part of Okinawa, the Sakishima islands.
Taking this part of Okinawa will give China a safer exit to the
Pacific Ocean from the East China Sea. It is also questionable if a
part of Okinawa alone satisfies China. Claims over Okinawa as a
historical part of China emerges in China from time to time.
Intention
The way the PRC handles the issue of the territorial problem with
Japan raises the question about the timing of its defiance. Due to
the gap between the rich and the poor, the Chinese society has a
large pool of discontent, which needs to be expressed in the name
166
of anti-Japanese action. Inflaming nationalism can be a tool for the

Chinese government to divert attention from domestic problems.
One way to interpret the situation is that China became more
assertive as it became more powerful, not only in terms of
economic size but also in terms of naval forces. The Territorial
Water Act of 1992 may be explained this way. China says that it
will beat Japan and that China will not be beaten by a declining
state.5 Another explanation is that China is essentially
expansionist. China's invasion of Tibet in the 1950s, war with
India in the 1950s and the 1960s, China's attacks on South Vietnam
and Vietnam in the 1970s and 80s, may be explained this way.
China may be essentially expansionist, but it is also true that it
began to tie its own hands in its territorial claims relatively
recently. China in the past several years began to mention the
'core interests' of China, implying that such interests were not
negotiable. For example, Xi Jiping, the new top leader of China, is
quoted as saying, '"we will persist in following the path of
peaceful development, but we certainly cannot abandon our
rightful interests or sacrifice our national core interests. No
foreign country should expect that we will trade our own core
interests, or that we will swallow the bitter fruit of damage to our
sovereignty, security, and development interests."6
The relation between the concept of core interest and the issue of
the Senkaku (Diaoyu)islands is very delicate. It is almost certain
that China regards the area as a core interest, because the
argument on the 'core interest'is made in the situation after the
beginning of the intense dispute over the islands. But China never
articulates that the Senkaku (Diaoyu)area is China's core interest.
This is the difference between the issue of the islands of the South
China Sea and the issue of Senkaku (Diaoyu). This point can be
5
6
PRC Academic ShenDingli Stresses Preserving China's Core Interests Article by
Professor ShenDingli, executive vice president of Fudan University's
Internatyional Studies Institute: "Squarely Face 'China's Bottom Line' in Peaceful
Development"RenminRibao Online Tuesday, February 5, 2013 T 14:49:24Z WNC
167
also seen in the recent passport issue. China has published a new
e-passport with the map of the Chinese territory. The Spratly
Islands, Paracell islands, and the areas disputed with India are
drawn as Chinese, but the Senkaku (Diaoyu) area is not in the map
of the passport.
The Senkaku (Diaoyu) for China is important for strategic reasons
as well. China is a rectangular state spreading across North, East,
South and Central Asia. Its three sides of the North, the West, and
the South are land borders and only the eastern side faces the sea.
China's access to the ocean is limited by the Maritime Province of
Siberia, the Korean Peninsula and the series of islands of Saharin,
mainland Japan and Okinawa, Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia,
and Indonesia. The US has military ties with some of them.
Whether to live in these fences is an important question for China.
If there is a crisis in China-Taiwan relations in the future, for
example, it will be critical for China to move its naval forces freely
to the eastern side of Taiwan. China's strategic struggle is to find
an exit to the Pacific Ocean. The most realistic possibility is to go
through a crack around the islands of Taiwan and Okinawa. Since
Okinawa main island has concentrated US military bases, it is
unrealistic for China to claim the main island of Okinawa now. It
is also unrealistic to integrate Taiwan by force. Taking even a few
of the five Senkaku (Diaoyu) is lets improves China's strategic
position.
Thereafter
In mid-October2012, China's claim kept its initial aggressive tone.
Calling the issue "theft",7 China says,
Japan's illegal control of the Diaoyu Islands is in essence
the same as its stealing Taiwan in 1895, all for encroaching
on China's natural and human resources. China regards
territorial integrity as supremacy because it concerns
7
RMRB Column Assails Japan's 'Theft' of Diaoyu, Calls for Talks "International
forum" by Zhong Sheng: "All the Disputes Stem From Japan's 'Theft' of Diaoyu --
First Comment on the Truth of the Diaoyu Issue"RenminRibao Online Tuesday,
October 16, 2012WNC
168
national esteem and sovereignty. More importantly, the

prevailing of China's claim reflects a triumph of justice
over fascism in World War II which will maintain world
peace and stability.8
Many questions arise. If the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands issue is a
case of theft, then China's possession of Tibet and Xinjiang, and
China's internal migration in Inner Mongolia and Manchuria are
not the cases of something more than theft? If the Senkaku
(Diaoyu) were stolen, how come the Chinese Communist Party,
under the supposedly brilliant leadership of MaoZedung, printed
the Japanese name 'Senkaku' on the official map of the islands?
How could come it was not seen as theft before suddenly began to
be seen as theft? How comes the timing of the volte-face coincides
with the news on natural gas? If China is confident of its claim,
why does it confiscate its old maps and delete internet opinions
that the area might be Japanese?
In October 2012,China maintains that Japan has not fulfilled
historical obligation. Asserting that Japan failed to 'self-examine
the history of aggression',9 it asks'How can we expect regional
tranquility if we allow Japan to challenge the post-War
international order and take the old path of militarism once
again?'This means that China and Taiwan followed Japan's path
to challenge the post-War international order until the UN
published a report on the natural gas in the area. Underlying in
this assertion is the question whether Japan has to apologize for
the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-5 because it was defeated in the
Second World War.The inclusion of the Senkaku (Diaoyu) into
Japan's territory has nothing to do with the Second World War.
The only argument China could make will be that Japan took
advantage of the victory of the Sino-Japanese War in 1895.
8
Xinhua 'Commentary': China's 'Diaoyu' Islands Claim Not Motivated by
Resources Updated version: rewording Subject line, adding Urgent tag;
Xinhua "Commentary" by resources: "China's Diaoyu Islands Claim Not
Motivated by Resources"Xinhua Thursday, October 18, 2012WNC
9
Xinhua 'Commentary': Japan's Propaganda War on Diaoyu Islands Doomed
To Fail XinhuaTuesday,October 16, 2012WNC
169
Repeatedly mentioning'Japan's rightwing forces that have gone

wild'10,China alludes to the 'apology' issue. There are many
misled Chinese in the continent who are not informed that Japan
apologized to China many times, even though they were all
belated apologies seeming insufficient to the Chinese. The
misinformed Chinese are the same people who are not taught
about Japan's ODA to China in the past. Better informed Chinese
should find that China, which is not apologizing to the Chinese
people about millions of deaths in the Great Leap Forward and
the Cultural Revolution, and keeps sending back North Korean
refugees into the hands of the North Korean police at this very
moment in blatant violation of the UN Refugee Convention,
which is also a part of the post-1945 order, is using the history of
the true Chinese victims of Japan's aggression in the past for the
quest of the imperialist ambition of modern China's power elites.
China's surveillance ships are seen sometimes violating the
territorial water of the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands. China considers
this to be a daily patrol over its own territory. Probably China's
minimum goal in doing this is to make appear that the area is
being contested.11 China welcomed Japan's former Prime Minister
Hatoyama's willingness to admit that there were territorial
disputes between the two nations, which the Japanese
government kept denying earlier.
America
China tries to compete with Japan without provoking the US.
Until October 2012, China said that it was uncertain if the US was
ready to be with Japan on this issue. It hoped that the US would
choose to be neutral.
10
RMRB Column Assails Japan for Trying to Overturn WW II History on
Senkakus "International Forum" by Zhong Sheng: "Verdict on the History of
World War II Cannot Be Overturned -- Third Commentary on the Truth of the
Diaoyu Islands Issue"RenminRibao Online Saturday, October 20, 2012WNC
11
CNA: Talk Of The Day -- Concern Over China's Diaoyutai Patrol Policy
By Sofia WuCentral News Agency Thursday, November 1, 2012WNC
170
To this day the United States is still saying that it remains

neutral on the issue of sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands.
That does not sit well with Japan. Given a US-Japan
relationship that has been cultivated over the past several
decades with Japan reluctantly following America's lead,
America's current position is clearly one of partiality
toward Japan. But the United States also recognizes that it is
a shame that Japan is forcing the United States to lie
through the teeth.12
China is aware of the possibility of 'containment' by the US, and
warns the US
From late Chairman Mao Zedong to President Hu Jintao,
Chinese leaders have reiterated that the country will never
seek hegemony as it gains power. Some may argue that the
rise of a superpower inevitably involves confrontation and
aggression, but China, with a civilization of 5,000 years,
does not force other countries to accept its ideologies, nor
will it simply copy systems established by other countries.
In the light of China's history and present state, it is unwise
to contain the peaceful rise of China. It will only lead to
confrontation and does no good to anyone.13
It is credible that China does not want a war with Japan, because it
will discredit the concept of 'peaceful rise of China.'
The logic of the US policy is: On the one hand, it does not
have a stand on the sovereignty of the Islands. On the
other, it has repeatedly confirmed the applicability of the
Japan-US Security Treaty and adopted the so-called "fuzzy
strategy" in a hope to avoid the escalation of the situation
through the "dual deterrence" against China and Japan.
"Dual deterrence" is a frequent tactic of the US diplomacy,
through which the United States hopes to maintain the
12
Article by Jin Caiwei: A Clumsy Duet RenminRibao Online Wednesday,
October 17, 2012WNC
13
Xinhua 'Insight': Rise of China, Tomorrow's WorldXinhua: "Xinhua Insight: the
Rise of China And Tomorrow's World"XinhuaFriday,October 19, 2012 WNC
171
fuzziness to let both China and Japan speculate over the

ultimate intention of the United States in order to achieve
the purpose of deterring both sides.14
In the near future, if the United States really wants to be
neutral, it should, at the least, take a stand against the
approach of unilateral changes of the status quo. The root
of the Sino-Japanese dispute over the Islands is Japan's
unilateral breach of the status quo, which is evident to the
United States15
China's observation of 'dual deterrence' is interesting. But the
Senate Amendment disappointed China. China has to repeat that
China's rise is peaceful and that it is not China but Japan that has
tried to change the status quo.
The US can react to China in various ways. On the one hand, there
is in China an opinion suggesting the possibility of co-domination
or power-sharing with the US. On the other hand, there is an
opinion fearing the possibility of containment policy toward
China.
All around China's periphery, whether it is the continuing
tension over the South China Sea issue or the continuously
escalating Diaoyu Islands conflict, the United States has its
hand in the background of everything. With the backdrop
of China's rapid rise, these are the new starting points of the
US containment and encirclement of China. Although the
United States is maintaining an unclear position on the
Diaoyu Islands issue, that does not exclude the possibility
that the United States might take action to intervene under
14
RROE: US 'Dual Deterrence' Against China, Japan on Senkakus Will Backfire
Article by associate professor Zhang Yun at Japan's National Niigata
University, "US 'Dual Deterrence' Will Backfire"RenminRibao (Overseas
Edition) OnlineMonday,November 5, 2012WNC
15
RROE: US 'Dual Deterrence' Against China, Japan on Senkakus Will Backfire
Article by associate professor Zhang Yun at Japan's National Niigata
University, "US 'Dual Deterrence' Will Backfire"RenminRibao (Overseas
Edition) Online Monday, November 5, 2012WNC
172
certain circumstances. This is a possibility about which

there must be a sober understanding.16
China may surpass the US, but it is not clear if such growth is
sustainable for China. While Japan wanted a statement from the
US to support Japan, China hoped to separate the US from Japan.17
And this is certainly not impossible.
The Senate Amendment of late November 2012stating that the
military alliance would cover the Senkaku area was something
China did not want to hear from the US. It is not clear to what
extent the US will help Japan, but the US will have to side with
Japan.China says that such a move will be detrimental to regional
security.18
China has taken notice of repeated statements by U.S.
government officials that the United States takes no sides in the
Chinese-Japanese territorial dispute. Hopefully, the U.S. will be
true to its word and loyal to its statements19
The current situation is an impasse. The Japanese coastal guard
boats sail around the territorial water, the connecting water, and
the public sea around the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islets, and the
Chinese surveillance ships sail near the Japanese coast guard,
sometimes entering the connecting water or the territorial water.
Tension arose out of the blue on the Japanese side when the
Chinese navy locked its fire-control radar onto a Japanese boat of
the Self-Defense Forces in January 1912. The SDF disclosed this
16
Article by Zhao Jingfang of the National Defense University Crisis
Management Center: "A Perspective on the Falsity and Truth of the 'US-Japan
Security Treaty'"; for assistance with multimedia elements, contact OSC at 1-800-
205-8615 or oscinfo@rccb.osis.gov.LiaowangFriday,November 9, 2012WNC
17
18
CRI: Latest US Congressional Move on Senkaku 'Detrimental' to Regional
Peace Web Editor: Luo Dan; "Experts: US Congressional Move on Diaoyu
Islands Harmful" -- CRIENGLISH headlineChina Radio International Online
Monday,December 3, 2012WNC
19
China opposes application of U.S.-Japan security treaty to Diaoyu Islands
Interfax-AVN OnlineWednesday,October 24, 2012WNC
173
information several days later. China categorically denied this as

a false accusation.
China determinedly says that it will not change its position even if
the US is with Japan.
China's determination to defend its territorial sovereignty
should never be underestimated. The attempt by the U.S.
Senate to muddy the waters over the Diaoyu Island
dispute will backfire against itself. 20
The Liberal Democratic Party, which was out of power at that
time, propagated the styptic banal argument that it was the recent
deterioration of the US-Japanese relations that brought the
current crisis. It is true that the government of Japan, led by the
Democratic Party, was torn between the US which wants to move
the Marine Corps from its old base in Futenma to the new base to
be constructed in Nago, and the Okinawa prefecture, where there
was strong resistance to the plan.
At least two factors matter. One is the balance of power between
China and the US. The other is the likelihood that the US would
fight China for Japan over the issue of the Senkaku (Diaoyu). It
will be simplistic to assume that Japan's concession on the issue of
the base in Okinawa will enhance the likelihood. What the LDP
does not notice is that the US benefits from the tension between
Japan and China. It is better to assume that, even though the US
does not want China's control over the Senkaku (Diaoyu), not to
satisfy Japan on this issue is also a political interest for the US.
Interdependence
China seems to be aware of the interdependence of Japan and
China.The following statement, quotingthe chairman of the
Japanese Business Federation,suggests a slight change in China's
position.
20
Xinhua 'Commentary': US Move on Senkaku Islands To 'Backfire Against
Itself' Updated version: rewriting Subject line, adding Urgent tag; Xinhua
"Commentary": "U.S. Move on Diaoyu Islands To Backfire Against Itself"
Xinhua Sunday, December 2, 2012WNC
174
One can only say that the regression in Japan's economic

and trade trends toward China and the emergence of the
dismal situation is a case of Japan "lifting a rock and
smashing its own foot." In the words of
YonekuraHiromasa, chairman of the Japan Business
Federation: "The Japanese and Chinese economies are
mutual complementary and dependent to a great extent;
they cannot stand still in a state of deteriorating relations
for a long time."
China admits that the relations between the two nations faced the
most serious crisis since normalization.21 The US Senate
resolution on the islands and the comeback of LDP after the
election may have softened China's position.
It is hoped that Abe could be more pragmatic in foreign
policies in order to break the ice between China and Japan
when it has not yet thickened and to improve mutual trust
with cogent actions so as to realize the essentials of the
bilateral strategic and mutually beneficial relations.22
China seems to separate the issues.
In a practical sense, Japan must rely on the pull of China
and other emerging-market countries if it is to revive its
domestic economy, make life better for its people, and
narrow the government deficit. Trade and investment
flows between China and Japan topped $300 billion in
2011. The improvement of China-Japan relations is vital
for the Japanese Government if it is to overcome the
domestic economic woes.23
21
RenminRibao Urges Right-Leaning Japan To Squarely Handle Ties With China
Article by Zhang Yun, associate professor at Japan's National Niigata University,
titled "Farther Right-Leaning Japan Must Squarely Handle Relations With China"
RenminRibao (Overseas Edition) Online Wednesday, November 28, 2012WNC
22
Xinhua 'Commentary': Abe Should Rebuild Mutual Trust With China Xinhua
Wednesday, December 26, 2012WNC
23
Scholars Decry Japans Rightward Shift, Say Japan Needs China To Revive
Economy International Viewpoint article: Japans Liberal Democratic Party Wins
House of Representatives Elections; Right-Leaning Policy Deepens Worry in
Neighboring Countries RenminRibao OnlineWednesday, December 26, 2012WNC
175
China keeps blaming Japan's 'failure to thoroughly reflect upon

and account for the history of militarist aggression',24 And China
repeats that it has sovereignty over Senkaku(Dyaoyu) since
ancient times and that the current situation is caused solely by the
action of Japan.25 It questions if Japan can face history in 'objective
manner.'26 But China is suffering at least as much as Japan.China
may need the islands for future resources, but it will suffer now
for the effort. Besides the drop of trade with Europe due to the
European Financial Crisis, which was slow to show sign of
recovery, the drop of trade with Japan gave China a serious
impact.
For China it as a positive sign that Prime Minister Abe regards the
Sino-Japanese relations as "one of the most important bilateral
ties27 "From China one can hear a word "two-sided" approach”28
which means being “tough on territorial disputes and mild on
economic issues”. China ascribes this to Abe, but it is also a
Chinese position.China toward the end of 2012 seemed to worry
about the decline of trade.
Deadline
China's growth rate was 8.4%in 2000, 8.3% in 2001, 9.1% in 2002,
24
Xinhua Commentary Urges Japan To Shift Course on Senkakus, History; Uphold Peace
Xinhua commentary on current affairs by Xinhua reporters Liu Hua and Xu Song: The
Japanese Side Must Show Sincerity and Take Action To Improve Sino-Japanese Relations
Xinhua Domestic Service Wednesday, December 19, 2012WNC
25
Xinhua Commentary Urges Japan To Shift Course on Senkakus, History; Uphold Peace
Xinhua commentary on current affairs by Xinhua reporters Liu Hua and Xu Song: The
Japanese Side Must Show Sincerity and Take Action To Improve Sino-Japanese Relations
Xinhua Domestic Service Wednesday, December 19, 2012WNC
26
Scholars Decry Japan s Rightward Shift, Say Japan Needs China To Revive Economy
International Viewpoint article: Japan s Liberal Democratic Party Wins House of
Representatives Elections; Right-Leaning Policy Deepens Worry in Neighboring Countries
RenminRibao Online Wednesday, December 26, 2012WNC)
27
Xinhua 'Commentary': World Expects New Starting Point on China-Japan Ties
XinhuaWednesday,December 26, 2012WNC
28
Xinhua Commentary Urges Japan To Shift Course on Senkakus, History; Uphold
Peace Xinhua commentary on current affairs by Xinhua reporters Liu Hua and Xu
Song: The Japanese Side Must Show Sincerity and Take Action To Improve Sino-
Japanese Relations Xinhua Domestic Service Wednesday, December 19, 2012WNC
176
10.0% in 2003,10.1%in 2004, 11.3% in 2005, and 12.7% in 2006.

After the highest record of 14.2% in 2007, it was 9.6% in 2008, 9.2%
in 2009 10.4% in 2010, and 9.2% in 2011. It may have slightly
declined for the past few years.
The world pays attention to when and how the end of China's
growth comes. Will it come suddenly or gradually? Is soft landing
possible? Can the CCP survive it? How high does the growth rate
need to be for the regime to survive? If the CCP cannot bear it,
what comes after the CCP?Will it be a stable multiparty system,
another version of authoritarian regime, or anarchy? If the current
regime is replaced by a new one, the Chinese nationalism will be
inflamed easily by manipulating the image of Japan already
imprinted in the people's mind. Will the nationalism calm down
or go out of control?
In the case of Japan, the ratio of the working age population to the
whole population was at its peak around 1990, and it began to
decrease afterwards. It is also around this time that the so-called
'lost twenty years'of Japan began.29 China's rate of ageing will be
high during the next two or three decades
Its strict population control, which was necessary before,
probably limits its future. China failed in the maintenance of
population balance. China will enter the age of an aging society
with a low birthrate around 2030.30 Before that period comes, the
ratio of the working population to the total population comes to
its peak around 2015 and then begins to decline.
This is the consequence of one-child policy which China started in
1979. At that time, the slow growth of Chinese economy justified
population control, but it has its own inevitable consequence. The
Chinese population begins to age quickly, especially after the
baby boomers in the 1960s began retiring. When there is not
enough social welfare, the end of China's growth comes.
29
http://lidai.asia/node/590?language=ja
30
http://www.meti.go.jp/report/tsuhaku2007/2007honbun/html/i1410000.html
177
There is a contrast between India and China. Having failed to

implement a strict population control policy, India is going to
experience balanced population increase. The peak of India's
working population ratio comes more than 20 years after China
gets to its peak.
In India, China, and the ASEAN countries, the relations between
social ageing and economic development differ from those in
Japan, Korea, and Taiwan in one important aspect. It is that their
ageing of the society comes before the population as a whole
attains a high standard of living. In the future of China, not
wealthy enough population has to support the group of the
retired growing fast..
The admirably strong growth of China may last during the next 5,
10, or 15 years, but China will have to see the arrival of the
deadline in the 2020s or around 2030. And this period means for
China the beginning of the weakening of its political will. The
waiting period can be shorter than this. China is going to come to
the stage of normal growth or stagnation before the population as
a whole cannot catch up with the level of standard of the
developed nations. Japan will also continue to decline in this
period, but the political impact of the economic decline will be
more serious in China than in Japan. In this context, whether
China succeeds in getting fait accompli in the South China Sea or
the East China Sea is of great importance.
China's growth necessitates competition for territory, natural
resources, and strategic positions. While expanding its influence,
China needs to accustom the public to low growth rate. The
deteriorating GINI index in China may mean that the poor can
sustain their life only at the cost of growing gap. The regime
cannot bear even a rate which for other countries is good enough.
One of the problems of China's growth is that China has
overachieved in a short time what it should have done in the long
run. Overcapacity of infrastructure and housing will direct China
toward the saturation of demand in the future, and China's
industry has to depend more on the area where demand can be
178
more easily created. In this trend, moving toward further

militarization may be not only possible but also necessary. It is in
military-related areas that China can continue to invest without
worrying about saturation.
Possibilities
Accidental war between China and Japan should not happen, but
it is possible. According to the Self-Defense Force of Japan, the
Chinese naval ship locked its fire onto the Japanese forces in
January 2012. Under a similar circumstance, the US Air Force
fired at the Iraqi forces in the 1990s in the so-called No Flying
Zone.
It is difficult to imagine how a new Sino-Japanese war will be
conducted if it starts. The Sakishima islands located in the south of
the Senkaku (Diaoyu) islands can be an area of contention. A new
Sino-Japanese war will place the US in an awkward position.
Two powers armed with nuclear weapons cannot and should not
be at war for the sake of just five tiny islets of a foreign country.
The US has to recognize, however, that letting China control the
Senkaku (Diaoyu)area will mean a long-lasting consequence that
China will have much better access to the Pacific Ocean, breaking
the status quo, in which the US naval power can reach both rims of
the Pacific Ocean.
Even if the war is short and small, it may be followed by a long
cold war between China and the rest of the world.This will mean a
shock to China's extremely export-oriented economy. China's
failure to win in the East China Sea will affect the situation in the
South China Sea and the Indian-Chinese border. In this sense
China will know that a crisis may cost for China more than it
estimates. But it may take time for China to unlearn the sweet
experience of 2010, when it succeeded in compelling Japan to
release the Chinese captain.
China will have to diversify its economy if it is ready to swallow a
long lasting crisis with Japan. To impose sanction on Japan,
China should be able to live without Japan. China's relations with
Europe will be particularly important because Europe can
179
provide an alternative to Japan. It is also in this line of argument

that China has reason to be interested in deepening relations with
India as well as Southeast Asia. India can be a state for whom both
Japan and China can extend their hands for risk-diversification
With India, China has a long history of territorial dispute as well
as such lasting problems as the water problem in the Himalaya,
the problem of Dalai Lama, Pakistan, or the Chinese influence
over the Indian Ocean. But at the same time the Indian's market
and its natural resources are luring to China.
The US will be on the side of Japan, but this is based on the
premise that the Japanese forces remain stronger than those of
China. The US will side with Japan because Japan can handle
China alone. Besides, it should not be forgotten that the flaring up
of the Senkaku (Diaoyu)dispute now is a bonanza for the US
because it endorses the domestic views of Japan that Japan has to
strengthen ties with the US in order to cope with the increasingly
strong and assertive China. The US will be able to reach a better
negotiation position over its own delicate security issues with
Japan like the construction of a new base in Okinawa or
commercial issues. In this sense the US has an interest in keeping
the Senkaku (Diaoyu)islands issue smoldering. China's leaders
expressly hope the US to remain neutral, probably because they
are smarter than the Japanese leaders to perceive this potential
American interest. But letting China take the upper hand is clearly
not in the interest of the US. It is a way for China to extend its naval
forces to the western Pacific besides the South China Sea, which
will be a breakthrough in the post 1945 order.
India can be a country wooed by both China and Japan for risk-
diversification. In India-Japan relations, there is no zero-sum
game in which Japan is asked to concede. And India has good
reason to be concerned about the expansion of the Chinese navy.
For Japan, cooperation with India is useful, first, in trade areas.
The cooperation between India and Japan on rare-earth has
already started recently, in the backdrop of the Sino-Japanese
relations for the past few years. Both the countries agreed on the
180
Indian production and export of rare-earth to Japan in 2011. India

is supposed to provide about 10 % of Japan's rare-earth demand.
The next area is information. The system of information control is
so strong in China that it is hard for the outsiders to inform the
Chinese people directly. It is possible to influence, however, the
public opinions of the periphery of mainland China, such as
Taiwan, the Philippines, and Vietnam. These have bitter history
of conflicts in the area of the South China Sea. It will be easier for
India and Japan to align themselves with these.
The third area is the UN. The PRC is now the only permanent
member of the Security Council in Asia, and Japan can no longer
expect itself to be its permanent member due to the conflict with
China. But India has a better prospect. It is at least questionable if
China is willing to veto India's joining the Security Council as a
permanent member, when China cannot antagonize South Asia
and East Asia at the same time. But this achievement may weaken
the influence of China.
There are optimistic views and pessimistic views about India's
future. What is important is not whether India catches up with
China sometime in the future, but whether India will survive with
China's sustainable growth.
Conclusion
China has not proven much more than the fact that the Senkaku
(Diaoyu) islands had a Chinese name in the late 19th century
when Japan judged them to be no man's land. It is possible that
Japan refrained from announcing its sovereignty over these
islands before its victory over China in the Sino-Japanese War, but
it was Japan that for the first time took legal steps with respect to
the islands. Not only the ROC but also the PRC had recognized
this territory as Japan's in their official newspapers or textbook
maps, and it was only after the news on natural gas in this area
was published by the United Nations that they retracted their
recognition. To allow nations this type of arbitrary claim is not
only against the interest of Japan but also against the order of Asia
and the world. If there is no domestic disagreement with the party
181
line in China, it is because China fastidiously silences any doubt

cast upon the official line.If China is confident of its own claim, it
should give its people freedom of speech on this matter.
Growth since the 1980s made China more determined in the name
of 'core interest'. But it is also true that China finally began to
reveal to Japan its imperialistic dimension which had been
witnessed by other neighbors of China such as India, the
Philippines, and Vietnam since the infancy of the PRC. China's
expansionism is the amalgam of many factors such as the history
of empire in the past, the humiliating modern history, use of
patriotism for the power to cover up its domestic injustice, quest
for natural resources, and the survival of the regime. The paradox
of China is that it is already so accustomed to success that it cannot
live without it. But Japan will live without success because it has
been accustomed to stagnation, failure, and submission for the
past 20 years. This is probably the only way in which what China
correctly regards Japan as the declining sun who can convert its
weakness into power in its competition with China.
An important question is the extent to which the Chinese public is
informed about the Japan'position on the Sino - Japanese
territorial dispute. It is possible that the Chinese are more
susceptible to the party's propaganda in foreign policy areas than
in domestic policy areas. Even the Chinese who wish for multi-
party system subscribe to the symbolic issue of nationalism.
China succeeded thus far, in containing the effect of the internet.
Anti-Japanese argument is a means for the Chinese government
to redirect public attention. This utility will remain forever.
China is now a growing state, but its prosperity is based on a
volcano. The end of growth is likely to come as a result of the
ageing of the population and the decline of the working force. The
shift to low growth may come faster than that as a result of
saturation of fixed assets investment.Japan should think of its
China policy not as relations between two states forever one
rising state and one for ever declining state, but as relations
between a rising state with dangerous deadlines and a declining
state with gloomy stability. Building ports, roads, and railroads,
182
China can extend its influence in South and Southeast Asia. And
the fait accompli will last long. But China may not have plenty of
time for consolidating its grasp of its core interests. Japan may be
able to put up with the challenge of China until China ceases to
shine as the rising sun due to its own structural weakness.
This is a kind of containment. But it differs from the previous one.
The containers need China, whereas the USSR was isolated. And
China needs the world much more than the USSR needed the
world.
China has to consider if it was wise to claim the Senkaku
(Diaoyu)islands in 2012 so violently, because by doing so the
world paid more attention not only to the Senkaku (Diaoyu)area
but also to the South China Sea. And this should be the reaction of
the world. Japan, the US, and India should pay more attention not
to the Senkaku (Diaoyu) dispute alone, but to China's claims as a
whole.
China used its precious 1950s and 60s for the blunders of the Great
Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. China should also
regret that it was not perspicacious enough to understand the
strategic location of the islets. For China now, it would be a
minimum goal to appeal to the world that the Senkaku (Diaoyu)
area is being disputed. Its immediate aim is to make the Japanese
agree to shelve the territorial issue. The world's reaction should be
to demand that China should shelve the issue of the South China
Sea.
For the risk-diversification of Japan, Japan should cope with the
situation not by alliance with the US alone, but also with the
countries having potentials to survive China, one of which is
India.
183
Rising China and India-Japan Ties
Rabindra Sen
Global attention has come to be increasingly focused on the rise of

China and especially the strong position it has come to enjoy in the
Asia-Pacific region. In a recently published paper, while
emphasising China's own vulnerabilities and concerns, Thomas
Fingar nevertheless points out that China is richer, stronger and
more influential than at any time in the past 200 years( Fingar
2012:195). PRC's growing economic and military clout, rising
defence spending and the assertiveness on territorial issues in its
relations with a number of countries including India and Japan
have set alarm bells ringing. It has been argued that India's Look
East Policy has been driven, at least in part, by an ineluctable
rivalry with China ( Mohan 2003).1 Japan is believed to be among
the countries which are in search of a strategic tie-up with India as
cooperation among them would be more effective in countering
the growing Chinese influence in the Asia-Pacific.2 There is a
reason to believe that China too shares the same perception.3
This paper looks at the growing warmth in India-Japan ties since
the beginning of the new millennium and especially in the recent
years, and attempts to gauge the importance of the China factor in
relations between the two countries. The question is worth a close
look as many consider the China factor as especially important in
the study of relations between India and Japan because both India
and Japan eye a rising and increasingly assertive China with a
high degree of concern. In former Indian foreign secretary
Muchkund Dubey's words, “China is a major concern for both
India and Japan.”(Dubey 2013:272)
The paper is divided into three parts. The stage is set in the first
two parts with observations on Sino- Indian and Sino-Japanese
relations with special reference of course to the trust deficit that
characterises both the sets of bilateral relations. Needless to say, in
184
the first two sections the security concerns and perceptions of

both India and Japan vis-à-vis China will figure prominently.
And in the third part, the focus will be on the rapid pace of the
development of ties between India and Japan since the beginning
of the last decade as well as what arguably is the most important
question that has arisen out of the title of the paper.
Sino-Indian Relations
India considers China as a 'foreign policy priority' and views the
partnership as crucial for Asia's emergence as the political and
economic centre of the new international order. China too
recognises India's growing importance and attaches considerable
importance to ties with New Delhi (NEWS FROM CHINA 2013:
4). Although wanting to put bilateral relations on an even keel,
India and China have had to contend with problems in their
relationship, which has been quite bumpy especially in the last
few years. The most recent events have led to a further thickening
and darkening of the clouds on the Sino-Indian horizon,
heightening tension as experienced several times in the past and
resulting in a border stand-off which even gave rise to
uncertainties over the Indian foreign minister's visit to China and
the visit to India of the new Chinese premier his first foreign visit
after assuming charge.
With the exception of the initial phase, the Sino-Indian
relationship has overall been mired in suspicion and mistrust.
Nevertheless the horizon has occasionally been lit up with hopes
of improvement in relations. The visit of Prime Minister Rajiv
Gandhi in 1988 was such an occasion, which is remembered by
the two countries down to the present day. The late 1980s did
witness a series of openings (Joshi 2011: 157). And then, from
2005- 2006,' things soured'(Joshi 2011: 157). The year 2006 was
celebrated as the India-China Friendship Year, rhetorical though
it may have appeared to some or many. Pranab Mukherjee, then
the defence minister, visited China in May 2006 to commemorate
this event. The visit of the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, to India in
November the same year marked the culmination of the Year of
185
Friendship celebrations. During his stay, the Chinese leader

talked of “building trust through trade” and also declared that the
two countries were “not rivals or competitors but partners for
mutual benefit” (Sen 2012 : 336). But the Sino-Indian relationship
has continued to largely remain in the shadow of mistrust.
Discordant voices pointing to doubts, apprehensions and
anxieties about each other's intentions and actions have been
heard more strongly so in the last few years.4
India has its share of concerns vis-à-vis China. China too has its
own concerns. While India is wary of China and its special
relationship with Pakistan, China is suspicious of New Delhi's
strategic partnership with the US and other countries including
Japan and their implications for China's security. China's position
on the Indo-US nuclear deal should be considered as an eye
opener about the nature and extent of the Chinese apprehensions.
The fact that after being non-committal for a fairly long time it
tried to block clearance of the deal by the Nuclear Suppliers
Group at the last minute clearly shows the extent of uneasiness
felt by the Chinese arising out of the warming of ties between
India and the United States.(Sen 2012: 342-48; Sen 2008).
Washington looks upon Beijing as a challenger, actually or
potentially. And Beijing suspects that the US is looking to forge a
new alignment of forces in the Asia Pacific region to undercut
Chinese position and influence. It is through the prism of this
concern that Beijing views the burgeoning ties between
Washington and New Delhi and in the same vein between Tokyo
and New Delhi. Chinese leaders have not failed to notice
statements by American officials considering the relationship
with India as a 'priority' for Washington and that the Obama
administration has repeatedly described the relationship as 'one
of the defining partnerships of the 21st century for the United
States'(Rajghatta 2012). One cannot expect Beijing to take these
statements casually and remain unruffled. Instead, the Chinese
leaders take the statements quite seriously in view of their own
assessments of the new American 'pivot to Asia' strategy. India
186
has tried to reassure Beijing that the mutual containment theory,

as regards India and China, is untenable. The Indian Prime
Minister, Manmohan Singh, has said that a strengthening of ties
with the US or Japan will not be at the cost of a relationship with
China. With regard to relations with Japan, Prime Minister Singh
said in Tokyo in 2008,”Economic partnership and security
cooperation between India and Japan is not at the cost of any third
country, least of it China.”('No China Factor...'). He added,
“Doing business with Japan does not mean that India can't have
ties with China.”('No China Factor...'). But the Chinese fears
remain.5
Notwithstanding the Indian security concerns arising out of
China's rapidly increasing economic and military might, the
importance of China in the eyes of India and the world has only
increased. One may, for example, take note of the fact that China
has already overtaken the United States of America as India's
largest trade partner. While at times the Indian leaders do openly
voice the concerns about China's moves,6 the self-restraint
exercised by them and the care taken to downplay border
violations and other prickly incidents, witnessed even at the
height of the very recent stand-off, should not be overlooked. The
question is whether distrust, howsoever deep-rooted it may be, is
or will be the final word in Sino-Indian relations?
Sino-Japanese Relations
To those with knowledge of Sino-Japanese relations, the locking
of horns from time to time by the two sides, as witnessed for
example in the middle of the last decade in the wake of the
massive anti-Japanese demonstrations across China and also very
recently over the territorial dispute in the East China Sea, does not
come as a surprise. It is a natural fallout of tensions resulting from
disputes about history and territory that have been simmering for
a long time.Tokyo and Beijing have been feuding for decades over
the island chain, known as the Senkaku in Japan and the Diaoyu
in China, near potentially huge maritime gas fields. As recently as
late last year the two countries were involved in sword clanging
187
over an island in East China Sea ( Dasgupta 2012). The tension and
mutual mistrust are too deep-rooted to be wished away
overnight. What is important, however, is that both China and
Japan, as emphasised above in the discussion of Sino-Indian
relations, have been and still are aware of the need for showing
restraint.
The Sino-Japanese relationship is the key bilateral relationship,
'potentially the most disruptive', that is most likely to affect
stability throughout the East Asia (Sen 2002:41). Japan and China
are suspicious of each other's aims. Needless to say, the
suspicions will remain and influence their threat perceptions as
well as policies. Japan fears a rising China and wants to prevent it
from gaining dominance in Asia. Japan sees China as a potential
threat to its security. Japan's concern over China's recent activities
in the defence domain is reflected in both the NDGPs of 2010 and
2011(Dubey 2013:273).
China too has apprehensions concerning Japan's role and policies.
In the post-Cold War period, China has come to view Japan as one
of its most important adversaries(Sen 2002:41). Beijing views the
US-Japan defence guidelines as aimed at itself since they cover
waters adjoining Japan, including the Taiwan Strait. Beijing sees
Tokyo aligning itself with a US-led circle of containment that
stretches from India via Southeast Asia and Australia round to
Japan. Chinese apprehensions seem to have deepened as a result
of the present American 'Pivot to Asia' strategy with Japan
expected to play a crucial supporting role.The Chinese are
keeping their eyes open to see also what role India plays in the
days to come.8
China sees Japanese ambitions as a key obstacle to its goals( Sen
2002:41). Beijing may not welcome a continuation of US strategic
presence in the Asia-Pacific region. But it has actually done so, at
least implicitly, believing that it would have a restraining effect on
Japan's military development programme. Now, instead of
relying on American foreign policy, China wants to develop its
own capability to contend with Japan's growing regional
188
presence (Sen 2002: 42).

A dominant school of thought in China is that 'militarism' will
play a significant role in Japanese politics and that the
expansionist instinct will once again dominate Japanese foreign
policy( Sen 2002: 42). If China takes the matter with utmost
seriousness, it has every reason to do so. The changing security
scenario, especially developments in the Korean Peninsula, has
added to the urgency of debates within Japan on the
nuclearisation of the island nation (Kazi 2010: 436). The recent
Japanese National Defence Policy Guidelines (NDPG) clearly
suggest that its defence policy is no longer immune to the geo-
strategic dynamics of the region (Khan 2011:391). Domestic
opinion within Japan is opposed to exercising the nuclear option,
but one cannot confidently rule out such a possibility (Kazi 2010:
444). It would be wrong to think that Tokyo's diplomatic drive has
melted dam Beijing's opposition to Japanese militarism.
The possibility of a clash between China and Japan may loom on
the horizon from time to time. But when a crisis erupts, the two
important Asian powers in their own interests are expected to be
careful to draw themselves away from the precipice. The leaders
of the two countries meet each other regularly. The agreement in
May 1993 to establish a bilateral security dialogue and the second
round of security talks in January 1995 are worth citing. As Sino-
Japanese relations are yet again passing through a stormy phase,
confidence-building talks are desperately needed at this hour to
lower, if not completely remove, the barrier of mutual suspicions.
The economic stakes built up through the decades are too
important for both the countries to be sacrificed and perhaps have
a sobering effect. The volume of trade between Japan and China is
particularly noteworthy. Bilateral trade in 2011 was worth $350
billion with China being Japan's largest trading partner. Also, as a
result of the opening up of the Chinese economy, the amount of
Japanese Outward Foreign Direct Investment (OFDI) in China,
which has contributed significantly to the rapid economic growth
of China, increased quite noticeably from less than one per cent in
189
the late 1980s to even higher than ten per cent during the mid
2000s (Noh and Mah 2011:230).
The interests of both the countries are likely to be adversely
affected when relations nosedive. For example, the flare-up of
anti-Japanese sentiment in China last year resulting from
territorial disputes in the contested Senkaku/Diaoyu islands
brought with it some economic aftershocks as a number of
Japanese factories in China such as Toyota, Nissan and Panasonic
shut down for a few days. As the economic costs of tensions and
flare-ups are too transparent to remain unnoticed, there are great
pressures on both the sides to exercise self restraint instead of
engaging in unbridled brinkmanship, shadow-boxing and
muscle-flexing. Not surprisingly, in March this year the Chinese
Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi urged Japan to 'work with China to
prevent the current tension from escalating or getting out of
control'(NEWS FROM CHINA 2013: 22).A long-term, sound and
stable relationship serves the fundamental interest of the two
nations, he said(NEWS FROM CHINA 2013: 23). Similarly, in
2011 with reference to the Senkaku islands dispute with China,
the then Japanese Foreign Minister Koichiro Gemba voiced the
same concern saying, “in case of unexpected developments
stemming from misunderstanding between the two countries, we
need to set up a risk management mechanism.” (Strategic Digest
2011: 1009). The following observation made so sensibly by
Foreign Minister Gemba in October 2012 is equally important.
Gemba said, “We do not at all wish for the situation surrounding
the Senkaku Islands to influence the broader picture of Japan-
China relations and to thereby affect the stability in the Asia-
Pacific region. Japan-China relations are extremely important to
both the countries.... We maintain and will continue to maintain
communication with the Chinese side to calm the situation. Japan
calls for China to respond in a level-headed manner and to
exercise self-restraint”(Gemba 2012).
India-Japan Ties
Contacts between India and Japan during the Cold War period
190
were far from substantive. The Cold War came in the way of close
interaction. In Ramesh Thakur's words, “They had little mutual
knowledge and appreciation before the Nineties. Relevant
neither to Japan's security interests nor to its international
economic strategy, India ... figured little in Tokyo's foreign policy
priorities. India's historical and linguistic ties to the West, its
economic policies of import substitution and protectionism and
its close political relations with the Soviet Union kept it at a
distance from Japan. During the Cold War, the Indian policy of
nonalignment with a pro-Moscow tilt contrasted sharply with
Japan's role as the bastion of US military deployment in Asia and
the Pacific”(Thakur 2000).
The end of the Cold War did not immediately bring about a
dramatic change in the relationship. In July 1997, the then
Japanese Foreign Minister, Yukihiki Ikeda, visited India the first
at that level in 10 years. This visit signified Tokyo's commitment
to an expanded relationship with India (Sen 2000). The geo-
strategic location of South Asia makes the region critically
important for Japan (Dubey 2013:265). The region is also
potentially a huge market for Japanese goods and services and an
important destination for its investments (Dubey 2013: 265).
Given the decision of Japan to shed its longstanding inhibitions
about seeking a greater political role in world affairs, Japan
considered it important to develop friendly relations with
India(Sen 2000).
But this new interest in India suffered a jolt in 1998 as a result of
the nuclear tests. Japan's reaction was harsh, though
understandable. It froze $2.5 billion in overseas development
assistance and held back $12 billion in pledges to the Aid India
Consortium. Japan's strong reaction was caused by heightening
fears of nuclear arms races in the troubled Indian subcontinent
and even beyond the region(Sen 2000). Since then, Tokyo, the
world's largest provider of foreign aid, restricted itself to offering
minimal grant aid primarily for humanitarian purposes to India
and Pakistan. Tokyo made the signing of the Comprehensive Test
191
Ban Treaty (CTBT) by India and Pakistan a condition for the

lifting of sanctions(Sen 2000). Indo-Japanese relations remained
hostage to the nuclear issue from 1998 to 2000(Dubey 2013:265).
The five day visit of the Japanese Prime Minister, Yoshiro Mori,
surely went down in the history of Indo-Japanese relations as a
momentous event. Mori was the first Japanese prime minister to
visit India in 10 years. The visit was a sign of Japan's readiness to
move closer to India despite disagreement over CTBT. Now the
two countries realize that bilateral relations should not be hostage
to any single issue like differences on nuclear non-proliferation
and disarmament. Muchkund Dubey has observed, “There are
indications that Japan is increasingly veering round to a realistic
and pragmatic view of India's nuclear status even though it has
not given up the goal of universalizing the NPT. India should also
not expect Japan to accord formal recognition to its nuclear
status.”(Dubey 2013:273-74). Japan played a positive role in
supporting the Indo-US Nuclear Agreement in the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and in getting the waiver from the
Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG).9 Japan's response so far to
India's efforts to get into the various export control regimes has
also not been discouraging (Dubey 2013:274).
Since the beginning of this century both the countries have
become increasingly aware of their common security interests in
the widest sense of the term, in Asia and globally, and of the
growing convergence of their perspectives on disarmament
issues(Dubey 2013:275). After the visit of Prime Minster Mori in
2000, security started figuring as a very important item on the
agenda of Indo-Japanese relations(Dubey 2013:275). Prime
Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visit to India in 2005 was
importantly marked by the launching of an eight-fold
initiative(Kondapalli 2010:310). Relations were given a boost
under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe (2006-07), who talked of an 'Arc
of Freedom and Prosperity' stretching from Japan to Eastern
Europe and taking in India.(Tuke,Victoria 2012).10 When the
Democratic Party of Japan came to power in 2009, Prime Minister
192
Yukio Hatoyama's focus, as initially made known, on rebalancing

relations with the United States and improving relations with
China gave rise to fears of an adverse impact on relations with
India. (Tuke, Victoria 2012).But those fears were laid to rest as
Hatoyama visited India at the end of the same year giving a more
or less clear indication of Japan's interest in continuing to attach a
lot of importance to ties with India.The election of Shinzo Abe for
the second time as prime minister on December, 2012 was for
obvious reasons a welcome development from India's point of
view given his long endorsement of boosting ties with India as
mentioned above.
It is needless to underline how important Japan is to India. Given
its growing interest in East Asia, India would be deeply interested
in forging close relations with the countries in this region,
especially Japan. Speaking in 2008, Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh explained, “I consider our bilateral relations with Japan to
be one of the most important we have” (Tuke, Victoria 2013).
In June 2012, the 60th anniversary year of the establishment of
diplomatic relations, demonstrating their camaraderie and in full
recognition of the common security interests, especially maritime
security, the Indian Navy and the Japanese Maritime Self Defence
Force conducted their first ever bilateral naval combat exercise
'Jimex-12' during the visit of four Indian Navy ships to Japan as
part of the scheduled Overseas Fleet Deployment. Aarti Betigeri
has commented, “Such joint exercises might be standard practice
in international military-to-military exchanges, but with growing
regional tensions - like in the South China Sea, located between
India and Japan they take on a more complex meaning” (Betigeri
2012).In a more direct way Rahul Bedi has observed, ”If you look
at it through a containment of China prism, it makes sense.
Everybody is very worried about China” (Betigeri 2012).11
India has been for almost a decade the largest recipient of
Overseas Development Aid from Japan. The Japanese companies
have a strong and growing presence in India (Raghavan
2013).The Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor Project is the
193
'flagship' economic initiative between the two countries. The Free

Trade Agreement (FTA) was signed in February2011.12 The surge
in Japanese FDI in India (to the tune of $5 billion in 2008 against
less than $ 500 million in 2007) indicates the increasing interest of
Japanese investors in India (Singh 2008:1).According to a survey
conducted by the Japan Bank for International Cooperation, India
has become the most favoured investment destination for long-
term Japanese investments (Nataraj 2009:2). However, the
financial cooperation and economic and trade ties are still far
below the potential.
Conclusion
In spite of the security concerns that India and Japan have and will
have to live with vis-à-vis China, the fact remains that both New
Delhi and Tokyo would not want to adopt a confrontationist
stance against Beijing. China as a prime security concern is surely
on the radar of the Japanese planners(Khan 2011:392).But at the
same time the following editorial comments appearing in 2010 in
The Mainichi Daily News help us read the minds of the Japanese
leaders and the considerations influencing their China policy. The
Mainichi observed, 'It is obvious that measures to counter China's
military build up cannot be the core of Japan's policy toward
China, considering China's role in the international community
and future Japan-China relations' (Khan 2011: 393). It suggested
that the Japanese government should 'launch a comprehensive
China strategy in all fields, including politics, economy,
diplomacy and security, on the assumption that Japan will expand
and deepen its reciprocal relations with its rising neighbour'(emphasis
added)(Khan 2011:393). In the unfolding power play in the Asia-
Pacific region, India especially would be ever vigilant and
cautious not to be seen as deeply involved in any strategy aimed
solely at countering China. India and Japan both clearly realise
the need for ensuring that the channels of communication with
the Chinese are kept open and promoting confidence building
mechanisms in place to guard against unwillingly putting their
relationships with China in jeopardy. If China is much stronger
194
today than in the past, it has become even more important and
necessary for countries the world over including India and Japan
to deal with China and somehow manage the vital relationship. A
clear evidence of this is the flurry of official, ministerial and
summit level exchanges covering issues from border disputes to
closer economic and political ties. India, Japan and China all
know that they cannot neglect each other.To quote Aarti Betigeri,
“While China's neighbours might be keen to curtail its ...
ambitions, they are also trying to engage with the country and
retain good relations”( Betigeri 2012).13 All the three countries are
fully conscious of the need to be cautious and careful in ensuring
that the process of constant engagement does not founder on the
rocks of deep-rooted mistrust and largely negative mutual
perceptions. Both India and China, and no less importantly Japan
and China, have to launch damage control exercises whenever
there is a crisis.14 For China, the first priority, as emphasised by
the new leadership too, is peace in its neighbourhood without
which the goal of economic development will be impossible to
realize. Peace is no less important for both India and Japan. The
three important Asian powers must be sensitive to each other's
problems which have their roots in history. Handling issues
emotionally will not help matters at all.
Finally, coming to the importance of the China factor in Indo-
Japanese relations, a couple of points need to be borne in mind.
First, there is no gainsaying the fact that the increasing
importance and clout of China has been and will continue to be
factored into by both India and Japan in their policies toward
China. Thus China does cast a shadow over Indo-Japanese
relations. But foreign policy being the outcome of the interplay of
a host of factors we should be careful not to overstate the
importance of the China factor. It would be wrong in other words
to view things through a particular prism or to think of foreign
relations as zero sum games.15 A recent editorial in The Hindu
rightly opined, “It is crucial that growing India-Japan ties are
viewed independently of each country's relations with China.”
195
Indeed, opinion is gaining ground slowly but surely that relations

between New Delhi and Tokyo need to be strengthened on their
own merits. ( Bhatia 2011). Also, is it not necessary to take a long
term view of national interest and make a proper assessment of a
country's relations with another country on the basis of the stakes
it has in the relationship concerned? Granting that it is the China
wind which draws New Delhi and Tokyo closer to each other,
what needs to be stressed above all is that both India and Japan
have big stakes in their relationships with China and that while
both are guarded and wary of China, the two countries do not
completely see eye to eye on the crucial question as to how the
perceived threat is to be dealt with or how the important
relationship should be managed. There are no doubt differences
between India and Japan even today. Still the two countries have
resolved to move forward together and further cement their ties,
because the common interests binding the two important Asian
powers far outweigh the differences.
References
Bagchi, Indrani 2013, 'India, Japan make common cause to thwart China's
maritime moves', viewed, 12 April, 2013, http://articles.timesofindia.
indiatimes.com...>...>Foreign Office>
Betigeri, Aarti 2012, 'As China Eyes Indian Ocean, Japan and India Pair Up
on Defense',viewed 21 November 2012, <http://india.blogs.nytimes.
com/.../as-china-eyes-indian-ocean-japan-and-in...>.
Bhatia, Rajiv 2011, 'Growing proximity between India & Japan', viewed, 21
November, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com/Opinion/Op-Ed.
Chanda, Nayan 2013, 'China's Expanding Core Interests', The Times of India,
11 May, p. 14.
Dasgupta, Saibal 2012, 'China woos neighbours in sea spat with Japan', The
Times of India, 22 September.
196
Dubey, Muchkund 2013, India's Foreign Policy: Coping with the Changing
World, Pearson, Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. Ltd., Delhi, Chennai,
Chadigarh.
Dutta, Sujit 2011, 'Managing and Engaging Rising China: India's Evolving
Posture', The Washington Quarterly, vol.34, no.2, pp. 127-44. viewed 17
August 2011, www.twq.com/11spring/docs/11 spring_dutta.pdf.
Fingar, Thomas 2012, 'China's Rise: Contingency, Constraints and Concerns',
Survival, vol.54, no.1, pp. 195-204.
Gemba, Koichiro 2012, 'Changes in Leadership and the Future Course of
Japan-U.S.-China Trilateral Relations', Speech by H. E. Minister for
Foreign Affairs at the 9th CSIS/Nikkei Symposium, October 26, viewed,
30 November 2012,http://www.mofa.go.jp/announce/fm/gemba/
speech_121026.html.
'India-Japan relations', (Editorial), The Hindu, 30 December, 2011, viewed 20
November, 2012, http://www.thehindu.com>Opinion>Editorial
Joshi, Shashank 2011, 'Why India Is Becoming Warier of China', Current
History, vol. 110,no. 735, pp. 156-61.
Kazi, Reshmi 2010, 'Japan's Nuclear Policy at Crossroads', Strategic Analysis ,
vol.34, no.3, pp.436-50.
Khan, Shamshad A. 2011, 'Japan's New Defence Guidelines: An Analysis',
Strategic Analysis, vol.35, no.3, pp.391-95.
Kondapalli, Srikant 2010, 'India's Interactions with East Asia: Opportunities
and Challenges', International Studies, vol.47, no. 2-4, pp. 305-21.
Krishnan, Ananth2012, 'India-US-Japan meet rankles China', viewed, 21
November,2012, http://www.thehindu.com>News> International
Mohan, C. Raja 2003, 'Look East policy: phase two', The Hindu, 9 October,
viewed <http.://www.hindu.com/2003/10/09/stories/
2003100901571000. htm>.
Nataraj, Geethanjali 2009, 'India and Japan: Increasing interest, declining
inflows',viewed, 7 February, 2012, http://www.eastasiaforum.or
g/2009/09/09/india-and-japan-increasin-interest-declining-inflows/.
Nataraj, Geethanjali 2007, 'Strengthen India-Japan ties', The Japan Times,
viewed, 9 May, 2013, http://japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2007
/05/22.../strengthen-india-japan-ties/
197
News from China (Embassy of PRC in India)2013, vol.xxv, no.3.

'No factor in Indo-Japanese ties: PM', viewed, 21 November, 2012,
<http.//www.rediff'com>India>News>
Noh, Sunyoung and Mah, Jai S. 2011, 'The Patterns of Japan's Foreign Direct
Investment in China', China Report, vol.47, no.3, pp.217-32.
Raghavan, 2013, 'India-Japan, via China', Deccan Chronicle, 12 April, viewed,
12 April, 2013, http://www.deccanchronicle.com/130405
/commentary-op-ed/comm....
Rajghatta, Chidanand 2012, 'Panetta to push India to partnership', The Times
of India, 25 May.
Ramachandran, Sudha 2005, 'Japan-India ties under China's shadow', Asia
Times, 26 March, viewed, 10 May, 2013, http://www.atimes/South_
Asia/GC26Df01.html.
Sawhney, Pravin 2013, 'Subtle Chinese Ping-Pong', The Times of India, 24
April, p.12.
Sen, Rabindra 2011/12, 'China's Shadow Over India's Myanmar Policy',
International Journal of East Asian Studies (Kuala Lumpur), vol.1, no.1, pp.
139 58.
Sen, Rabindra 2012,'Sino-Indian Relations : Dead Weight of Old Mindsets or
Opening of New Vistas?', in K. Raja Reddy (ed.), India and Asia-Pacific :
Convergence and Divergence, New Century Publications, New Delhi, pp.
333-53.
Sen, Rabindra 2008, 'Chinese Chequers',The Telegraph,17 July.
Sen, Rabindra 2005, 'Against a sea of mistrust',The Telegraph,17 May.
Sen, Rabindra 2002, China and ASEAN: Diplomacy during the Cold War and
After, Manuscript India, Howrah.
Sen, Rabindra 2000, 'Ties on a new footing', The Telegraph, 24 August, p.11.
Singh, Amit 2008, 'India and Japan: poised to enter a new era', viewed,10
May,2013,http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2008/12/13/india-and-
japan-poised-to-enter-a-new-era-of-economic-relationship/.
Strategic Digest(IDSA)2011, vol.41 no.10, p.1009.
Thakur, Ramesh 2000, 'India's new sun', The Asian Age, 22 August, p.7.
Tuke, Vicky, 'What Abe's Return Means for India-Japan Ties', viewed, 20
198
November, 2012, http://www.thediplomat.com/2012/...what-abes-

return-means-for-india-japan-tie...
Tuke, Victoria, 2012, 'India, Japan Ties Blossom', viewed, 21 November, 2012,
http://thediplomat.com/new-leaders-forum/.../india-japan-ties-
blossom/
Tuke, Victoria 2013, 'India, Japan must get closer', viewed, 12 April, 2013,
http://www.thehinubusinessline.com/.../india-japan...
get.../article4547665
Xiaoxiong Yi 2010, 'India, Japan forming an alliance in the shadow of China',
The Marietta Times, 6 November, viewed 10 May, 2013,
<http:www.mariettatimes/com/.../India-Japan-forming-alliance-in-
the-s...>. <www.ibtimes.com/india-japan-free-trade-agreement-win-
win-deal-267457>, viewed, 10 May 2013.
Footnotes
1
C. Raja Mohan himself, however, opines that “India's Look East Policy in
phase two is not driven by a fear of China nor a desire to become a frontline
state against it”.Mohan( 2003).
2
While noting that Tokyo's interest in a closer relationship with New Delhi is
considered by some to have been motivated by its concerns regarding
Beijing, Sudha Ramachandran, however, points the awareness of both the
countries that bilateral cooperation could prove to be counterproductive if it
is seen as an anti-China alliance. Ramachandran(2005). Also see, Xiaoxing Yi,
who has observed, “...it is their shared strategic concern, the one posed by
China, that is the real motivation between New Delhi and Tokyo's decision to
form an alliance”. In the beginning of the paper, however, Yi calls the alliance
an alliance of 'freedom and prosperity. Xiaoxing Yi (2010).
3
Given the focus of this paper, it is relevant to point out that several Chinese
scholars indeed have been following the evolving relations between India
and Japan with a certain amount of anxiety. Kondapalli( 2010: 310).
4
See, Joshi (2011); Dutta (2012). Harsh Pant interprets China's behavior as an
attempt 'at preventing the rise of India as a regional and global player'( Joshi
2011: 159). Pravin Sawhney very recently has observed that the tent pitching
by Chinese border guards last month is part of their grand strategy of
'strategic encirclement'. Sawhney(2013).
199
5
The wariness expressed by the Chinese state media outlets and strategic
analysts at the India- Japan-US trilateral meeting in New Delhi in October
2012 may be cited as an example. Krishnan(2012). Also noteworthy in this
connection is the negative attitude of the Chinese concerning the cooperation
between India and Japan in their efforts to become permanent members of
the United Nations Security Council. While the Chinese position on India's
aspirations in this regard is shrouded in ambiguity, Beijing has so far
opposed Japan's entry in very clear terms.
6
Under pressure to do some hard talking, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh
himself said in 2010, “there is a new assertiveness among the Chinese ... so it's
important to be prepared.” Joshi (2011: 160).
7
For a discussion about how bickering over wartime history, the Yasukuni
shrine and the East China Sea gas fields can plunge Sino-Japanese ties deep
down to their lowest point, as was experienced by the two countries in 2005
before ties improved, see Sen (2005).
8
Keeping India from a strong American embrace is an important Chinese
objective. See Chanda( 2013).
9
For a discussion of China's position on the issue and role, see( Sen 2012: 342-
48; Sen 2008).
10
In 2006, Abe even wrote, “It will not be a surprise if in another decade,
Japan-India relations overtake Japan-US and Japan-China ties”. Tuke, Vicky
(2012). Abe described Indo-Japanese relations as 'the most important
bilateral relationship in the world'. Tuke, Vicky (2012). By the by, the next
year was declared as the Indo-Japan Friendship Year. See, Nataraj (2007).
11
See also,Bagchi( 2013).
12
See,( www.ibtimes.com/india-japan-free-trade-agreement-win-win-deal-
267457).
13
It is worth noting, for example, that the Indian ships that took part in the
Tokyo exercises in June 2012 stopped at Shanghai on their way back, the first
naval visit by Indian ships to China in six years (Betigeri 2012).
14
Two headlines in The Times of India in the midst of the recent crisis are worth
noting in this context. The first appearing on 23 April 2013 was 'China
incursion sets off defence alarm', and the second catching the attention of the
author the very next day interestingly enough was 'India, China try to put lid
on faceoff'.
15
For an analysis of the China factor in India's Myanmar Policy see, Sen(
2011/12).
200
India-Japan Relations in the Wake of Emergence
of China
Sri Siddhartha Sankar Manna
Abstract
Each region has a separate Political Identity and Traditions. Japan is an
archipelago in East Asian Countries consisting of four Principal islands of
Honshu Hokkaido, Shikoku, and Kyushu plus thousands of Small Islands.
India is the largest democratic state which is playing an influential role in
South Asia. The relationship between India and Japan reflects the co-
operation between East Asia and south Asia. Nehru emphasised the friendly
relations among the three leading states of Asia Japan, China and India. This
attempt has taken a 'U' turn in favour of the interests of Asia.
In the early of the 20 century India considered Japan as a big power in Asian
resurgence. Japan becomes more popular when Indian National Army,
under the leadership of Netaji Subash Chandra, was supported by Japan. But
I do not think that India and Japan had a healthy relationship all times,
because the high tides of indo-Japan relationship witnessed some low tide
during Indo-China War in 1962, Indo-Pak war in 1965 & 1971. As a
consequence, Japan has taken recourse to the way different from that of
India. Now Japan is a member of G-8, and ASEAN. The rise of China as an
economic and military power brings closer the two countries of India and
Japan. India and Japan both have had conflicts with china.
In 1980s Indo- Japan relations took new dimensions and were stepped up
due to the common vision on vital issues like “Trade”, “Energy Policy”,
Security of Sea lines in Indian Ocean, and Potential for Economic Partnership.
India and Japan have also similar views about the restructuring of the UN
and the Security Council. India's look East policy (1991), Strategic and Global
Partnership (2006), Security Co-operation (2008), CEPA (2011) would enhance
and develop the positive relations between the two Nations.
Introduction
Each region has a separate Political Identity and Tradition. Japan,
an archipelago in East Asian Countries, consists of four Principal
islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Shikoku, and Kyushu plus
thousands of Small Islands. India is the largest democratic state
which is playing an influential role in South Asia. The
201
relationship between India and Japan has often reflected the co-
operation between East Asia and south Asia. Nehru emphasised
the friendly relations among the three leading states of Asia
Japan, China and India. This attempt has resulted in favour of the
interests of Asia. Since independence in 1947 the objectives of
Indian foreign policy has been to maintain friendly and co-
operative relations with various countries. My paper presents an
overview of Indo-Japan relation since the end of 1940s to till date.
Every relation has its ups and downs. Indo-Japan relation is not
out of that kind. Indo-Japan relation has been through several
decades with the influential relations of culture and most
probably Buddhism from 6th A.D. China, a powerful country
among the South Asian countries has developed itself into a big
power within very short period of time. India and China are
playing a crucial role in this region. So without an emphasis on
china, it will be illogical to analyse the relation between India and
Japan. Hence the relation between India, Japan and china has
become more significant among the East Asian as well as the
South Asian countries.
The relation between India and Japan is unique since there are no
contradictions in their relations like political, cultural, territorial,
and economic etc. The exchange between India and Japan began
in the 6th century A. D. through the introduction of Buddhism to
Japan. So Indian culture, generally, influenced the Japanese
culture. Historically the image of Japan in Indian people has been
positive. At the time of freedom struggle, Netaji got Japanese
support and assistance to take forward his struggle against the
British. This support and assistance influenced Indian people to
think good about Japan and make it popular in India. Now the
three countries India, Japan and China have become very
powerful in the world politics. In 1951india invited Japan to
participate in the first Asian games organised in New Delhi. In
1952 India and Japan cordially signed the peace Treaty which
enhanced the closer relation between them. However this relation
remained on low tide when Japan got involved in security alliance
with USA and India took the policy of Non Alignment. Nehru
202
India-Japan Relations in the Wake of Emergence of China
was more interested in the establishment of friendly relations

between the three leading nations of Asia India, Japan & china for
the development of peaceful coexistence and cooperation. In 1958
Japan was considered one of the two largest donors to India. But
in 1962 during India and china conflict Japan took different way
from that of India. During the Indo-Pak war, Japan did not lay any
emphasis on it. In 1971India established a Treaty of Peace and
Friendly relations with the Soviet Union. This treaty was vastly
criticised by Japan. At that time India and Japan relations
remained at a low key.
Indo-China Conflict
The growth of China, as a powerful country a considerable factor
causing threat to the peace and security in the Asian region. China
is a challenge as well as an opportunity for India and Japan. China
developed its strength within very a short time and demonstrated
its economic power in the world political system. The China's role
in her assistance to Pakistan in the establishment of the Gwadar
Port and in Myanmar in the establishment of Kyaukpyu port in
the Arakan do not create the same concerns in Japan as they do in
India. In these circumstances India and Japan have been taking
important decisions for strengthening their relation in other
different spheres like investment, defence, science and
technology. The emergence of china in world politics is a major
factor in the development of Indo-Japanese relation and
cooperation. India and Japan together may make a balance
against China. China's foreign policy is the important factor for
the formulation of India-Japan cooperation. On the other hand,
India has declared herself that she is ready to participate in the
highest decision making system of the world. India has some
conflict with china. The threat perceptions between India and
china differ from one another----
The disputes of Aksai Chin.
China's demands of Arunachal Pradesh and Senoku Island.
Sikkim china border (1975) disputes continue to military activities.
203
India's annexation of Sikkim in 1975 was rejected by china. The

conflict between India and china is rooted in the above mentioned
problems. Aksai has been demanded by India because it is a part
of Kashmir. And China demanded Aksai Chin because it is a part
of Xinjiang. Aksai chin is an important place which connects the
Tibet and Sinjians region of China. In July 1954, Indian Prime
Minister Nehru claimed that Aksai chin had been a part of Ladak
region for centuries as per Johnson line which was India's official
western boundary after independence. Aksai chin was easily
accessible to the Chinese when China constructed a road (1956
1957) which connects the Xinjiang and Tibet. This road came into
existence in Chinese map in 1958. It has been proved that Indo-
Chinese border dispute has been the main factor in establishing a
strong cooperation between India and Japan. On the other hand
Chinese demand on Arunachal Pradesh and Senoku Island
developed a conflict between India and China.
Indo, China and Japan Conflict
Historically, the relation between Japan and china is changeable.
The two countries are economically dependent on each other. The
China-Japan relationship remained at a low key because of the
disputes about the East-China Sea. Ubidulloev identified that the
threat of perceptions of these three countries have been different
from each other. The threats are as follow:
“India need not have a concern over the North Korea's
military nuclear ambitions;
North Korea is a big threat for the national security of Japan.
Japan is not concerned with Pakistan's nuclear, missile and
now space relationship with china.
Pakistan and its nuclear programmes and relations are the
biggest threat for India and its national security.
China's assistance to Pakistan in the construction of Gwadar
port and in the construction of the Kyaukpyu port in the
Arakan in Sri Lanka do not evoke the same concerns in Japan
as they do in India.”
204
India does not have a concern over the North Korea's military
forces. But Japan has been trying to improve its security power
through the cooperative relationship with India due to the North
Korea's threat to Japanese national security. On the other hand
Pakistan and its growing nuclear programmes are the greatest
threat for national security to India. India's relation with Japan
has been to maintain a balance with the evil threats.
Indo-Japan Relations after Cold War
Basically during the cold war Indo-Japan relation remained at a
low-tide. After 1980s, new dimensions have been seen between
two countries relationship because of their security and economic
reform. This was the starting point of India-Japan relation. The
new dimension was Maruti Suzuki plant which motivated to
manufacture cars in India. Japan's Prime Minister Mr. Yasuhiro
Nakasone visited India in 1984. It was the first visit to India after
23 years. Prime Minister of India, Rajiv Gandhi visited Japan three
times in 1985, 1987& 1988. These visits resulted in high level
political dialogue between two the countries. The Agreement on
Science and Technology was signed between India and Japan
which helps to increase the relationship between both the
countries.
Since 1990s India and Japan have cooperated in various fields like
technology, railways, electronics & automobiles for mutual
benefits. Indian government is trying to encourage trade with
Japan for the economic development in India. India and Japan
have been maintaining good diplomatic relations and mutual
cooperation based on trade, economic and technical
opportunities. During this period India took to economic
liberalisation and market oriented economy. While India pursued
economic liberalisation, Japanese corporation and private sector
investment has risen up. India's “Look East Policy” and economic
liberalisation made closer relations between India and Japan.
Japan has identified four major areas of foreign investment like
ICT, biotechnology, medical care and environment.
But the relations between the two nations remained at a low key in
205
1998 as a result of the Pokhran-II test, an Indian Nuclear Weapon

Test. After the first half of 1999 Japanese relation between two
nations got improvement when India assisted Japan in capturing
the pirates who controlled a Japanese ship on the Malacca Straits.
In January 2000, George Fernandes, foreign minister of India,
paid a visit to Tokyo, Japan and conducted a new dialogue on
security and defence. In this year, India and Japan started a new
sphere of cooperation for building a common interest in ensuring
energy security. Prakas Chander said “India and Japan are
dependent on petroleum imports through Persian gulf with
common shipping routes. It is in their mutual interest that they
work out an arrangement which will ensure the safety of oil
transportation along the strategic sea lanes extending from the
Indian Ocean to the Strait of Malacca”.
In August 2000 the Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori visited
India to develop their relation with India. At that time Japan
placed an emphasis on the political and economic ties with India
and Japan readily signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
(CTBT). During this visit both the countries agreed for enhancing
the cooperation in the field of Information Technology (IT) more
particularly:
To develop IT sector relations.
To develop the exchange of human resource between the two
nations.
To develop the private sector management in both the
countries.
To develop the socio political relation for the maintenance of
social stability.
The editor in chief, KeithTimimi, said “India is one of the largest
official Development Assistance (ODA) recipients from Japan.
However in the changed context of our desire for seeking a new
economic partnership, it is important that we shift the emphasis
of India and Japan relationship from ODA based to FDI based.
Approvals of Japanese FDI in India during the period 1991 2004
206
has been in the order of $ 3.2 billion which was around 4.8 per cent
of total Indian approvals of all FDI. In August 2000 India and
Japan established a partnership called “Global Partnership in the
21 Century”. The Global partnership between them reflects the
broad coverage of long term political, economic and strategic
interests.
The strategic and global partnership is the new phase of the
development of cooperation between two nations. It enhances the
open society and free market Economy, strong defence relations,
educational linkage and people to people contacts. This
partnership will enhance the bilateral cooperation and address to
resolve the regional and global challenges. The Minister of
Foreign Affairs of Japan reported that since Prime Minister
Junichiro Koizumi's visited India in April 2005, Japan-India
annual summit meetings have been held in respective capitals.
Prime Minister Monmohan Singh visited Japan in 2005 when
Global and Strategic Partnership was elevated. In December 2011
Prime Minister Noda visited Delhi and summit a meeting with
Prime Minister Monmohan Singh was hold. After the discussion
the two Prime Minister signed an agreement entitled “Vision for
the Establishment of Japan India Strategic and Global
Partnership upon entering the year of 60 the Anniversary of the
Establishment of Diplomatic Relation”.
In October 2008 prime minister of Japan Hatoyama and prime
minister of India Sing issued “The Joined Declaration on Security
Cooperation between Japan and India”. In December 2011 the
two leaders of both countries in the annual summits, explained
that they must expand cooperation in the areas of maritime
security including safety and freedom of navy. In August 2011
Japan India “Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement”
(CEPA) had taken place. This agreement helps to eliminate about
94% of the tariffs between Japan and India within 10 years. The
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan realised that India is the
largest recipient of Japanese ODA loan for the past several years.
Delhi metro is the best successful example of the utilisation of
ODA of Japan.
207
Important Dates
Started in 2004 and concluded on 16th February 2011.
Agreement will be effective from 1st April 2011.
In the year 2019, 94% tariff lines of Japan and 90% tariff lines of
India will have duty free access from both sides.
They recognise that a changing pattern of global
environment/world brought the technological benefits which
present various economic and strategic challenges and
opportunities to the nations. They agree about the longstanding
friendship and strong economic and political ties and mutually
beneficial cooperation between them. They have been in favour of
bilateral relationship based on the mutual economic benefits
through liberalisation, trade, investment, and cooperation. This
partnership will create larger and competitive markets for their
manufacturing and service industries. This agreement can play
an important role in promoting sustainable developments in the
social and environmental protection. The economic partnership
would help to expand trade and investment in the region and
would bring about a new era of relationship between India and
Japan. This agreement has various types of objectives like:
Liberalise and facilitate trade in goods and services between
the Parties;
Increase investment opportunities and strengthen protection
for investments and investment activities in the Parties;
Ensure protection of intellectual property and promote
cooperation in the field thereof;
Promote cooperation for the effective enforcement of
competition laws in the countries;
Improve business environment in each Party;
Establish a framework to enhance closer cooperation in the
fields as agreed in this Agreement; and
Create effective procedures for the implementation and
208
application of this agreement and for the resolution of

disputes.
The policies of India and Japan have led to a healthy cooperation
in certain fields. Today India and Japan stress on the universal
demand of Peace, Security, and sustainable development. They
share the democratic values, social plurality, and commitment to
human rights, open society and freedom. This relationship
reflects the long term political, economic and strategic interests.
India and Japan are partners for establishing peace, security and
development in Asia as well as advancing the global peace and
human security. So we may conclude that both the countries are
partners for enhancing their common interests.
Japan-India Trade (Yen: billion)

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Trade from India to Japan. 283 352 472 491 544 348 497 543
Trade from Japan to India. 329 388 518 723 819 591 792 882
Source: Japanese Government document.
Foreign Direct Investment from Japan (Yen: billion)

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Direct investment from Japan 15.0 29.8 59.7 178.2 542.9 344.3 241.1 181.4
Source: Japanese Government document
From the beginning of 21st century, India and Japan pledged to

take their relationship to a qualitatively new level. They realised
that the international system is characterised by inter
dependence which promotes great opportunity for both countries
for their mutual benefits. In August, 2000 “Global Partnership
21st Century” came into existence to enhance the trade
relationship between the two countries. It leads to the
development of trade relations between both countries which
determines the economic cooperation. The two countries
developed their cooperation for full utilization of their economic
resources. They agreed to develop their cooperation in various
areas like environment, Energy, disarmament, Non Proliferation
209
security, Medical Care and ICT etc. In 2006 Dr. Manmohan Singh
visited Japan from December 13th to 16th and the two countries
agreed to sign “Towards India Japan Strategic and Global
Partnership”. That is the point of high level in relations between
the two countries. In 2007 Mr. Shinzo Abe, Prime Minister of
Japan, visited India from August 21st to 23rd and a joint statement
on “The Enhancement of Cooperation on Environmental
Protection and Energy Security” was signed. At that time Mr. Abe
came to Kolkata to inaugurate the “Indo Japan Cultural Centre”.
Dr Manmohan Singh visited Tokyo from 21st to 23rd October in
2008 and it was the annual summit between them. They agreed
that they would carry on such relations for the next four years
also.
In conclusion, it is to be said that India and Japan are in the
process of globalisation. The China's factors in south Asia as well
as international politics help to enhance the bilateral cooperation
and agreement between India and Japan. Treaty of Peace (1952),
Agreement for Air Service (1956), Cultural Agreement (1957),
Agreement of commerce (1958), Convention for the Avoidance of Double
Taxation (1960), Agreement on cooperation in the field of science and
Technology (1985), Japan India Comprehensive Economic Partnership
Agreement (2011) etc. Presents the positive results between India
and Japan. These steps are the results of high level political
dialogue for the bilateral relations and cooperation in the field of
trade, politics, defence, science and technology. Today India and
Japan are making a headway in the fields of peace, security and
p
rosperity and long term socio-political strategic cooperation
yielding a new dimension for the international relations.
210
Notes and References

1. Anand Giridharadas, “Rising India remains torn between East and West”,
The New York Times, August 15, 2005, available:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/14.
2. Jackson, Robert. & Sorensen, Georg. “Introduction to International
Relations: Theories and Approaches”.
3. Japan-India Partnership in a New Asian Era: Strategic Orientation of Japan-
India Global
4. John Baylis & Steve Smith “The Globalisation of World Politics“.
5. Kapur, K.D., “India-Japan: Strategic Partnership in the Emerging Global
Scenario” in Panda R., and Yoo Fukazawa, eds, India and Japan In Search
of Global Roles, New Delhi& Chicago: Promilla & Co., Publishers,
Bibliophile South Asia, and Japan Foundation (New Delhi), 2007.
6. Malhotra, Vinay Kumar- “International Relations”.
7. Mansingh L., “India-Japan Relations”. IPCS, Institute of Peace and Conflict
8. Mansingh, L. “Towards India- Japan Strategic and Global Partnership” IPCS,
Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies”, New Delhi, India, January 2007.
9. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan “Japan-India Relations, “May 2012.
10. Mr. S.S.Mennon Seminar Report “Towards India- Japan Strategic and Global
Partnership”, IPCS, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi,
India, January 2007.
11. Mr.Nishigahhiro, Wataru-“Political and Defence Aspects of India-Japan
Relation. Partnership, available: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-
paci/india/ partner 0504. html (Accessed July, 2009).
12. Prakash Chander & Prem Arora- Comparative Politics and International
Relations, Cosmos bookhives (p) LTD.
13. Rajamohan, P. G, Rahut, D.B, Jacob, J.T- “Changing Paradigm of Indo-Japan
Relation: Opportunities and Challenges” Working paper No-212, April 2008.
14. Report of IPCS Seminar “Towards India-Japan Strategic and Global Partnership”
held at the India International Centre on 10th January 2007, Article No. 2198,
31 January2007, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi.
15. S.N. Roy “Modern Comparative Politics”. Studies, New Delhi, India,
January 2007.
16. Zubaidullo UBAIDULLOEV -“Contemporary Japan-India Relations and the
China factor,” PhD Student, Doctoral Program in International and
Advanced Japanese Studies University of Tsukuba.
211
India and Japan in Asian Regionalization
Sourya Banerjee and Gehna Banga
"It doesn't matter how difficult the obstacle is, if you stand
together, you can succeed." - Anon.
South East Asia is one of the most volatile regions in the entire
world. There is Myanmar with ethnic violence, countries like Sri
Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal with their respective
domestic violence and terrorism. There's China with its trouble
with Tibet, North and South Korea breathing down each other's
necks, a still war torn Vietnam and a few relatively calmer places
like Cambodia, Bhutan. In such a place are situated the two
countries of Japan and India. Japan, the "Pearl of the East",
surrounded by water and the diverse land of India dealing not
only with its own internal conflicts but also with the unstable
countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and China on its
borders. The two countries are poles apart in the matters of size,
population, culture and location but yet are among the fastest
developing economies in the world. The sheer Indian labor force
and the indomitable spirit of the Japanese have brought the two
countries into such a bond that the entire region of South East Asia
follows where these two lead; but this bond in this region is not
new. The exchange of Indian and Japanese culture had started
before the World War II, like a small tickle at first, with the flow of
Buddhism from India to Japan deepening during the Second
World War and continuing even after India got Independence.
Regionalization is not only a geographical concept but also the
integration of various economies, politics and socio-cultural
environments of countries. They say that great people influence
and crave the way the other people are around them. Similarly
India and Japan together lead the entire region of the South-East
Asia from war torn under-developed countries to developing
economies which are tourist destinations.
212
“The true ally is not the one who comes first, But the one who
leaves last” -Anon.
Regionalization in simple words can be defined as the tendency
or the process to form regions. This formation of regions is made
on the basis of two factors, exogenous and endogenous factors.
Geography, social conditions, linguistics and culture lead to an
endogenously constructed region. On the other hand
globalization, politics, economy, security and trade are a few
factors which lead to an exogenously constructed region. The two
terms region and regionalization have their own distinct
meanings. Regionalization can be defined as the creation of
diplomatic, military and political ties amongst the
interdependent sub-regions for giving impetus to regional
cooperation and regional integration. Regional cooperation is
undoubtedly the second best policy as it provides a road between
complete self-reliance by a country and complete openness and
freedom.
Regionalization is a phenomenon that has by now occupied every
region's political leaders' attention and time. Andrew Hurell saw
region as a political and social construct. According to him,
regions are created and recreated in the process of global
transformation. Its origin can be traced back from the times of a
little before the cold war but to be more precise during the Cold
War. The Cold War, often dated from 19471991, was a period of
sustained state of political and military tension between the two
powers of the Western world, that is, the United States with its
NATO allies and the Soviet Union, its satellite states and allies.
After the success of the two power's temporary wartime alliance
with each other against the Nazi regime of Germany various
profound economic and political differences cropped between
the two regions. From February 4th to 11th, 1945 a wartime
meeting between the heads of the government of United States,
Soviet Union and United Kingdom took place. It was known as
the Yalta Conference and the delegations were headed by the 'Big
Three' that is, Winston Churchill, Franklin D Roosevelt and
213
Joseph Stalin. The Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov

had once expressed concern that the Yalta Agreement's wording
might impede Stalin's plans in Central Europe. In return Stalin
responded, "Never mind. We'll do it our own way later.”The
Soviet Union then created the Eastern Bloc with the eastern
European countries it occupied as its members which were
known as the satellite states. The formation of the Eastern Bloc
serves as a quintessential regionalization. It can be inferred that
the purpose behind its formation was to help the Soviet Union
attain dominance in the worldthrough military, political and
diplomatic ties with the satellite states.
Despite the severe repercussions of the Asia-Pacific war, which
encompassed the Second Sino- Japanese War, the 1945 Soviet-
Japanese conflict, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki, Soviet invasion of Manchuria; the Bangladesh
Liberation War, Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, Sino-Indian War of
1962, the Vietnam War and the Korean War, India and Japan have
remained undeterred in their journey to the world's largest
economies in 2012 leaving behind Winston Churchill's United
Kingdom, Joseph Stalin's Moscow, Yalta Conference's benefiters
France and Italy, to name a few. As per CIA World Fact book, the
world will by 2020 witness a major shift in the global balance of
economic power compared to 2010. China is predicted to overtake
USA by GDP measured in PPP terms. As per a report released by
the Global Research Department of HSBC and its prognosticators
there will be a sweeping change in the world's top economies by
2050. Philippines is expected to leap from the 27 place to become
the world's 16th largest economy. Japan is expected to drop by
one point and India to take over its spot. Out of the top 30
economies, 11 are predicted to be Asian powers. As per the
projections made by IMF, Africa on average will have the world's
fastest growing economy of any continent over the next five years.
It is purported to be the 'Next Asia'. The Asian Continent
currently accounts for the highest GDP in the world and its
regionalization is of utmost importance for a strong hold on its
position in the coming years. Thus it is imperative and warrants
214
India and Japan to maintain cordial relations and regional

cooperation with each other and their counterparts in the Asian
regionin order to sustain regionalization. Besides, any economic,
political, financial, cultural or military developments in India and
Japan individually and together have the tendency to leave a
great impact on the rest of the world and not just Asia. The main
purpose of this paper is to discuss in detail the impact that the two
superpowers and mainly the Indo-Japan relations have on the
Asian region.
Whether you choose politics, trade or culture, India-Japan
relations in almost all the fields have always been strong and
cordial. During the anti-Christian persecutions in 1596, many
Japanese Christians fled to the Portuguese colony of Goa in India.
By the early 17th century, there was a community of Japanese
traders in Goa in addition to Japanese slaves brought or captured
by Portuguese ships from Japan. Both the countries are familiar
with the word exchange for years now. Early in the 6th century
Japan was introduced to an indirect spread of Buddhism through
China & Korean peninsula from India. Later on, this cultural
exchange gradually culminated into trade and economic
ties.After the end of World War II, in 1949, the first Indian Prime
Minister Jawaharlal Nehru donated two Indian elephants to the
Ueno Zoo in Tokyo.This brought a glimmer of hope into the lives
of the Japanese people who still had not recovered from the defeat
in the war. Japan and India inked a peace treaty and established
diplomatic relations in April 1952, which was one of the first
peace treaties Japan signed after the World War II. India's iron ore
played a big role in aiding Japan's recovery efforts. After Japanese
Prime Minister NobusukeKishi's path-breaking visit to India in
1957, the country started providing loans to India. However,
direct exchanges, began only during the Meiji Revolution.
Further, bilateral relations developed as a consequence of
Japanese purchase of the Indian cotton and import of iron ore.
Thus trade helped in fostering relations which were once initiated
by a great religion. Even India's own Gurudev poet Rabindranath
Tagore had visited Japan many times and had even translated the
215
Japanese haiku into Bengali.It should also be noted that Benzaitin,

one of the 'Seven Gods' of fortune in Japan is actually an evolved
form of Indian Goddess Saraswati.Since 1952, Japan and India
have maintained diplomatic relations and enjoyed cordial
relations based on trade, economic and technical cooperation. The
Year of 2007, in fact, was declared as the 'India-Japan Friendship
Year'. The year of 2012 marks the completion 60 years of
diplomatic relations between the two countries.
Strong and determined efforts by India and Japan to give effect
and life to their bilateral relationship mainly future aspirations
regarding bilateral trade have finally started showing positive
results. The most notable one is the two-way Comprehensive
Economic Partnership Agreement signed between India and
Japan on 16th February 2011. The main objective of the agreement
is to promote trade in goods and services, increase investment
opportunities through liberalization of investment flows and
protection of intellectual property rights. As per a CII study, the
two-way trade between India and Japan which stood at about
USD 13 billion is likely to touch USD 25 billion by 2014 on the back
track of the CEPA. The major gainers among all the sectors of this
deal are textiles, pharmaceuticals, automobile and
electronic/FMCG sectors.
The next in line is Japanese premiere Yoshihiko Noda's pledge of
$4.5 billion over the next five years for the Delhi-Mumbai
Industrial Corridor (DMIC) projects which aims at enhancing
infrastructure and industry between the two cities. This project
would not only enhance infrastructure and industry in India but
also create 100 million jobs within a decade in the manufacturing
sector leading to a rise in the share of manufacturing in the
country's GDP to 25 percent by 2022 as recently announced in
India's National Manufacturing Policy. Since the number of
companies with business operations in India has doubled in the
three years, it is pertinent that adequate infrastructure must be
made available in India which is what is sought to be achieved by
the Japanese Government through this investment. The total
trade between the two countries in 201011 amounted to US$13.8
216
billion and the cumulative FDI inflows from Japan between April
2000 and April 2011 totaled to around US$5.5 billion that accounts
for about 4 per cent of total inflows to India. These figures when
are inferred in real terms do not look very impressive and rather
call for caution and more bilateral trade efforts on the part of both
the countries. India's share in Japan's total global trade and
investment is only about 1 per cent. China, on the other hand,
which is Japan's top partner in trade, had a total of US$163.2
billion in the first half of 2011, setting a new record on the first
half-year basis. Also, Japanese FDI inflows to China in 2010 alone
were around US$22 billion. Therefore, this leaves a huge room for
both the countries to increase their bilateral trade ties and sustain
Asia's economic stand in the World.
The other point to be noted in the similar context is the impact of
the decisions taken at the second India-Japan Energy Dialogue
that was held this year, led by Planning Commission Deputy
Chairman Montek Singh Ahluwalia from the Indian side. One of
the major decisions taken at the interaction was the congruency
expressed by both countries to end the Liquefied Natural Gas
(LNG) discriminatory pricing formula for Asian countries vis-à-
vis European nations. Japan is the largest LNG consumer in the
world, and India, the fifth largest.The price discrimination
followed mainly by Qatar and Oman in selling LNG to India at a
price which is double of what the West is asked to pay to the West
is very upsetting for the two countries. The proposed reduction in
price by 20% is not only expected to benefit the two soft powers
but the entire Asian region.
As per a report of the Atlantic on the next 5 emerging economies
that will change the world, Kazakhstan occupies the No. 1 spot. It
has been clearly expressed that as long as Asia grows, Kazakhstan
would.
The other aspect of India-Japan relations is its security ties with
each other. Japan is heavily dependent on energy supplies from
the Middle East, and the safety of the sea lanes of communication
(SLOCs) is of vital security interest. Given this scenario, Japan is in
217
need of India's support to keep its SLOC's safe. Maritime

cooperation is one of the most promising areas between India and
Japan.
Another area of cooperation between Japan and India is in
Myanmar and Afghanistan. India has huge strategic stakes in
both the countries. Japan has committed considerable sums for
reconstruction in Afghanistan. In Myanmar, however, it has
followed a policy more independent of the US and has not
imposed sanctions against the Junta, preferring instead a policy of
constructive engagement, including providing ODA. As in the
case of India, it is here, that there is, no doubt, an element of
countering China. Japan's primary interests lie in its immediate
neighborhood. There is scope for greater defense cooperation,
intelligence-sharing and joint initiatives on maritime security,
counter-terrorism, disaster prevention and management and
energy security.
In October 2008,India and Japan signed a momentous security
accord a significant political achievement since Tokyo has
concluded such an agreement with only one other country, i.e,
Australia. The India-Japan security agreement also marks a
significant milestone in building Asian power equilibrium. What
Tokyo and New Delhi signed is a framework agreement, to be
followed up with “an action plan with specific measures to
advance security cooperation” in particular areas, ranging from
sea-lane safety and defence collaboration to disaster management
and counter-terrorism. The significance of the Indo-Japanese
agreement truly parallels the 2005 Indo-U.S. defence framework
accord, which marked a major transformation of the strained
relationship between the world's most populous and most
powerful democracies. Both those agreements focus on
counterterrorism, disaster response, the safety of sea-lanes of
communications, nuclear non-proliferation, bilateral and
multilateral military exercises, peace operations and defence
dialogue and cooperation. The former has not only been signed at
a higher level prime ministerial but also comes with a key
218
element: “policy coordination on regional affairs in the Asia-

Pacific region and on long-term strategic and global issues.”
India and Japan have been conducting annual foreign office
consultations at the Foreign Secretary level. The Security
Dialogue between the two countries started in 2001. High level
exchange has been continued between the defense authorities till
date. From Japan, General Massaki, Chief of Staff (September,
2005), Admiral Saito, Chief of Maritime SDF (February, 2006),
General Mori, Chief of Ground SDF (March, 2006), and General
Yoshida, Chief of Air SDF (April, 2006) visited India. From India,
Admiral Prakash, Chief of Naval Staff, visited Japan in October,
2005. Defense Minister of India, Mr. Mukherjee, visited Japan in
May, 2006, and a Joint Statement was issued to promote defense
exchanges. In September, 2007, Maritime SDF joined in the
"Malabar 07-2" which was hosted by India.
Between the coast guards, combined exercises on anti-piracy and
search and rescue operations have been conducted every year
since 2000. Heads of the coast guards of both the countries visit
each other almost every year. The two coast guards exchanged a
Memorandum on Cooperation at the occasion of commandant
Ishikawa's visit to India in November 2006. The two countries
have instituted multiple strategic dialogues involving their
Foreign and Defense Ministers and national security advisers, as
well as “service-to-service exchanges including bilateral and
multilateral exercises.” The Indian and Japanese space agencies
are also cooperating as part of capacity-building efforts in disaster
management.
The platform for the security ties was created during Prime
Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Japan in October 2008. “Joint
Declaration on Security Cooperation between Japan and India"
was issued. Further in April, 2009 the Maritime Self Defense
Forces (SDF) of Japan had participated in the bilateral navy
exercise conducted between U.S and India. Also, between the
coast guards, combined exercises on anti-piracy, search & rescue
etc. have been conducted since 2000 the recent one conducted at
219
Chennai in January 2012. Japan's quickness in responding to the

2004 Indian Ocean tsunami by sending Maritime Self-Defense
Force ships that provided potable water and crucial supplies,
exemplifies the country's ability to contribute to humanitarian
efforts in Asia. The Asia-Pacific region has remained quite
peaceful for many decades following World War II, and
particularly since the Korean and Vietnam wars. This was no
accident of history but the result of a permanent U.S. military
presence in the region that has helped maintain freedom of the
seas and it served to deter large-scale intra-regional conflict from
erupting. From overseas development aid of which India is the
biggest receiver, the recent being a commitment of over Rs. 7800
crores, to counter-terrorism training, humanitarian relief,
maritime security exercises, Japan has definitely played a though
sometimes controversial, yet important role in helping maintain
regional stability. The United States and Japan have, for decades,
worked together on surveillance and patrols of crucial northeast
Asian waterways and through the help of various Japanese P-3
aircrafts tracked Soviet submarines, a role that it is assumed that
Tokyo will be playing vis-vis China in coming years. Beijing is
already, due to its increasing assertiveness, in the middle of
bruising diplomatic tussles with Japan over the Senkaku/Diaoyu
islands, evidently, along with a host of other south-east Asian
nations, Philippines and Vietnam, in the South China Sea. The
Tibetans are also not keeping rest and they continue to keep their
issue on fire. Also, China's claim over Arunachal Pradesh has
quite affected India's relations with Beijing. Among the various
benefits that the Paracels and Spratlys islands are speculated to
bear are the existence of the possible oil reserves as high as 213
billion barrels, that is, 10 times the proven reserves of US and
natural gas reserves at 25 trillion cubic metres, which is equal to
the reserves of Qatar. The disputed territory also serves as one of
the region's main shipping lanes and is also home to a fishing
ground that supports the livelihoods of thousands of people. In
such circumstances the security and military ties between India
and Japan need to be strengthened to contain any future attacks,
220
the sparks of which have already raised global concern.

Determined efforts in effect to the above concerns are being made
by the sides in the way of their Defence Policy Dialogue where
issues like maritime security, cyber security and space and naval
exercises are the subject matter. Previously, also in the India Japan
Defence minister's Meetings the issues that dominated were the
maritime security, anti-piracy measures, freedom of navigation
and maintenance of the security of Sea Lanes of Communication
so that that unhindered trade by the sea routes could be
facilitated. The need to “actively pursue consultations and
cooperation in the field of maritime security both bilaterally and
in association with all other countries in the region” was
warranted. Both sides had even decided to implement Staff Talks
between the Japan Ground Self Defence Force (GSDF) and Indian
Army and Staff Exchanges between Japan Air Defence Force
(ASDF) and Indian Air Force in 2012.
Another major concern is the aspect of the repercussions of lifting
the longstanding ban by Japan on the export of weapons. The ban
hindered the Japanese makers from any joint developments and
export of their military technology. Recently, in view of replacing
its ageing fleet of F-4 jets, Japan chose Lockheed Martin's F-35
Lightning II.The move to abandon the Cold War-era restrictions
came as Japan sought to defer costs for procuring the new aircrafts
by developing and manufacturing advanced technology in areas,
such as ballistic-missile defense and jet fighters and further
exporting these components to other F-35 buyers. As per the
statements made by the Japanese officials Japan would still
continue to uphold the principle of not exporting weapons to
countries which might prolong international conflicts or violate
embargoes. The relations between Iran and U.S have always been
bad and they worsened this January when Iran sentenced a
captive American citizen to death and verified it was enriching
uranium. Also the visits by the Iranian leader Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad of the American antagonists to Venezuela and
Cuba added fuel to the fire. These events came against a backdrop
of American-led sanctions by western nations against Iran
221
because they suspected the country of proceeding with a nuclear

weapons program. The sanctions apparently began taking their
toll cutting Iran's vital oil revenues and thus made Iran choose the
above actions to react to the pressure. In such situations, every
deal by Japan in this regard had to be made with caution.In times
like these both India and Japan need to play their cards safe
because the entire South Asia region is considered to be very
volatile.
According to Takenori Horimoto, professor of contemporary
South Asian politics at Shobi University, incompatibilities in the
foreign policy stances of the two nations prevented the
development of fruitful bilateral relations during the Cold War.
Japan was closely aligned with the United States, while India
remained formally non-aligned and even tilted towards the
Soviet Union at times. Meanwhile, India maintained a closed
economy in contrast to Japan's relatively open export-led
economic policy. However, since the 1990s, there has been a tide
of change in relations between Japan and India. With New Delhi's
post-Cold War economic liberalization policies, India has become
a new market for Japan. Meanwhile, the rise of China has made
both Japan and India increasingly eye each other as potential
strategic partners in the last five years.
In 2007, India and Japan concluded a strategic agreement. A joint
declaration of New Delhi and Tokyo announced that this accord
would become an “essential pillar for the future architecture” of
Asia. Since then, the two countries have signed a comprehensive
economic partnership agreement and have held preliminary talks
on a potential civil nuclear deal. At an Asia Program event on
November 15, among speakers of Indian, Japanese, and American
perspectives one strategist has described the relationship as
Asia's fastest growing relationship.
Recently the 2nd India-Japan 2+2 Dialogue was held in Tokyo on
October 22, 2012. The Indian delegation was led by Foreign
Secretary Shri Ranjan Mathai and Defence Secretary Shri Shashi
Kant Sharma. The Japanese delegation was led by Deputy Foreign
222
Minister Mr. Akitaka Saiki and Administrative Vice-Defence

Minister Mr. Hironori Kanazawa. These 2+2 consultations at
Senior Official levels are mandated by the Action Plan to Advance
Security Cooperation concluded between the two countries in
December 2009. These consultations were built on the last round
of the 2+2 Dialogue held at New Delhi in June 2010.
The two sides briefed the other on their respective defence and
security policies in the background of each country's security
environment. In this context, they reviewed the bilateral security
and defence cooperation and discussed ways of further
expanding such ties. The two delegations also exchanged views
on maritime, cyber and outer space security. They agreed to an
early meeting of the new India Japan Cyber Security Dialogue.
In a simple view there is no stopping the growth of the
relationship of India and Japan. Pakistan, Afghanistan and other
countries have their problems with terrorism which is deeply
affecting India. Japan's technological support and help can
greatly boost India's strengths. Together there is no limit to how
far the 'Land of Diversity' and the 'Pearl of the East' can go, not
only for their own personal benefit, but also for the overall
development of the entire Asia.
References
Chellaney, Brahma (2008), Toward Asian power equilibrium, The Hindu,
Nov 01, 2008
Rupakjyoti Borah, Maintaining Peace in Asia: India-Japan Relations
Leupp, Gary P. (2003). Interracial Intimacy in Japan. Continuum International
Publishing Group. p. 35. ISBN 0-8264-6074-7.
India- Japan Summit, Sanjana Joshi, February 3rd 2012, East Asia Forum.
Editorial(December 30, 2012), Indo- Japan Relations, The Hindu.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, India.
The Times of India/Archive.
223
India-Japan Relations in the Era of Strategic Partnerships:
Domestic and Regional Foundations of Partnership
Moises Lopes de Souza
Abstract
Japan and India have labeled its bilateral relations as a strategic partnership.
However differently they are the partnerships of the same kind, Delhi and
Tokyo are emphasizing the development of joint infrastructure projects as
the basis of this new momentum of their bilateral relations. This paper argues
that the strategic partnership between Indians and Japanese based on
projects rather than geopolitical or regional concerns can unfold the huge
potential between these two important actors in Asia and can open a new
understanding of the concept of strategic partnership as a whole.
Introduction
The emerging global order which has emerged from the ashes of
the Cold War is probably the most fragmented international
order since the first half of the twentieth century during which
two world wars took place. As a reflection of this international
environment, new opportunities have been opened for
international actors searching for new power status and the
establishment of key partnerships. Emerging powers have
become more sufficiently assertive to confront the west on some
issues; consequently this fragmentation makes international
cooperation more difficult to solve global challenges. The
geographic location is no longer important; the states' interests
and needs pointing in a multitude of directions. In fact, the very
concept of strategic partnership became subjective, sometimes
intangible in its reasons of establishment. The concrete elements
like the geographic location or military capability are no longer in
the core of the contemporary states' strategic partnerships,
elements as perceptions are in the measure that the international
arena becomes complex and volatile once the development of the
bilateral partnerships also assimilats these characteristics. To
respond to this new scenario, currently the strategic partnerships
224
India-Japan Relations in the Era of Strategic Partnerships: Domestic and Regional Foundations of Partnership
switched its designing process from the table of military

strategists to the civil bureaucratic apparatus. The outcome of this
shift has made the very concept of strategic partnership a current
fashion term in international relations.
Different countries with all types of economic size and political
interests have utilized the concept in its relations with important
partners. For example, the United States has established strategic
partnership agreements with countries having different profiles
as India but at the same time also with Afghanistan, Romania,
Georgia, and Singapore. And currently it is negotiating to confer
the same status to its relations with Egypt, Vietnam and Mexico.
By the same token, China has established strategic partnerships
with Russia, but also with the European Union, Ireland, North
Korea, Pakistan, South Korea, Argentina and Brazil. India has
also pushed for strategic partnerships with a dozen of countries
among which the United States, Russia, France, United Kingdom,
Germany, and Japan ranks as the most important ones. The
European Union has been one of the most active in the
establishment of strategic partnerships with states having
“systemic importance at the global or regional level” since the end
of 1990s1. In fact, the national states around the globe ave labeled
their relations with important partners a strategic relation or
partnerships. But what exactly means the term strategic
partnership? How can we define a bilateral relationship as
strategic in a world of such diffuse interests and challenges?
A literature review of the term revealed that strategic partnership
is a term waiting for a clear definition. A good example of this
lack of definition is the European Union approach in establishing
strategic partnerships. Analysts, that have conducted a historical
overview of documents and debates on this topic inside EU, have
1
Currently EU maintain relations with the status of strategic partnership with
Brazil, Canada, China, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, South Korea,
and United States. See Giovanni Grevi (ed) and Gauri Khandekar, Mapping
EU Strategic Partnerships. Fride (2011). Available: http://www.fride.org/
publication/956/mapping-eu-strategic-partnerships
225
affirmed the “total absence of strategic rationale behind the elaboration

of strategic partnerships since the very beginning, with no definition of
the concept or its fundamental objectives, and ad hoc selection of
partners” (Renard, 2011:IV).
In the past, more precisely, during the Cold War, it was used to be
dictated by its military component and essentially connected to
the geographic aspects. In a profound etymologic analysis of the
term Blanco (2010) called attention to the primary idea of what
means “strategic” and “partnership”. He argues that the terms
mean “the fact or condition of being a partner; association or
participation as a partner” or “a person who possesses something jointly
with another or others; a person who takes part with another or others in
doing something; an associate, a colleague; a player on the same side in
the game; a spouse, a member of a couple who live together or are habitual
companions”.2 Hence, he argues that the word “partnership”
comes with up the notion of “to the presence of common goals between
the parts in a “partnership” relationship, goals that if common, must be
based on some kind of shared interests and values. That doesn't mean
that player on the same side must be friends to fight together towards
common goals, but some kind of solidarity must be present since they
share at least one common interest”.3 Regarding the idea of
“strategic”, Blanco highlights “of or pertaining to strategy; useful or
important with regard to strategy; … concerned with or involving
careful planning towards an advantage.” In the same dictionary we can
find a definition of the noun strategy as “[a] government or province
ruled by a strategus (…)The art of a commander-in-chief; the planning
and direction of the larger military movements and overall operations of
a campaign (...), the art of skill or careful planning towards an advantage
or a desired end”.4 Therefore, we can assume as a possible
definition of strategic partnership a relationship in which a
coordinated planning is implemented towards a desired end; a desired
2
Luis Fernando Blanco, “Bringing Russia closer to the core: EU's strategic
partnership approach”. Paper presented at 7th SGIR Pan-Euroepan
International Relations Conference, Stockholm, 9-11 Septermber 2010. pp.6-7.
3
Ibid.2
4
Ibid.
226
end which is a common goal of the parties involved and that is based on
common interests or even common values”.5 Cameron and Zheng
(2007) seem to agree with this definition defining strategic
partnership “as a long term commitment by two important actors to
establish a close relationship across a significant number of policy areas.
Despite of all others partners, strategic partners recognize the
importance of their commitment to each other and are prepared to try and
reach common ground wherever possible” .6 Yet, by analyzing the EU-
China strategic partnership, Cameron and Zheng argue that a
strategic partnership should be 1) to promote mutual
understanding; 2) To strengthen the rules-based systems of global
governance; 3) To promote regional and global security; 4) To
promote respect for the rule of law, including human rights; 5) To
increase economic and social sustainability. Hence, they argued
that “any such strategic partnership must be based on equality, mutual
trust, respect and understanding. It must also be comprehensive, holistic
and long-term, and there must be intensive, ongoing and stable and
stable commitment to it. Ideally, the broad, underlying values of the two
parties should be similar, or at least compatible (…) strategic
partnership must be built on the basis of mutual trust, respect and
understanding, the most important challenge is how to build a solid
foundation for the relationship”.7 Combining the above definitions,
Giovanni Grevi condensed the term as a coordination frame
agreed between the two countries, with the purpose of fulfilling
major common goals, raising the level of the bilateral relations,
according to the wants or desires of two states, regarding their
external policy goals . Hence, it necessarily needs to be based on
foreign policy priorities of the two states; as long as those
priorities exist, strategic partnership has consistency. The
partners need to be willing to cooperate to solve the challenges ,
preferably in multilateral framework - e.g. by coordinating the
5
ibid
6
Frazer Cameron and Yongnian Zheng, “Key Elements of a Strategic
Partnership” in Stanley Crossick and Etiene Reuter (eds). China-EU: A
Common Future (London, World Scientific Pub: 2007). p. 4.
7
Ibid.6
227
partners' position with those strategic partners in multilateral

forums. The ultimate objective of the strategic partnership is to
safeguard the vital interests of both sides (Grevi, 2011:5).
The bilateral relations in general are the cornerstone of the world
politics. The quality and depth of this interaction are responsible
to shape the perceptions of one country to another (Grevi &
Khandekar, 2011). After the Cold War, the international relations
have witnessed a more intense qualitatively and quantitatively
bilateral relations between the major global and regional power
centers. With India and Japan not different, their relations are
deeply dictated by the international environment through the
time. However, with the end of bipolar period, again responding
to new strategic imperatives, the Indian-Japanese relations got a
new momentum.
India and Japan Strategic Partnership Building Process
The modern bilateral relations between India and Japans - as any
other major bilateral relations in Asia - have been subject to
international environment that have surrounded them. However,
it is important to notice the Indo-Japanese historic exchanges pass
more the one thousand years with the Buddhism8 as the first
common link between both sides (Mathur,2012). In terms of the
contemporary relations, the developments after the end WWII
played a key role in the modern basis of bilateral relations. In fact,
the absence of India in the San Francisco Treaty in 1951, in protest
to the limitations imposed by that treaty to the Japan's national
sovereignty and independence , still reverberates on Tokyo's
memories. In addition, with the treaty signed in 1952, India has
put aside its reparation claims against Japan. Based on the
importance of these gestures in such a fragile economic and
political moment, India became one of the first countries to
receive loans from Japan in 1958, after the visit of the Japanese
8
According to Arpita Mathur, Korea was instrumental in introducing Japan to
the Buddhist philosophy. See Arpita Mathur. India-Japan Relations: Drivers,
Trends, and Prospects. RSIS Monograph N.23, S. Rajaratnam School of
International Studies, 2012.
228
Prime Minister Nobuke Kishi to Delhi in 1957. However, the two

states were engulfed in the logic of the Cold War period. This
made them keep distantance from each other due to the bipolar
game dominated by the United States and Soviet Union (Mathur,
2012). At its positions, India saw Japan become a technological
powerhouse and one of the most important and advance
economies of the world. From its side, Tokyo witnessed India
play an important role in the Non Aligned Movement (NAN),
principally due to the active figure of the Prime Minister
Jawaharlal Nehru.
The end of bipolar era coincided with the economic reforms
conducted by India in 1991 and the economic problems that hit
Japan during all the 1990's decade. This way, the new encounter of
Japan and India could only happen in the doors of the new
century only. By conducting its reforms, India became a serious
candidate to share with China the leadership of the calling “Asian
century”, experiencing economic growth rate of 9% per year on
average during 1990s. As once before, India's iron ore reserves
and now also its huge domestic market made it a natural partner
to the Japanese companies in general. These economic
complementarities, led to the first idea of a concept of partnership
between Japan and India. It was envisaged by both sides during
the visit of the Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori to India in
August 2000 when was signed the "Global Partnership in the 21st
Century. " Later in December 2001, the Prime Minister Vajpayee
and the Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi implemented a new
step in the partnership on the deepening of the bilateral relations
and meeting global challenges. However, it was only in December
2006 during the visit of the Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to
Japan, that Japan and India labeled its relationship as a global
and strategic partnership. The concept of strategic partnership
was reinforced again in 2011 when the Prime Minister Noda paid
a state visit to Delhi and had a summit meeting with Prime
Minister Singh. From this visit was signed a Joint Statement
entitled, "Vision for the Enhancement of Japan-India Strategic
and Global Partnership upon entering the year of the 60th
229
Anniversary of the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations." In

this opportunity, both sides reaffirm their relations are based on
universal values such as democracy, human rights and the rule of law, as
well as wide-ranging strategic and economic interests. The aspect is
the cornerstone of this partnership that would further enhance their
economic partnership by giving it strategic and long-term policy
orientation.9
In parallel to these more embracing negotiations, Japan and India
also signed in 2011 a bilateral free trade agreement - of which they
have been negotiating since 2007- that would abolish duties on
more than 90% of trade in ten years. The “Comprehensive
Economic Partnership Agreement” will promote a strategic
partnership between the two countries so that they can establish win-
win relations and achieve growth.10 The agreement aims to abolish
tariffs on 90 percent of Japanese exports to India, such as auto
parts and electric appliances, and 97% of imports from India,
including agricultural and fisheries products, until 2021.11
Although, In 2011, bilateral trade was worth a relatively modest
$17.8 billion; with the deal India and Japan are targeting to grow
to $25 billion by 2014, which eliminates tariffs on most goods
traded between the two countries.12 Foreign direct investment
from Japan to India between April of 2000 and April of 2012 was
$12.3 billion
9
“Vision for the Enhancement of Japan-India Strategic and Global Partnership
upon entering the year of 60th Anniversary of the Establishment of Diplomatic
Relations." Available: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/india/pmv
1112/joint_statement_en.html . Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan.
10
“India, Japan sign free trade agreement”. Available: http://timesofindia.
indiatimes.com/india/India-Japan-sign-free-trade-agreement/articleshow/
7506864.cms Access: October, 15 2012.
11
Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Between Republic of India
and Japan. Available: http://commerce.nic.in/trade/ijcepa_basic_ agreement.
pdf Access: October, 15 2012.
12
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Japan. Economic Relations. Available: http://
www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/india/index.html Access: October, 18 2012.
230
Despite the commercial improvements between Delhi and India,

their strategic partnership has a more interest component than is
not common in other's agreement of the same kind, that is the
term “global”. The term is not well defined in the documents of
the partnership, but is generally delineated in the content of the
declarations signed by the two sides, principally the last one
mentioned above. At the first glance, the term global present in
the document signed in 2011 , implies that the partnership
between India and Japan not only includes questions that escape
the simple bilateral dynamic but will also include global issues
where the two countries have common positions. Among these
possible global issues are: the climate changing and environment
protection negotiations, Support for the East Asia Summit
(EAS),Cooperation with African continent, assistance to
Afghanistan becomes stable, Counter-Terrorism, elimination of
nuclear weapons, reform of the United Nations Security Council,
including its expansion in both permanent and non-permanent
categories, defense of multilateral trading system, reaffirmation
of the role of the G-20, strong adherence to the principles of
international law, including the 1982 United Nations Convention
on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
It is not clear if New Delhi and Tokyo are on the same page with all
these questions. Although some of them as counter terrorism,
naturally put the two sides together due to the mutual dramatic
domestic experiences which made both the countries suffer.
From a regional point of view, the relations with China put India
and Japan naturally side by side. Both sides are working to
reduce or counterbalance the Chinese influence in the region, by
advocating the inclusion of Russia and United States at the East
Asian Summit (EAS). Hence, the maritime dispute between Japan
and China over the Senkaku/Diaoyutai Islands and the
increasing Chinese assertiveness on the South China Sea touches
a very sensitive nerve of India too. Delhi and Beijing have vital
security interests regarding their maritime periphery, principally
about the Indian Ocean. The Indian Ocean is strategically
important predominantly due to its proximity to the energy rich
231
Persian Gulf, apart from its being a vital line supply for Asia's
energy it is also a vital commercial route interaction with the
world market. Thus, it is not a secret that the Chinese desire to
ensure security over vital shipments, which is the main driver
behind the Chinese naval presence in the region. By doing this,
Beijing has stimulated India's proactive response by increasing its
naval capability whilst projecting their presence in the South
China Sea (Bensouda, 2012). Based on it, India and Japan have
reaffirmed their commitment to international law that too
including the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea (UNCLOS) in a clear message to Beijing. The Sino-Japanese
historic rivalry and the maritime disputes between Chinese and
Indians could be a natural and enough reason for the
establishment of partnerships between Delhi and Tokyo. Given
that the developments in one case can affect directly the other and
vice versa. However, the India-Japan strategic partnership
possesses another important element that can guarantee a long
term basis to the bilateral relationship. More than a result of
regional geopolitics dynamic between the major powers in Asia,
India and Japan establish a partnership based on projects that
engage the productive economic forces on both sides in the deep
interaction of infrastructure projects.
Domestic Projects as Basis of the Partnership
It is in the plane of economic relations where it becomes harder to
understand the strategic partnership practical implications.
There is a tendency , as Felix Pena argued, to use it as a means of
granting significance before the public eye to meetings at the highest
political level where what is agreed eventually never materializes (Pena,
2010:2). Although being also possibly true to say about the India-
Japan strategic partnership, it is important to highlight that the
partnership has an important linkage with domestic
infrastructure projects that fits the strategic demands of both the
sides. India needs to equip its major cities to the demands of the
international position requiring of a country aspirant to become a
regional leader and influential in the global multilateral forums.
232
In this regard, the urban problems in cities as New Delhi and

Mumbai like public transportation and the interconnection
between the two cities require a huge amount of resources and
expertise that India tacitly admits that it lacks of. As well pointed
out by the specialists, the current transport system in India is
largely a legacy of the British empire. As Santelli-Bensouda
argued , this system is slowly reaching its tipping point and will not last
forever. Rather than waiting for the system to fail, it is time to ensure
India keep moving into the next century (Bensouda, 2012).
On the other hand, Japan is facing an immediate necessity to
diversify its investments to give up its dependency on the Chinese
market in times that the territorial disputes are overshadowing
the economic relations. This need for diversification of
investments is clear when the presence of Japanese companies in
China and India are compared. Currently, there are more than 850
Japanese companies in India operating more the 1400 separate
projects estimated in US$ 1.5 billion.13 However, in comparison
with China, these numbers are far from impressing. A recent data
showed that there are around 30,000 Japanese firms in China,
with investments of $85 billion during the past 15 years,
including over $6 billion last year alone. With such massive
presence in Chinese soil, the sequence of nationalist
demonstrations in 2005 against Japan and Japanese products
showed how urgent it is for Tokyo to figure out alternative
markets for the Japanese products. The events in 2005 triggered a
series of assertive diplomatic endeavors which targeted India and
Southeast Asian countries. Thus, when the wave of anti-Japanese
demonstrations took place again in 2012 they were subject to a
different interpretation from those that happened in 2005.14 The
13
“Japanese companies trying to invest in India's growth”. India Business
Today. Available: http://businesstoday.intoday.in/story/japanese-companies
-investing-in-indias-growth/1/185962.html
14
In Spring 0f 2005 occurred a series of demonstrations in China against Japan
due the questions regarding to the Japanese textbooks. Also, the Chinese also
manifested their angry with the G4 group (Brazil, Germany, Japan, and India)
to support each other demands to take permanent seat as members of United
Nations Security Council.
233
main difference between the events was that the Japanese

developed perception that China was no longer the “only fast-
growing, well-populated, low-cost market around”. Japanese
firms hedged their China risk with a “China-plus-one” strategy,
implying that they would find an extra Asian supply hub, such as
Thailand. Now, that has grown into a wider “China-plus” strategy,
because their options these days have widened to include Indonesia,
Myanmar, Vietnam, Cambodia, the Philippines and India.15 No
wonder, Tokyo has established a similar approach used in India
to establish a high level cooperation with all the key countries.
With Indonesia the “Strategic Partnership for Peaceful and
Prosperous Future" was established in 2006. In the same year also
was signed the “Japan-Vietnam Joint Statement: Toward a
Strategic Partnership for Peace and Prosperity in Asia”, and in
march 2012 during the visit Yingluck Shinawatra, Prime Minister
of Thailand released “the Japan-Thailand Joint Statement on the
Strategic Partnership based on the Enduring Bonds of Friendship
Fostering Confidence beyond the Disasters”. All these documents
contemplate the same possibilities of partnership in economic
and security matters and also on disaster relief rescue aspects.16
By definition, a strategic partnership needs to be rooted in firm
common grounds. Japan and India partnership, also does obey an
important strategic imperative demand for both sides. It is based
15
“Rattling the supply chains Businesses struggle to contain fallout from the
diplomatic crisis”. The Economist, Available: http://www.economist.com/ news/
business/21564891-businesses-struggle-contain-fallout-diplomatic-crisis? zid=306&
ah=1b164dbd43b0cb27ba0d4c3b12a5e227 access: October, 14 2012.
16
“Japan- Indonesia Joint-Statement the Strategic Partnership for Peaceful and
Prosperous Future”. Available: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/
indonesia/joint0611.html. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. “Japan
Vietnam Joint Statement: Toward a Strategic Partnership for Peace and
Prosperity in Asia”. Avaliable: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/
vietnam/joint0610.html. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. “Japan-Thailand
Joint Statement on the Strategic Partnership based on the Enduring Bonds of
Friendship - Fostering Confidence beyond the Disasters”. Available: http://
www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/noda/diplomatic/201203/07thai_e.html. Prime
Minister of Japan andf his Cabinet.
234
on India's necessities to find out resources and expertises in vital

investments in its infrastructure and the Japanese desperate need
to find alternative to escape from the increasing volatile relations
with China, and also to open new markets due to its increasingly
intense aging process of population.17 These elements confer to
the Indian-Japanese partnership a ground that is not generally
present in other current strategic partnership agreements of other
states. In general, the major power as US, China, and Russia have
also implemented the strategic partnerships which essentially
lack the linkage with the domestic projects and is general in
nature. China is focusing on secure sources of energy to keep its
high economic growth rates to face its huge labor market
demands (Su, 2009). In the case of the United States, due its
diverse interests the foreign strategic partners have been based
essentially on the military with a notorious geostrategic
component (as Iran and Egypt). But it can also be based on
moralistic/ideological aspect too as in the case of US-Israel
strategic partnership, (even though, it is also connected with
geostrategic interests of US in Middle-East area) or more
specifically as its partnership with Mexico regarding their
common border issues considered as strategic by both sides.18
The same can be said with Russia that has conducted a very low
profile in the establishment of strategic partnerships, basically
basing it on energy or security aspects with peripheral countries
as is established with China (Kushins, 2000).
17
With a populations of 127 million, Japan expected to face a decline 0.077 per cent
this year. The average age is 44.8 years, compared with 26 in India. For more
information about the chronic Japan's population problems see: Statistics Research
and Training Institute, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication of Japan:
Available: http://www.stat.go.jp/english/data/handbook/c02cont.htm
18
See The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership. A Report of Four
Working Groups on US-Mexico Relations. Woodrow Wilson International Center for
Scholars - Mexico Institute. January, 2009. Available: http://www.
wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/The%20U.S.%20and%20Mexico.%20Towards%20a
%20Strategic%20Partnership.pdf Access: October, 5 2012. See also, Haim Malka.
Crossroads: The Future of the U.S.-Israel Strategic Partnership. Center for Strategic and
International Studies (2011). Available: http://csis.org/files/
publication/110908_Malka_CrossroadsUSIsrael_Web.pdf Access, October 14 2012.
235
Table 1: Strategic Partnerships characteristics of Major Powers

Countries SP Characteristics Link With Level of
Domestic Projects Measurement
China Focused on domestic No - China use its Low
economic development essentially strategic - General/diffuse
and Social stability partnerships to supply its Stable
demands for energy and
food, but not for joint
cooperation projects
USA Focused on geostrategic No-generally based on Low

aspects, counter-terrorism geostrategic General/diffuse
(security), moral- considerations and politically
ideological (Israel) unstable
Russia Pragmatic, security and No High-principally

energy cooperation in cross-border
joint-projects on
energy issues.
Source: Author's analysis combining with diverse sources.
Infrastructure Development Projects

A strategic partnership can become relevant when it signals the
willingness of the involved countries whether at the government
or the business level to create cooperation networks in diverse
fields visible from both sides. These cooperation networks can be
related to innovation, scientific and technological development,
productive investments, and the joint approach of sensitive issues
of the global agenda such food, energy, and climate change (Pena,
2010:2). By binding the partnership with concrete infrastructure
projects India and Japan send very clear signals that the
establishment of bilateral strategic partnership possesses ties that
goes beyond pure politicians performing as statesmen in the eye
of the public. It confers an element that makes the business
community on both sides work together, involving a huge range
of economic sectors and exchange of expertise. Consequently, the
strategic partnership is no longer a mere generalist document of
good intentions but can be converted into binding contracts of
investments or services that enforce both parts fulfill their
obligations. By doing this, the partnership acquires clear elements
236
to measure it up, given the implementation the conclusion of the

projects will show without mistake, if the goals of the partnership
are or not achieved. Among the many projects, the Government
of Japan is open to negotiate loans of 134.288 billion yen to two
new projects, the Delhi Mass Rapid Transport System Project
Phase III and West Bengal Forest and Biodiversity Conservation
Project as the projects of the first batch in the fiscal year 2011.19
Besides these two projects, the the partnership agreement also
contemplates another important infrastructure project called the
Western Dedicated Freight Corridor (DFC) which runs through
the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor (DMIC). According to the
Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Ltd. it is
envisaged that a STEP (Special Terms of Economic Partnership)
loan in the region of ¥677 billion will be provided by the Government of
Japan to finance the construction of Western DFC as well as
procurement of Locomotives for the Ministry of Railways. The loan will
be extended for a period of forty years with a moratorium of ten
years. The positive aspect is that the first part of the loan of ¥ 90.2
Billion Yen for the construction of railway line between Rewari
and Vadodara has been signed. Hence, the funding for phase II
(Vadodara-JNPT) of the Corridor is already under negotiation
process with the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
for ¥ 266 Billion Yen.20
Another important project that has been conducted by the two
sides is the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor. It is also being
called Ïndo-Japan mega infrastructure project, in total, the project
will cover six states: Uttar Pradesh, NCR of Delhi, Haryana,
Rajasthan, Gujarat and Maharashtra. Distribution of the length of
the dedicated freight corridor indicates that Rajasthan (39%) and
Gujarat (38%) together constitute 77% of total length of the
alignment of freight corridor, followed by Haryana and
Maharashtra (10% each) and Uttar Pradesh and the National
19
Ibid.8 at part 8.
20
Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Ltd. Available:
http://dfccil.org/DFCC/Projects/Project%20Funding Access, October, 22 2012.
237
Capital Region of Delhi (1.5% of total length each) between Delhi

and Mumbai. The financial and technical assistance will come
from from Japan, covering an overall length of 1483 km
connecting the two most important Indian cities, Delhi and
Mumbai. The complexity of the project involves an array of
infrastructure facilities such 9 mega Industrial zones of about 200-
250 sq. km., high speed freight line, 3 ports, and 6 airports; a six-
lane intersection-free expressway and a 4000 MW power plant
power facility. The India government estimates that
approximately 180 million people or 14% of the population, will
be affected by the corridor's development.21
Source: Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion. Ministry of Commerce & Industry Government of India.
But is Japan Really Important for India or Not?

It is important we differentiate my approach here from those
concerned with the questions of national security or
geostrategical aspects. For instance, in 2011 a study elaborated by
the Indian think-thank FNSR Group of Experts ranked Russia as
the most important India's strategic partner. The study took into
21
For more detail about the project see:
http://delhimumbaiindustrialcorridor.com/ Access: October, 22 2012. See also
Concept Paper Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor,August 2007. Available:
http://www.dmicdc.com/frmDownloads.aspx?pgid=43 Access: October, 22 2012.
238
consideration three variables defense cooperation, economic

cooperation and political cooperation. Each variable was
evaluated based on three parameters 1) how substantial has been
the cooperation in the last 10 years 2) how sustained the
cooperation has been and 3) how much potential it has for the
future. Based on these parameters, Japan performed not that
good. The study sees the 2006 strategic partnership with Japan as
the least developed, making only 34 points. The study concludes
that the partnership still lacks the substance due to essentially
Tokyo's hesitations on Pakistan issue, and also due to India's
nuclear program as a whole. The study also argued that despite
there is scope for cooperation with Japan in the field of maritime
security, Japan suffers from a chronic lack of any interest in
India's concerns pertaining to Kashmir and terrorism. In addition,
Japan's deep reservations about the development of nuclear power and
its limited capacity to play a meaningful role in India's bid for a
permanent United Nations Security Council seat would suggest that the
potential in their strategic partnership will be slow to realize.22
This paper however, gives to the economic interdependency and
joint-infrastructure projects a heavier importance that utilized in
the FNSR study. In this case, another evaluation conducted by
Azad and Gupta (2011) points it the direction that I am advocating
here. By applying the AHP (Analytic Hierarchical Process), it is
possible of assess the importance of each partner in different
sectors rather than confering a note based on all variables as was
made by the previous study. Based on it, Japan's importance in
terms of economic partnership is remarkably more important
than United States, which in turn is politically much more
important than Japan.23
22
Satish Kumar, S.D. Pradhan (et all). “India's Strategic Partners: A
comparative Assessment”. Foundations for National Security Research, New
Delhi, November 2011. p.6.
23
Sarita Azad and Arvind Gupta. “Evaluating India's Strategic Partnership
Using Analytic Hierarchical Process”. Institute for Defense Studies and
Analyses (IDSA). September, 17 2011. Available:
http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/EvaluatingIndiasStrategicPartnershipsusi
ngAnalyticHierarchyProcess_agupta_170911 Access: September, 30 2012.
239
Source: Sarita Azad & Arvind Gupta,“Evaluating India's Strategic Partnerships using Analytic
Hierarchy Process”. Institute for Defense Studies and Analysis. September, 17 2011.
As discussed in the first part of this paper, a strategic partnership

is described as coordination frame agreed between the two
countries, with the purpose of fulfilling major common goals,
raising the level of the bilateral relations, according to the needs of
the two states, regarding their external policy goals. Moreover, it
necessarily needs to be based on foreign policy priorities of the
two states; as long as those priorities exist, the strategic
partnership has consistency. Although the general terms
described in the joint declarations of both the sides, India and
Japan strategic partnership possesses many of these consistency
elements in its core. That does not mean that the security aspects
are not important. In fact, the geopolitical aspects regarding the
assertive presence of China in the region have increased the
awareness of both in Delhi and also in Tokyo for more deep
bilateral relations. The increasing Sino-Indian maritime rivalry
and the unfinished WWII questions between Japan and China,
have paved the way to a natural partnership between Indians and
Japanese by raising the level of its bilateral relations to the level of
“strategic”. It does make Japan an extremely important partner to
India and the vice-versa.
Conclusion
This article has advocated the consistency of the bilateral
partnership because it is not based on the volatility of a
240
geopolitical environment. The basis of Indo-Japanese partnership

possesses this consistency due to the interaction of the
government agencies and presentation of infrastructure projects
and the consequent development of these same projects. The
partnership in this way is based on projects rather than the
general and vague intentions that characterize the current wave
of strategic partnerships among other major powers. For India,
the projects is the gateway to the country to respond to the
demands of its chaotic urban net that have grown up year by year
without a clear response of the government in solving it. To Japan,
it offers an opportunity for its companies, insurance firms and
banks to lay down deep roots on the grounds of one the most
important markets for the next decades, if all economic forecasts
are correct. This is an important breakthrough in the measure that
the classic conditionality of a strategic partnership was used to be
a location or strategic resource that a potential partner could offer,
while it is easy to identify the measure the importance, feasibility
and measurability of the quality of the partnership. After a period
of adrift general good intentions, the official declarations
promoted by different countries around the world being labeled
as strategic partnerships, the Indian-Japanese experience can
unfold new ways of partnership by utilizing economic
complementarities and by reinforcing the interdependence of
economic agents in the joint-projects.
Literature Cited
AZAD, Sarita. and GUPTA, Arvind. “Evaluating India's Strategic
Partnership Using Analytic Hierarchy Process”. Institute for Defense
Studies and Analyses (IDSA). September, 17 2011. Available:
http://www.idsa.in/idsacomments/EvaluatingIndiasStrategic
PartnershipsusingAnalyticHierarchyProcess_agupta_170911 Access:
September, 30 2012.
BLANCO, Luis Fernando. “Bringing Russia closer to the core: EU's strategic
partnership approach”. Paper presented at 7th SGIR Pan-European
International Relations Conference, Stockholm, 9-11 September 2010. pp.6-7.
241
BLANCO, Luis Fernando. “Strategic Partnership” A New Form of

Association in International Relations”. Available:
http://www.wiscnetwork.org/porto2011/papers/WISC_2011-
523.pdf Access: October, 10 2012.
CAMERON, Frazer. ZHENG, Yongnian. “Key Elements of a Strategic
Partnership” in Stanley Crossick and Etiene Reuter (Eds). China-EU: A
Common Future (London, World Scientific Pub: 2007). p. 4.
GONÇALVES, Williams. BRITO, Lana Bauab. “BRAZIL-CHINA
RELATIONS: A STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP?”. SÉCULO XXI, Porto
Alegre, V. 1, Nº1, jan-dez (2010) (Portuguese).
GREVI, Giovanni. KHANDEKAR, Gauri (Eds). Mapping EU Strategic
Partnerships. Fride (2011). Available: http://www.fride.org
/publication/956/mapping-eu-strategic-partnerships
KUMAR, Satish. PRADHAN, S.D. (Et all). “India's Strategic Partners: A
comparative Assessment”. Foundation for National Security Research, New
Delhi, November 2011. p.6.
LESSA, Antonio Carlos. “Brazil's strategic partnerships: an assessment of the
Lula era (2003-2010)”. Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, numero
53 (special edition): 115-131 (2010).(Portuguese).
LIEBERTHAL, Kenneth. JISI, Wang. “ Addressing US-China Strategic
Distrust”. John L. Thorton China Center Monograph Series, Number 4,
March (2012).
MALKA, Haim. Crossroads: The Future of the U. S. -Israel Strategic Partnership.
Center for Strategic and International Studies (2011). Available:
http://csis.org/files/publication/110908_Malka_CrossroadsUSIsrael_
Web.pdf Access, October 14 2012.
MASAYUKI, Masuda. “Between New Terms and Classic Thoughts: The
Logic of Strategic Partnership of Chinese Foreign Policy”. Forum 21,
September, 12 (2000).
MATHUR, Arpita. “India-Japan Relations: Drivers, Trends, and Prospects”.
RSIS Monograph N.23, S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies,
2012.
OHMAE, Kenichi. “The Global Logic of Strategic Alliances”. Harvard
Business Review Magazine. March 1989.
242
PENA, Felix. “Strategic Partnerships and Trade Preferences: Towards

Greater Density in the economic Relations between Brazil and Mexico?”.
International Trade Relations Newsleter, March 2010. Available:
http://www.felixpena.com.ar/index.php?contenido=negotiations&ne
agno=report/2010-03-strategic-partnerships-brasil-mexico
RENARD, Thomas. “The EU and The Strategic Partnerships: Searching for a
Strategy Meaning- How the EU is looking for Strategic Guidance for
itself and for its Partnerships”. Paper submitted to the Twelfth Biennial
Conference of the European Union Studies Association (EUSA). Boston,
Massachussets, March 3-5,2011.
RENARD, Thomas. “The Treachery of Strategies: A Call for EU Strategic
Partnerships”. Egmont Paper 45, Royal Institute for International
Relations, April (2011).
SANTELLI-BENSOUDA, Mikael. “10 Reasons Why India is not the Next
Superpower”. International Politics Energy Culture, Jan, 4 2012. Available:
http://inpec.in/2012/01/04/10-reasons-why-india-is-not-the-next-
superpower/ Access: October, 20 2012.
SU, Hao. Harmonious World: The Conceived International Order in
Framework of China's Foreign Affairs. In: IIDA, Masafumi (Ed.). China's
Shift: Global Strategy of the Rising Power. National Institute for Defense
Studies, 2009. Available: http://www.nids.go.jp/english/
publication/joint_research/ series3/pdf/3-2.pdf. Access, October, 23
2012.
“The United States and Mexico: Towards a Strategic Partnership”. A Report of
Four Working Groups on US-Mexico Relations. Woodrow Wilson
International Center for Scholars - Mexico Institute. January, 2009.
Available: http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/The%
20U.S.%20and%20Mexico.%20Towards%20a%20Strategic%20Partners
hip.pdf Access: October, 5 2012.
TRENIN, Dmitri. “True Partners? How Russia and China See Each Other”.
Centre for European Reform. February, 13 (2012). Available:
http://www.cer.org.uk/publications/archive/ report/2012/true-
partners-how-russia-and-china-see-each-other Access: October, 18
2012.
Documents
“India, Japan sign free trade agreement”. The Times of India. Available:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-Japan-sign-free-
trade-agreement/articleshow/7506864.cms Access: October, 15 2012.
243
“Rattling the supply chains Businesses struggle to contain fallout from the
diplomatic crisis”. The Economist, Available: http://www.economist.
com/news/business/21564891-businesses-struggle-contain-fallout-
diplomatic-crisis?zid=306&ah= 1b164dbd43b0cb27ba0d4c3b12a5e227
access: October, 14 2012.
“Vision for the Enhancement of Japan-India Strategic and Global
Partnership upon entering the year of the 60th Anniversary of the
Establishment of Diplomatic Relations." Available: http://www.
mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/india/pmv1112/joint_statement_
en.html . Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan.
“Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Between Republic of India and
Japan”. Available: http://commerce.nic.in/trade/ijcepa_
basic_agreement.pdf Access: October, 15 2012.
Concept Paper Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor, August 2007. Available:
http://www.dmicdc.com/frmDownloads.aspx?pgid=43 Access:
October, 22 2012.
Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Ltd. Available:
http://dfccil.org/DFCC/Projects/Project%20Funding Access,
October, 22 2012.
Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor Ltd: http://delhimumbai
industrialcorridor.com/ Access: October, 22 2012.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs Japan. Economic Relations. Available:
http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/india/index.html
“Japan- Indonesia Joint-Statement the Strategic Partnership for Peaceful and
Prosperous Future”. Available: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-
paci/indonesia/joint0611.html. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan.
“Japan-Vietnam Joint Statement: Toward a Strategic Partnership for Peace and
Prosperity in Asia”. Available: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/ asia-
paci/vietnam/joint0610.html. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan.
“Japan-Thailand Joint Statement on the Strategic Partnership based on the
Enduring Bonds of Friendship - Fostering Confidence beyond the Disasters”.
Available: http://www.kantei.go.jp/foreign/noda/diplomatic/
201203/07thai_e.html. Prime Minister of Japan and his Cabinet.
244
Contribution of India and Japan in Asian Regional
1
Integration and Development
Srinivasulu Bayineni and V. Ramesh Babu
Why Regional Integration?

Regional Integration is an economic process inextricably linked to
political objectives and cultural backdrop of the integrating
countries. Economic integration can be pursued either through an
intergovernmental or supranational approach. Supranationalism
implies that member states agree to exercise some of their
sovereignty jointly. The law passed at the regional level in those
areas where the region is granted competence prevails over the
national legislation and is binding directly on the member states
and citizens of those states. Supranationalism can be seen as a
stepping stone to a federal political structure or confederation but
more recent thinking, based on the European Union (EU)
experience, envisages a more diversified political outcome in
which power is shared at various levels and interacts in complex
ways. With intergovernmentalism, there is no sharing of
sovereignty and each member state effectively retains a veto on
the application of regional agreements. The recognition that
effective integration requires more than simply reducing tariffs and
quotas. Many other types of barrier have the effect of segmenting
markets and impeding the free flow of goods, services,
investments, and ideas, and wideranging policy measures going
well beyond the traditional trade policies are needed to remove
them. Such 'deep integration' was first actively pursued in the
Single Market Programme of the EU, but its elements are now
finding their way into the debate on the other regional
agreements.
1
The paper is presented in International Seminar on India-Japan Relations
Transforming into Potential Partnership, held on 7-9 December 2012, organized by
Centre for Southeast Asian & Pacific Studies, S. V. University, Tirupati-517502.
245
The advent of 'North-South'trade blocs in which, high-income

countries and developing countries are equal partners. Perhaps
the most important example is the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA), formed in 1994 when the Canada-United
States Free Trade Agreement (CUSFTA) was extended to Mexico.
The EU also has North-South arrangements, including the
Europe Agreements that link the EU with the transition
economies of Eastern Europe, a customs union with Turkey, and
agreements with many Mediterranean countries. In addition, the
EU is committed to negotiating reciprocal trade agreements
(economic partnership agreements, or EPAs) with the African,
Caribbean, and Pacific (ACP) countries. These developments
have occurred against the backdrop of globalization: new
technologies and more liberal trading regimes have led to higher
trade volumes, larger investment flows, and increasingly
footloose production. All these considerations reinforced the
need for the World Bank to undertake a new analysis of regional
integration agreements one that would take political effects into
account and would carefully examine the dynamic economic
effects and will assess the needs and opportunities for deep
integration.
Asia has undergone a remarkable economic transformation over
the past 50 years. Now, Asia is an important driving force in the
global economy featuring 4 of the world's 12 largest economies:
Japan, China, India, and Korea, as well as several fastest-growing
ones. Region building is on the move in Asia. Regionalization
implies economic integration across national boundaries, but in a
macro-region of markets for goods, services, labor and
knowledge. It occurred in the East and the Southeast Asian
economies. Asian economies acknowledged regional integration
as a complementary strategy of economic growth and recognized
the need to adapt it with an objective to expand trade and promote
real GDP growth rate. The most widely recognized argument in
favor of regional integration is the benefit of expanding markets
and promoting competition by eliminating barriers to trade
among the member-countries.
246
Contribution of India and Japan in Asian Regional Integration and Development1
Microeconomic decision-making in large firms, particularly

transnational corporations (TNCs) played an active role in the
spread of regionalization in the East and the Southeast Asian
economies. Regional integration or cooperation can address
common concerns, harness strengths and help to overcome global
challenges with less back-sliding possibilities. It helps countries
to overcome the small size of their domestic markets and enable
them to achieve larger economies of scale in production and attain
specialization. Regional integration allows fuller benefits of
increased openness to trade. It is being increasingly realized that
regional development cooperation and integration are the
effective policy instruments for locking in reforms and improving
the investment climate.
During the last millennium, different geographic Asian economic
regions had fairly good economic relations, albeit they were not
economically integrated in the modern economic meaning of the
term. Smooth trade flows and active commercial activity led to
prosperity in many parts of Asia. Historical evidence is available
to show that the Eastern, Southeastern and Southern regions of
Asia continually interacted economically with each other and a
good deal of commercial activity existed among them for
centuries. Integration of Asian economies, particularly those from
the South, East and Southeast Asia is neither a novel concept nor a
new phenomenon. During the post-War era, regional integration
became a significant component of international economic
order.While Asian economies promoted regional trade and
investment in an extensive, enthusiastic and functional manner,
there were several reasons why the Asian economies spurned
formalized regional cooperation. Thye were:
The heterogeneity of the region is much higher than that in the
other regions like the Western Europe and the Latin America.
It discouraged launching of such institutionalized regional
integration initiatives.
Several neighboring economies did not have amicable
historical and political relationship, while there were others
that were even hostile to each other.
247
Emphasis on nationalism in economic policies was another

reason. Many economies were more focused on promoting
their narrow national interests and specific industries than on
underpinning the regional economic strengths.
Due to their penchant for outward economic orientation the
dynamic Asian high-performing (AHP) economies
established liberalized trade and FDI policy regime early in
their growth endeavors, which ran counter to the doctrine of
institutionalized regionalism.
Several Asian economies developed strong trade and
investment bonds with the industrial economies, particularly
the United States (US), during the post-War era, which in turn
delayed the formation of formal regional groupings.
Therefore, the time has come for greater Asian regional economic
integration; India and Japan must play a major and proactive role
in all future endeavours towards this. Only an integrated Asia
will be able to find its right place in shaping the global economic
governance structure. This paper seeks to analyze India's efforts
at regional integration in Asia and explore the future
opportunities and also aims to discuss the implications of Japan-
India partnership for the regional project, the regional identity,
and the regional balance of power.
Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) between India
and Japan
India and Japan share the view that Asia is the new development
engine in the 21st Century. Asia represents half of the world's
population, includes the world's second economic power, two
giant nations that have grown at a fast pace and a collection of
new industrialized countries. Asia has a high potential for
economic cooperation with a vertical specialization, dense
regional networks for production, and more than 55 per cent
intra-zone trade. India and Japan have a long history of trying to
strengthen trade relations, starting with the Agreement on
Commerce between India and Japan in 1958. The overall India-
Japan trade talks on bilateral trade and investment began in 1978.
248
A Joint Study Group was formed in April 2005 during Japanese

Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visit to India. This is in line
with Japan's intention of strengthening its economic partnerships
with Asian countries through expansion of trade and investment
and through harmonizing common rules in various fields and
facilitation of the movement of people in order to develop and
strengthen the competitiveness of the entire Asian region. The
study concluded that there is a huge untapped potential to further
develop and diversify the economic engagement between India
and Japan.
Therefore, the two countries negotiated on a traditional bilateral
FTA consisting of tariff elimination and reduction at the core with
the aim of realizing an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) in
a way consistent with the World Trade Organization principle.
While the EPA negotiation between India and Japan is ongoing,
the two leaders of both the countries in 2006 declared the “India-
Japan Special Economic Partnership Initiative” (SEPI). This
initiative is meant to promote the enhancement of investment
from Japan to India and help develop India's infrastructure and
manufacturing capacity. The main components of SEPI include
the development of infrastructure and promotion of
manufacturing, trade and investment;
human resource development for promotion of
manufacturing;
science and technology initiative;
peopleto-people exchanges; and
regional and multilateral cooperation
Negotiations for an EPA covering a wider range of issues
including market access in trade in goods, rules of origin, custom
procedures, trade in services, investment, intellectual property,
non-tariff barriers, competition etc are underway. The EPA
should be defined as a framework of institutional arrangements
that can achieve deeper economic cooperation than a simple FTA,
encompassing all aspects of bilateral economic relations such as
249
the liberalization of trade in goods and services, investment,

economic cooperation and other areas of cooperation for mutual
benefit. So the India-Japan EPA may cover, but may not be limited
to:
trade in goods;
trade in services;
measures for trade promotion;
promotion, facilitation and liberalization of investment flows;
and
measures for promoting economic cooperation in identified
sectors.
Liberalization of trade in goods under the EPA would improve
trade flows between the two economies and promote further
intra-industry and inter-industry trade. An EPA will also serve as
a building block for regional economic integration on a larger
scale. On October 25, 2010, leaders of Japan and India declared the
successful conclusion of negotiations for the EPA between the
two countries. Finally, Japan and India signed the much-awaited
EPA on the 16th February 2011 that would abolish duties on more
than 90% of trade for 10 years. The deal would eliminate tariffs on
90% of Japanese exports to India, such as auto parts and electric
appliances, and 97% of imports from India, including agricultural
and fisheries products, until 2021. India and Japan have set a
target of achieving $25 billion worth of bilateral trade by 2014
from the present $10.3 billion.
The Agreement inter alia provides 'schedule for India', a list
detailing product wise plan for reduction/elimination of duties
for imports into India and a similar 'schedule for Japan'. The
quantum of duty reduction under EPA will vary from product to
product. Therefore, some products may see a complete
elimination of duties on 1st April 2011 itself while others may see
a gradual reduction over the years. Sensitive sectors for India and
Japan are fully protected and will not see any tariff change. A
descriptive list of goods for import into India and the time period
250
over which basic customs duty would be eliminated is given

below:
Description of Goods Period in which tariff

Sl.No.
to be reduced
1 Most of the textile products including yarn and fabric Immediate
Computer printers, PCs and other automatic data
2 Immediate
processing machines
Cell phones and other types of telephones, networking
3 Immediate
equipment and SIM cards
4 Capacitors, diodes, specified measuring instruments Immediate
5 Lubricating oil 7 years
6 Specified petroleum products 10 years
7 Most metals and articles thereof 10 years
8 CDs, DVDs, watches, musical instruments 10 years
9 Arms and ammunition 10 years
10 Certain types of furniture 10 years
Source: Ministry of Finance, India and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan, Report of the
India-Japan Joint Study Group, 2006.
The sensitive goods' list which will not see any change in the rates
would inter alia include most of the automobiles, TV sets, air
conditioners, fruits, spices, wheat, basmati rice and edible oils. A
descriptive list of goods for import into Japan and the time period
over which the customs duty would be eliminated is as under:
Description of Goods Period in which tariff

Sl.No.
to be reduced
1 Specified petroleum products Immediate
2 Ores, slag and ash Immediate
3 Inorganic chemicals and specified organic chemicals Immediate
4 Machines mechanical and electrical, and parts thereof Immediate
5 Most Textile and textile products Immediate
6 Specific types of fish and fish meat 7 years
7 Specified iron and steel products 10 years
8 Certain fruits like oranges, apples, grapes 10/15 years
Source: Ministry of Finance, India and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan, Report of the
India-Japan Joint Study Group, 2006.
251
Apart from the concessional duties on the products, the EPA

envisages measures for promoting services such as financial
services and telecommunication services between the two
countries. Further it provides an encouragement to movement of
people between the two countries.
Trade between India and Japan
The success saga of Japanese official development assistance to
India was initiated in February 1958 with the disbursement of the
first yen credit to the tune of 18 billion yen (US$50 million) given
out following the visit of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. The
amount was to be utilised by India to import goods and
machinery from Japan. Besides, the Indo-Japan Trade agreement
was signed in February 1958 under which both sides gave each
other the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) status in trade, tariffs,
business, travel, residence and shipping. Besides, India also
liberalised trade with Japan by choosing to withdraw application
of Article XXXV of the former General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade (GATT). The first ever Japanese industrial mission to India
was led by President of Toshiba Electric Company Ishizaka Taizo
in April 1952 with a view to decipher the possible areas of
cooperation as well as to seek reasonable prices for Indian iron ore
and manganese exports to Japan.
Japanese companies have sought to benefit from India's activism
in signing FTAs with other economies with which Japan already
holds strong economic ties. The India-ASEAN Free Trade
Agreement is one such example. In August 2009 in the
culmination of India's 'Look East Policy, an FTA was signed with
ASEAN and was ratified in August 2011. Between 2010 and 2012,
India-ASEAN trade increased by 30% with prospects of reaching
$70 billion in 2012. Japan-India trade has been looking upwards
since around 2003, and exports from Japan to India in products
such as steel, automobile parts, processing machinery have
increased. In early 2011 when CEPA was signed, trade stood at
approximately $10 billion with aspirations to reach $25 billion by
2014. The total trade between the two countries in 2010-11 was
US$ 13.8 billion. This is only about 1 per cent of Japan's global
252
trade. In contrast, the trade with China, Japan's top partner, was
US$ 163.2 billion in the first half of 2011, setting a new record on
the first half-year basis. On the other hand the total trade between
India and Japan has already reached US$ 13.2 billion during the
first nine months of 2011, indicating an increase of 23.9 per cent
over the same period of previous year. Japan's exports to India
witnessed an increase of 26.1 per cent by January-September,
2010, to reach US $ 8.11 billion while its imports from India rose by
20.6 per cent to US $5.09 billion. Thus, India's trade with Japan has
steadily improved in the recent years (Table-1).
Table-1: India's Trade with Japan (Millions of US dollars)
Year Exports Imports
2000 1,767 2,016
2001 2,011 (V) 2,134
2002 1,776 1,914
2003 1,748 2,460
2004 1,911 2,921
2005 2,393 3,855
2006 2,767 4,462
2007 3,606 5,891
2008 3,214 7,286
2009 3,186 6,386
2010 4,832 7,791
Source: Direction of Trade Statistics, IMF, Washington DC, 2007 and 2011.
The main items of India's exports to Japan have been minerals

such as iron ore (36% in 2010), metal products (16%), food
products including marine products (15%), raw materials (15%)
and chemical products (8%). It has been noted that the prices of
certain products that India exports to Japan are significantly
higher than India's exports to other countries. This is due to the
much higher cost of certification by the Japanese agencies as
compared to the Indian agencies. It has been suggested by India's
Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development
Authority (APEDA) that the Japanese government accord Indian
253
certification agencies an equal status as that of Japanese agencies.

This can particularly boost exports of organic products to Japan
which include basmati rice, honey, spices, tea and dry fruits.
India's major item of imports from Japan has been general
machinery constituting 31% of total imports in 2010. This is
followed by iron and steel accounting for 23%, electrical
machinery and transportation machinery constituting 10% and
8.5% respectively. However, the share of Japan in India's trade
has been falling significantly over the years; Japan remains an
important trade partner of India. But, India has been only a
marginal trade partner for Japan. India constituted just 0.6% of
Japan's global exports as well as imports in 2005. Thus, Japan's
trade with India has steadily improved in the recent years (Table-2).
Table-2: India's Trade with Japan (Millions of US dollars)

Year Exports Imports
2000 2,488 2,637
2001 1,940 2,212
2002 1869 2090
2003 2396 2174
2004 3044 2611
2005 3524 3194
2006 4486 4117
2007 6165 4159
2008 7910 5270
2009 6332 3729
2010 9052 5683
Source: Direction of Trade Statistics, IMF, Washington DC, 2007 and 2011.
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)

India's economic growth is extremely favorably placed in
Japanese perspectives and is generating strong imperatives for
Japan to engage with India in a substantial manner. The Japanese
Prime Minister Noda's visit in December 2011 has reaffirmed this.
The key announcements during this visit included a revised
254
bilateral currency swap arrangement from 3 to 15 billion US

dollars and the intention of the Government of Japan to make
available for Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor (DMIC) projects
Japan's public and private finance totaling 4.5 billion dollars in the
next five years. With regard to FDI the cumulative inflows from
Japan since April 2000 April 2011 are about US$ 5.5 billion, 4 per
cent of total inflows into India. Japanese FDI into China in just
2010 was more than US$ 22 billion. On the other hand FDI inflows
into India from Japan from April 2010 March 2011 were US$ 1.5
billion. The figure for Jan-Sept 2011 is US$ 834 million, a 44 per
cent increase over the same period of the last year. In fact the
Japan External Trade Relations Organization (JETRO) figure for
Financial Year 2010 is even higher at US$ 2.8 billion as it takes into
account the 're-invested earnings'.
Table-3 gives the FDI inflows and outflows of India and Japan
during 1990-2010. Japan is known for its outward FDI and its
inward FDI flows have been relatively low. On the other hand,
India had significant FDI inflows and also outflows. India's FDI
inflows rose from about 2% of gross fixed investment in 1995 to
about 7% in 2006 and 10% in 2008, before declining sharply to
4.5% in 2010. In the case of Japan, FDI inflows as a proportion of
gross fixed investment reached just above 2% of its fixed
investment in 2007 and declined thereafter and turned negative in
2010. Turning to outbound FDI, Japan's outflows rose from 1.5%
of its gross fixed investment in 1995 to about 4% in 2005 to a high
of 11% in 2008. India's outward investment rose substantially
since 2005 to above 4% of its fixed investment but declined to
below 3% of its fixed investment in 2010.
Table-3: FDI Inflows & Outflows with respect to India and Japan
1990 1995 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
FDI Inflows (US$ Million)
India 237 2,151 3,588 7,622 20,328 25,350 42,546 35,649 24,640
Japan 1,806 41 8,323 2,775 -6,507 22,550 24,426 11,939 -1,251
255
1990 1995 2000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

FDI Inflows as a percentage of Gross Fixed Capital Formation
India 0.3 2.2 3.3 2.9 6.6 6.2 9.7 8.2 4.5
Japan 0.2 0.0 0.7 0.3 -0.6 2.2 2.1 1.1 -0.1
FDI Outflows (US$ Million)
India 6 119 514 2,985 14,285 17,234 19,397 15,929 14,626
Japan 50,775 22,630 31,557 45,781 50,264 73,548 128,019 74,699 56,263
FDI Outflows as a percentage of Gross Fixed Capital Formation
India 0.0 0.1 0.5 1.1 4.6 4.2 4.4 3.7 2.7
Japan 5.2 1.5 2.7 4.3 4.9 7.3 11.2 7.1 5.1
Source: UNCTAD (2012), World Investment Report 2012, UN Publications, New York.
However, the factors that have contributed to the changing

Japanese perception of the Indian economy include the economic
growth despite the global economic downturn, domestic
demand, projections of expansion of India's working population
aged 15-64 over the long term, strengthening ties with the other
East Asian economies particularly South Korea, and
geographically strategic position of India to develop as a
production and export base for the growing market in the Middle
East and Africa. Thus, India offers a huge domestic market and
will grow to be a leading economic power. Japanese companies
have begun to increasingly commit themselves to India. The
number of Japanese companies in India has increased from 267 in
January 2006 to 438 in January 2008 and from 550 in October 2008
to 725 in October 2010. Their investment value has more than
doubled to 189 billion yen in 2007-08 and totalled to 809 billion
yen in 2008-09, outstripping Japanese FDI into China. Although
Japanese FDI into India declined steeply to 89.3 billion yen in
2009-10, it soon recovered to 168.2 billion yen in 2010-11. Table-4
shows the sector-wise Japan's FDI in India during April 2000 to
January 2011. Table-5 presents rank-wise top 10 countries FDI in
India during April 2000 to April 2011. Mauritius got the first rank
accounting 552 million dollars with 51 percent and UAE bagged
256
10th rank accouting 19 million dollars with least 1.7 per cent. But
Japan is 6th ranker in India accounting for 55 million dollars with
5 per cent.
Table-4: Japan's FDI in India during April 2000 to January 2011
Rank Sector FDI ($ million) % share
1 Automobile Industry 13.6 40.4
2 Service Sector 7.3 21.7
3 Electrical Equipments 5.8 17.3
4 Industrial Machinery 3.6 10.8
5 Trading 3.3 9.8
Total 33.6 100.0
Table-5: Foreign Direct Investment in India (100 million dollar)

Rank Country 2010 April 2000 to April 2011 Percentage Share
1 Mauritius 70 552 51.1
2 Singapore 17 131 12.1
3 USA 12 95 8.9
4 UK 8 66 6.1
5 Netherlands 12 57 5.3
6 Japan 16 55 5.1
7 Cyprus 9 50 4.6
8 germany 2 31 2.8
9 France 7 25 2.3
10 UAE 3 19 1.7
Total 156 1081 100.0
The governmental support has come in the form of the Special

Economic Partnership Initiative (SEPI). This has several high
visibility flagship projects like Western Corridor of the Dedicated
Freight Corridor (DFC) and the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial
Corridor (DMIC). The total volume of Japanese ODA loan
committed for the first phase of the Western Corridor is about 405
257
billion Yen. The DMIC is projected to attract foreign investment

worth about US$92 billion and will be built around DFC and will
include cooperation in development of sea ports on the west coast
and industrial estates and Special Economic Zones with high
quality physical and social infrastructure through collaboration
between private and governmental sectors of India and Japan.
The Japanese government and private companies are now more
willing to commit themselves to infrastructure development in
India. Poor conditions in infrastructure used to constitute the
most formidable barrier keeping the Japanese companies away
from investing in India. However, given that India is going to
invest as much as $500 billion in infrastructure development
during the 12th Five Year Plan. The Japanese companies have
come to realize that it will surely provide major business
opportunities for them. Some Japanese companies are keen to be
suppliers of mechanical equipment, notably generation turbines
or rolling stock in Ultra Mega Power Projects or Dedicated Freight
Corridor. Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor and Dedicated
Freight Corridor between Mumbai and Delhi will be among the
priority areas of Japanese government-sponsored investment
into India.
However, other prominent studies on investment options have
been giving India a very high ranking as an investment
destination, albeit next to China. The World Investment Report
2009: Transnational Corporations, Agricultural Production and
Development, UNCTAD had predicted FDI growth in areas such as
infrastructure and retail in both China and India. The findings of
the World Investment Prospects to 2011: Foreign Direct Investment
and the Challenge of Political Risk throw more light on India as an
investment destination:
India ranks number three among the most preferred FDI
locations.
India is ranked second among the top recipient countries for
'new' FDI projects.
Its business environment ranks for the period 2007-2011 is 54, 8
places up from 2002-2006 and just one rank below China.
258
Prospects and Challenges

The current paper will estimate the economy wide impact of EPA
between Japan and India. The Signing of the 'Strategic and Global
Partnership' agreement, as well as a variety of other
undertakings, including reciprocal state visits every year and the
negotiations on Economic Partnership Agreement, reflect a deep
and mutual interest to seek an even stronger bilateral relationship
between India and Japan. As a result of the flowering
relationship, 2007 was declared the Indo-Japan friendship year.
The number of Japanese delegations visiting India over the past
few years shows that India is a significant beacon on the Japanese
investment radar. The economic integration is most evident in the
East Asia (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, China and
the ASEAN countries). Intra-regional trade as a share of East
Asia's total trade increased from 36.8 per cent in 1980 to 54.5 per
cent in 2006. That is lower than the comparable share for the EU
(65.8 per cent), but higher than for NAFTA (44.3 per cent) and
much higher than for the other developing-country regions (eg.
15.7 per cent in MERCOSUR).
Japanese investment in India has reportedly doubled in the last
two years and today India's trade with Japan stands at USD 10.3
billion. Indian Commerce minister expects bilateral trade of USD
25 billion by 2014, perhaps through increase in Indian exports
which today constitute less than one percent of Japanese imports.
For Indian exporters, EPA may open various sectors of Japanese
economy like chemicals, pharmaceuticals, textiles while Japan too
will find it easier to introduce its products into India.
A 2008 survey conducted by the Japan Bank for International
Cooperation (JBIC) concluded that India has become the most
favoured investment destination for long term Japanese
investments. According to the latest data released by the
Department of Policy and Promotion (DIPP), Japan ranked 6 in
terms of cumulative FDI in India, with US$3,047 million from
April 2000 to July 2009. Japanese companies have begun to
increasingly commit themselves to India. However, the following
two challenges should be addressed for further expanding India-
Japan economic relations.
259
First, the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor should be started

along the right line, which will be the touchstone for future
India-Japan collaboration.
Second, human exchanges should be promoted by all means
for cementing and expanding bilateral relations.
There is no doubt that Tokyo and New Delhi have enough areas of
convergence, providing an enduring and durable foundation on
which a superstructure of relations has been built. Hence, with the
growing importance of the Asia region globally, it is incumbent
on India's part to forge closer economic ties within the Asian
region. It can be rightly said that Asia cannot do without India,
and likewise India cannot do without Asia.
References
ADO (2011) Asian Development Outlook 2011: South Economic Links,
Published by Asian Development Bank, Manila.
Ahmed, S., India-Japan FTA in Goods: A Partial and General Equilibrium
Analysis GTAP Resource. Paper Presented at the 13th Annual
Conference on Global Economic Analysis, 9-11 June 2010, Penang,
Malaysia.
Bhalla, A. S., and P. Bhalla, Regional Blocs: Building Blocks or Stumbling Blocks?
New York: St. Martin's Press, 1997.
Bilal, Sanoussi, “Why Regionalism May Increase the Demand for Trade
Protection.” Journal of Economic Integration, 13, 1998.
Bhattacharya, S. and B. Bhattacharyay, Gains and losses of India-China
Trade Cooperation A Gravity Model Impact Analysis, Working Paper
Series 1970, Munich: Center for Economic Studies, 2007.
Encarnation, Dennis J., Japanese Multinationals in Asia. Regional Operations in
Comparative Perspective, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Embassy of India in Japan, India at a glance, http://www.embassyofindia
japan.org/, 2012.
260
Frankel, Jeffrey A. The Regionalization of the World Economy. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press, 1998.
Japan-India Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA)," Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Japan, http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/fta/
india.html.
Kondo, M. "Japan-India Relationship - How Do Japanese Companies View
India's Infrastructure?", Japan Spotlight, Vol. 25, No.5 (2006).
Kondo, M. "Japan and an Asian Economic Community", Asian Management
Review, (2007).
Kalirajan, K. and S. Bhattacharya, Analysis of Constraints to Free Trade
Agreement between India and Japan, Draft, National Graduate Institute
for Policy Studies, Tokyo, and the Indian Institute of Public
Administration, New Delhi, 2008.
Kondo, M. "Growing Economic Relationship between Japan and India",
Contemporary India Forum Quarterly Review, No.5 (2010).
Kawai, M., B. N. Bhattacharyay, and K. Mukhopadhyay, “Forging a
Comprehensive Economic Partnership between India and Japan: Impact,
Prospects and Challenges”, Paper presented at the 9th Biennial Pacific
Conference, April 26-29, 2011, Brisbane, Australia.
Ministry of Finance, India and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japan, Report of the
India-Japan Joint Study Group, 2006, http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/
asia-paci/india/partner0504.html
Matsushima, D. “Accelerating Japanese FDI into India under the Upgrading
DMIC”, Contemporary India Forum Quarterly Review, No.9 (2011).
Prabhakar, H.S., “Role of ODA in India-Japan Economic Relations”, Journal
of Indian Ocean Studies, Vol. 13, 2005.
Rjamohan, C., “Japan and India: Challenges and Prospects in Asia and Pacific in
the 21st century”, Tokyo: Mita Kaigisho, Symposium held on 10th March,
2006.
Rajamohan, P. G., D. B. Rahut and J.T. Jacob, “Changing Paradigm of Indo-
Japan Relations: Opportunities and Challenges”, Indian Council for
Research on International Economic Relations Working Paper No. 212,
2008.
Thomas, Prince Mathews, “Why Japanese Steel Companies Are In India,”
Forbes India, 21 February (2011).
261
UNCTAD (2007), World Investment Report 2007, UN Publications, New

York.
York.
York.
Wilson, D. and R. Purushothaman, Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050.
Global Economics Paper No. 99 .New York: Goldman Sachs, 2003.
World Bank (2012), World Development Report 2012, Oxford University
Press, New Delhi.
262
Indo-Japan Relations and Asian Balance of Power
Sudhir Singh
The end of the cold war has witnessed a new realization of Indian
realism based on foreign policy. The launching of “Look East
Policy” in 1992 was an important step in this direction as far as
Asian balance of power is concerned. In the aftermath of its
“Look-East Policy”, India economic links with the ASEAN
Countries in general and Japan in particular have seen a constant
improvement. In 2010-2011, the amount of trade was US $ 57
billion. India and the ASEAN have agreed to work towards
meeting an ambitious trade target of US $ 70 billion by 2012. India
Japan bilateral trade was 17.7 $ billion in 2010-2011 and slated to
increase rapidly due to inherent nature of growing bonhomie.1
We are aware of the fact that divergence of opinions was
expressed since the end of the cold war that Asia would be an
important player in the 21st century world. With the end of the
cold war new lines were brought by the formulators of foreign
policy that both the World and the Asian system must be multi-
polar. This is one of the most significant divergences of interests
between India and China, which believe World must be multi-
lateral but Asian balance of power must be uni-polar super
headed by China. Japan also thinks similar to the Indian line;
hence since the end of the cold war, bilateral relationship between
India and Japan has been deepening. It is due to the growing
convergences between both the countries. There are diverse
shared concerns of both the countries like the G-4 campaign for
enlargement of United Nations Security Council, cooperation to
guard against China's hegemonic role in Asia , joint strategies to
handle maritime and space security issues, etc. This is vindicated
with the frequent high voltage meetings between the leaders of
1
Annual Report, 2011-2012, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India,
New Delhi, 2012, P-7-8.
263
both the countries.2 In comparison to the relations with China

such bilateral visits are extremely productive. For example,
during Prime Minister, Koijumi's visits to India in 2005, an eight
fold initiative was launched between both the countries. It
included the following points;3
o Enhanced dialogue and exchanges , including high-level
strategic dialogue
o Comprehensive economic engagement
o Enhanced security dialogue and cooperation
o Science and technology initiative
o Cultural and academic initiatives
o Cooperation in ushering in a new Asian era
o Cooperation in the UN , specifically for Security Council
Reform
o Cooperation in responding to global challenges and
opportunities
Particularly the India-Japan relationship has grown rapidly for
the last one decade. Due to the inherent geo-political, economic
and strategic dimensions this bilateral relationship is all set to
reformulate new Asian balance of power based on multiplicity.
No concept in the realm of international politics has been
discussed more often than the balance of power. It has been
2
While two Indian Presidents visited Japan viz Rajendra Prasad in 1958, and R.
Venkataraman in 1990 , no Japanese Emperor visited India . However Japanese
Prince visited India twice in 1960 and 1992. Nine Japanese Prime Ministers
visited India viz. Kishi in 1957, Ikeda in 1961, Nakasone in 1984, Kaifu in 1990,
Miyazawa in 1992, Mori in 2000, Koijumi in 2005, Abe in 2005 and Hatoyama
in 2009, while only eight such reciprocal visits were from India viz. Nehru in
1957, Indira Gandhi in 1969, Rajiv Gandhi in 1985, P.V. Narasimha Rao in 1992,
A.B.Vajpayee in 2001, Manmohan Singh in 2006, 2008 and 2010. MEA Report
on India-Japan Relations at http;//meaindia.nic.in/meaxpsite/foriegnrelation
/japan.pdf.
3
Ministry of External Affairs Annual Report 2005-06, Government of India,, New
Delhi, 2006, P- 34.
264
defined in so many ways , despite diversity of descriptions it

remain an ambiguous idea. Used objectivity or descriptively, the
term indicates the relative distribution of power among states
into equal or unequal shares. Traditionally, it refers to a state of
affairs in which no one state predominates over others.
Prescriptively , it refers to a policy of promoting a power
equilibrium on the assumption that unbalanced power is
dangerous. Prudent states that are at a disadvantage in the
balance of power will [ or at least should] form an alliance against
a potentially hegemonic state or take other measures to enhance
their ability to restrain a possible aggressor. Also, one state may
opt for a self conscious balancing role, changing sides as
necessary to preserve equilibrium. A balance of power policy
requires that a state moderate its independent quest for power,
since too much power to one state may bring out self-defeating
reactions of fear and hostility from other states.4 China, Japan,
India and Vietnam are indulged in the balance of power within
Asia and other countries do not want China's supremacy
therefore their bonhomie is deepening in an excellent manner
since last one decade and all is set to grow in the foreseeable
future. In the year 2012, China has exposed that it could use force
to take Islands of East China Sea under the Japanese rule for many
decades. In many areas of China including Hong Kong protests
against Japan had been organized which demanded capture of
Japan ruled Islands in East China Sea. Including the United
States, India had also insisted on amicable resolution of disputes
and adherence to international law by all the concerned parties.
Because of border disputes, India is also apprehensive about
Chinese steps. Therefore it has strengthened its bilateral
relationship with Japan in a massive manner. These events
vindicate that balance of power theory is working well in Asian
theater and all is set to sustain the process due to Chinese
reluctance to accommodate the aspirations of other countries.
4
Grifiths, Martin & Terry O Callaghan, Key Concepts in International Relations,
Routledge, London, 2004, P-2.
265
A new architecture of power within Asia is emerging. In this

process many traditional players have to lose some power, while
some new players are supposed to acquire new acumen in the
chessboard of this emerging power game. Long back during the
Peloponnesian War, Trucydides (c. 471-400 BC), the great
Athenian historian, regarded in the west as the founder of
international relations theory, identified the root cause of the war
between Sparta and Athens as their struggle for power. He
argued, “ what made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian
power and the fear which this caused in Sparta. In the first stage of
the war , Sparta, the predominant power, decided to wage war
against Athens ; while in the second stage, Athens , the rising
power , was determined to conquer Sparta.5 Of course, time and
context have changed but the real struggle of power still holds the
same dimension.
The new balance of power in Asia is all set to reshape the existing
power architecture. However the theory of balance of power
according to its proponents has come into being with the theory of
Prisoner's Dilemma. Balance of power has been one of the most
debated concepts of the international relations. The balance of
power is a kind of compromise among the states that find the
order preferable to absolute chaos, even though it is a system that
favors the stronger and more prosperous states at the expense of
the weaker. Great powers play the dominant role in balance of
power system because of their preponderant military force and
their control of key technologies.6 The cold war era just after the
end of the Second World War is a classic example of balance of
power between the United States and the Soviet Union. In the post
cold war era even the prevalence of the anarchic international
environment has created a fear psychosis. Military build-ups and
its competition by rival powers have left every harbinger of the
international system insecure. Therefore all countries are trapped
5
Qing Simei, From Allies to Enemies ;Vision of Identity , and U.S- China Diplomacy,
1945-1960, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2007, P- 297.
6
Griffiths, Martin & Terry O Callaghan, Key Concepts in International Relations,
Routledge, London, 2004, P-13.
266
in a dilemma. This kind of phenomenon is called the Security

Dilemma.7
Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was one of the founders of Non
Alignment Movement just after the end of the Second World War
and he insisted that there is a fundamental difference between
Asia and Europe. Europe had the legacy of conflict and in contrast
Asia had a little legacy of conflict and had a better spirit of
cooperation. According to him
“There are many ways of distinguishing between what may be
called the approach of Asia and the approach of Europe .... Europe
has a legacy of conflicts of power and of problems which come
from the possession of power…The European approach is a
legacy of the past conflicts of Europe. I do not mean to say that we
in Asia are in any way superior, ethically or morally, to the people
of Europe. In some ways I imagine we are worse. There is,
however, a legacy of conflicts in Europe. . . There is no basic legacy
of conflict [in Asia] .. . That is a very great advantage for Asia, and
it would be a folly in the extreme for the countries of Asia and for
India, to be dragged in the wake of the conflicts in Europe”.8
Right from Keshore Madhubani to many pundits of international
relations have said that Asia is emerging but the billion dollar
question is why Asian powers are not cooperating and thus
negating the utopian idea of cooperation among the Asian
countries better than the European countries dreamt by the
Wilsonian practitioner of foreign policy, Nehru. It is the lust of
balance of power and historical baggage both are the propelling
factors for increasing cold war within Asia and thus negating the
utopian ideas of Nehru of Asian cooperation. China, India, Japan,
South Korea, Indonesia, Iran and Vietnam are some of the
important Asian powers. The changing power configuration in
Asia has turned Nehru's hypothesis and Asia seems to follow
7
Herz, John, H, Idealist Internationalism and Security Dilemma, World Politics,
Volume-2, 1950,P-157-158.
8
Jawaharlal Nehru, India's Foreign Policy: Selected Speeches, Sept. 1946-April
1961 (New Delhi: Publications Division, Government of India, 1961), pp. 22-23.
267
European model of conflict. However the post second world war

Europe has emerged as a beacon of cooperation and has won
Nobel Prize for peace [2011-12] and must be emulated by other
regional groupings. Major Asian countries are not cooperating
because there is a divergence of interests among them. China
wanted its unipolar dominance over Asia but wanted multi-
polarity at the global level. India, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia,
Iran and Vietnam wanted both Asia and the globe to be multi-
lateral. Long back Kautilaya, one of the earliest strategic thinkers
had stated that convergences of interests are the basic
determinates of foreign policy. There are convergences of
interests between India and Japan. This bilateral relationship
could be one of the most deepening relationships of 21st century
Asia. It is also an open secret that they had average relationship
during the cold war. Even after the cold war during 1998 Pokhran
bomb blast , it took the world by surprise. Many countries
including Japan reacted sharply to the tests. It suspended all
political exchanges and even economic assistance was frozen for
nearly three years. However, a turnaround in the damaged ties
was achieved in August 2000, when the then Japanese Prime
Minister Yoshiro Mori paid a five-day visit to India. Mori and the
then Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee called for a
“global partnership.” From then on, the relations have seen a
steady progress. During the visit of the Indian Prime Minister
Manmohan Singh to Tokyo in 2006 during the tenure of Shinzo
Abe, the two Prime Ministers decided to go for a “strategic
partnership.”
Japan imposed sanctions on India during the atomic explosion in
1998. But a lot of water has already crossed over the Ganges since
then. China-Japan divergences are increasing since the last many
years. In July 2012 , Japan recalled it envoy from Beijing over the
disputed territory in the East China Sea.9 It is another coincidence
that in July 2012 only, China refused to issue Visa to an athlete
belonging to Arunachal Pradesh, which China perceives as its
9
Japan Recalls China envoy over territory dispute, The Hindu, New Delhi, July
16, 2012.
268
own territory.10 Despite 15 rounds of high voltage bilateral

dialogue till January 2012 there is not an iota of progress over
thorny boundary dispute between India and China. Other
divergences like water flow from Tibet, trade deficit and many
other issues are also there. These prevailing situations have
brought India and Japan closer. Chinese officials are worried that
the growing relationship between India and Japan is its main rival
in the recent years and that it is meant to contain and counter
Beijing. According to two leading foreign policy experts from
China Institute of International Studies “ India's border dispute
with China has yet to be resolved , therefore it views a stronger
relationship with Japan as a way to counter balance China's
growing influence in the Asia-Pacific region.”11 As China's
dispute with Japan escalates over the Islands in the East China
Sea, China seems worried that India will throw its weight in favor
of Tokyo. Chinese experts believe that India and Japan share
much strategic common ground on China. First time probably in
contemporary history, Chinese experts have accepted that India
is working on the reciprocation of Chinese policy of encircling
India within South Asia and therefore deepening its relationships
with all estrange neighbors of China.12
It is also a fact that after the end of the cold war India has emerged
as a stable economic hub and Japan being one of the biggest global
investors has a stake in the increasing profile of India at the global
level.
India-Japan relations have undergone a significant and
qualitative shift in the recent years. The government and the
people of Japan were appreciative of India's sympathetic
response to the earthquake and tsunami that struck the country in
March, 2011, and then during the ensuing nuclear crisis also,
10
Dasgupta, Saibal, MEA fumes as sports min team ignores China sunb, The
Times of India, New Delhi, 15 July 2012.
11
Dasgupta, Saibal, China sees growing India-Japan ties as move to counter it,
Times of India, New Delhi, September 20, 2012.
12
Ibid.
269
India sent a variety of relief materials. The Japanese Prime

Minister, Mr. Yoshihiko Noda, came to India on a State visit on 27-
28 December, 2011, for the Annual Summit between the two
countries. A Joint Statement titled “Vision for the Enhancement of
India-Japan Strategic and Global Partnership upon entering the
year of the 60th Anniversary of the Establishment of Diplomatic
Relations” was signed by the two Prime Ministers during the
Annual Summit. During the visit, the Japanese side renewed its
commitment to flagship infrastructure projects like the Delhi-
Mumbai Industrial Corridor Project and the Dedicated Freight
Corridor West Project, and expressed support for the new
Chennai- Bengaluru Industrial Corridor Project.
The External Affairs Minister visited Tokyo for the 5th Strategic
Dialogue, which was held on 29 October, 2011. Indian Defence
Minister visited Japan from 1-3 November, 2011, for the annual
Defence Ministers' meeting. The year 2011 also saw visits by
Indian Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, S&T and Earth
Sciences (January-February 2011), Minister of Commerce and
Industry (February 2011), and Minister of State for Planning,
Science & Technology and Earth Sciences (October 2011) to Japan.
The Lok Sabha Speaker also visited Japan from 2-6 October, 2011,
along with a Parliamentary delegation. In 2011, the bilateral trade
between the two countries reached $17.7 billion.13 It is expected
that this figure will increase further as a result of the India-Japan
Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA),
which came into force on 1 August, 2011. For the 8th consecutive
year, India in 2011 continued to be the largest recipient of
Japanese ODA. During the New Delhi visit of the Japanese Prime
Minister Noda in December 2011, the Japanese side renewed its
commitment to the implementation of flagship infrastructure
projects, namely, the Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor project
and the Dedicated Freight Corridor West Project and expressed
support for the new Chennai-Bengaluru Industrial Corridor
project.
13
Ministry of External Affairs Annual Report, Government of India, 2011-12, New
Delhi, P-28.
270
United States as a Factor

President George W. Bush ruled 8 years between 2001 and 2009.
He had intended to provide a new place to India in Asia; however
the foundation was laid down in the last days of President
Clinton, when Indian Prime Minister , Atal Bihari Vajpayee
outlined that United States and India were natural allies in 2000.
During President Bush era this relationship was further
expanded and put China in a situation which is known as
'Prisoner's Dilemma' in international politics. China was of course
one of the factors of President Bush's outreach to India. It was
clearly articulated by Robert Blackbwill , U.S Ambassador to
India for the first two years of President Bush rule.
“President George W. Bush based his transformation of United
States-India relations on the core strategic principle of democratic
India as a key factor in balancing the rise of Chinese power. To be
clear, this was not based on the concept of containing China. As
you know, there is no better way to clear a room for Indian
strategists than to advocate containing China. Rather, it is
centered on the idea that the United States and India in the
decades ahead would have enormous equities in promoting
responsible international policies on the part of China and that
deep United States-India bilateral cooperation in that respect was
in the vital national interests of both the countries. It was with this
strategic paradigm in mind that the Bush Administration treated
India with at least as much importance as China.”14
China looms large in India's mind. The baggage of 1962 still
hounds Indian psyche. In the meanwhile India-United States
bonhomie remained at a sustainable affair since the last one
decade. China is very sensitive to a growing US-India
relationship. China is fearful that this ongoing closeness is bound
to weak her position and is intended to establish a new balance of
power in Asia which must be based on multi-polarity.
14
“Transcript: Senior Ex-Diplomat on India-United States Relations”, Financial
Times Online, 6 May 2009, available at
<http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1ec735fe-3a12-11de-8a2d-00144feabdc0.html> .
271
Japan-United States bonhomie is one of the oldest in Asia since the

end of the Second World War due to the prevailing situation
during the cold war. The post cold war Asian architecture of
power has further consolidated U.S-Japan relationship. In recent
years, China has been assertive and negating the international
law and rights of the neighboring countries particularly in South
China Sea and East China Sea and considered all the waters as
their own lakes. Japan is not weak like other Chinese contested
neighbors over water and has challenged China. Interestingly the
United States has extended its supported to Japan and reaffirmed
that International Law must be followed. It has further put strain
in the bilateral relationship of Japan and China and it in contrast
strengthens the United States-Japan relationship. This situation is
converging with Indian interests. Therefore since the last one
decade India-Japan bilateral relationship has emerged out as an
important determining bilateral relationship in Asia.
This has cornered China at a certain extent which forced the
Chinese policy formulators to admit the importance of
cooperation while understanding other sensitivities. It is
vindicated by the editorial of June 2009 of 'Global Times' mouth
piece of the Chinese government:
“India has long held contradictory views on China. Another big
Asian country, India, is frustrated that China's rise has captured
much of the world's attention. Proud of its 'advanced political
system', India feels superior to China. However, it faces a
disappointing domestic situation which is unstable compared
with China's. India likes to brag about its sustainable
development, but worries that it is being left behind by China.
China is seen in India as both a potential threat and a competitor
to surpass. But India can't actually compete with China in a
number of areas, like international influence, overall national
power and economic scale. India has apparently not realized this.
Indian politicians these days seem to think their country would be
doing China a huge favor simply by not joining the 'ring around
China' established by the United States and Japan. India's
growing power would have a significant impact on the balance in
272
this equation, which has led India to think that fear and gratitude
for its restraint will cause China to defer on the territorial
disputes. But this is wishful thinking, as China won't make any
compromises in its border dispute with India. And while China
wishes to coexist peacefully with India, this desire isn't born out of
fear.”15
China's concerns about expanding Indo-US defense cooperation
acquired an extra edge as it saw Tokyo join Washington in the
security outreach to New Delhi. Japan has been the last among the
great powers of the world to sense India's rising power potential.
However, during the final years of the premiership of Junichiro
Koizumi and the brief tenure of Shinzo Abe, Japan has moved
rapidly to define a new approach to India.16 Unlike much of East
Asia, India carries no baggage about Japan's history or a grudge
against its nationalism. The implementation of the Indo-US
nuclear agreement and the likely change in Japan's policy on
sensitive exports to India could open the doors for a very
rewarding high technology partnership between Tokyo and New
Delhi. India and Japan have also agreed to expand their current
defense cooperation which is focused on securing the sea-lanes in
the Indian Ocean, immensely vital for Japanese access to energy
and raw materials.17 The United States still remains the biggest
balancer of Asia; therefore the deepening of the United States-
India relationship has pushed forward for a better Japan-India
relationshipalso. We are aware of the Chinese reservations of the
admission of India on the East Asian platforms. India did admit
on these platforms despite Chinese protest, and it has
emboldened Japan to forge a better relationship with India and so
this is bound to deepen in the foreseeable future.
15
“India's unwise military moves”, editorial in Global Times, 11 June 2009, available
at <http://opinion. globaltimes.cn/editor-picks/2009-06/436167.html>.
16
James Lamont, “United States agrees weapons sales to India”, Financial
Times, 20 July 2009, available at <,http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/663e6e04-
7507-11de-9ed5-00144feabdc0.html.
17
Gurpreet S. Khurana, “Security of Sea Lines: Prospects for India-Japan
Cooperation”, Strategic Analysis, Vol.31, No.1, January 2007.
273
Concluding Remarks
Since the end of the cold war coincided by the launching of Look
East Asia policy , India has given unprecedented importance to
Asian balance of power within the contours of its foreign policy. It
was emphasized as the core of post cold war Indian foreign
policy. It was articulated by Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee
during his 2002 visit of Singapore.
“Look East' policy was not limited to Southeast Asia. In his
Singapore Lecture during 2002, Vajpayee declared that
geography and politics make India an important part of the Asia-
Pacific community and that “it does not require formal
membership of any regional organization for its recognition or
sustenance”.18
In the recent years India has shed down its Nehruvian shyness
and has expressed deep interest in the affairs of all issues of the
Asia-Pacific. It could be said that India has now initiated the third
phase of Look East Policy [LEP] with special focus of security issues
besides the other issues of importance. The third phase of the LEP
was marked by India's public claim of its engagement in affairs in
East Asia and Asia-Pacific at large. The move began by the speech
of Indian Defence Minister A.K. Antony in the first ASEAN Plus3
Defence Ministers' Meetings (ADMM) in October 2010 in Hanoi.
Never before had an Indian official publicly supported and
committed to secure the freedom and safety of navigation in the
Asia-Pacific region. It was a bold step which was the need of the
hour in the changing contours of architecture of balance of power
in the Asia-Pacific. Including the friendly countries of the region,
the United States also intends that India must enhance its
presence in the region. It was vindicated by the speech of Defense
Minister, A.K.Antony :
“The security of sea lanes of communication is vital in today's
world. It is in the common interest of nations to keep sea lanes
18
Atal Bihari Vajpayee, “India's Perspectives on ASEAN and the Asia-Pacific
Region”, 21st Singapore Lecture, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 9 April
2002, available at http://www.iseas.edu.sg/ vajpayee.pdf.
274
open, secure and free for navigation, trade and energy supplies.
Piracy remains a serious challenge for the world community, as
we have witnessed in the Gulf of Aden and the adjoining areas.
The Indian Navy is actively engaged in providing anti-piracy
patrolling and escort operations in the Gulf of Aden for over two
years now. India is committed to working together with other
countries in the efforts to address piracy. The security of sea lanes
is important for the Asia-Pacific region, which is now one of the
most important drivers of global economic growth. Through the
Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and
Armed Robbery against Ship in Asia (ReCAAP) and the Malacca
Straits mechanisms, we are partnering with other countries in the
region to improve the safety of navigation in the region.
Cooperative approaches on maritime security would offer
benefits for the region as a whole”.19
Japan is an important power of the East Asia. By all counts it is a
regional power. Growing uncertainty between Sino-Japan
relationships has given a new twist to Japan-India deepening
relationship. India and Japan have been part of many bilateral
and multilateral military exercise with the likeminded countries
since the last one decade. Defense cooperation and non security
threat cooperation like disaster management are also going on.
Both the countries have maintained high level submits for the last
many years and trade is also gradually catching up. In the Second
half of 2012, China has claimed over the East China Sea Islands
which is under Japanese control for the last many decades. China
is willing to transform its new wield aura to dominate its
neighbors which is bitterly resisted by Japan in particular and to
rest of the world in general. India has not only supported Japan in
these disputes but called upon international community to ensure
the compliance of the norm of international law of navigation and
other rights. China has adopted the globalization process in 1978
almost 13 years ahead of India. Therefore Japanese companies
19
India calls for cooperative approach to ensure security of sea lanes, Asian
Military Review, October 12, 2010.http://www.asianmilitaryreview.com/
News/index.php?hNewsId=1359.
275
have invested in China in a massive scale. The conflict over the

Islands between Japan and China and other major divergences
between China and Japan has sowed the seed of trust deficit
between Japan and China. This situation has compelled Japan to
rethink over the relocation of their investments in India. Already
Japan has increased the pace of investment in India but in the
prevailing situation it is bound to further accelerate the pace in
India. India also needs to facilitate the investment through
immediate clearance. Needless to say that it will be positive for
the growth of the Indian economy in a sustainable manner. The
United States' better relationship with Japan and India has further
emboldened the scope of this triangular relationship as the three
large economies and militaries in Asia are poised to influence the
Asian order in the foreseeable future.20 In November 2012, Prime
Minster, Dr. Manmohan Singh had scheduled to visit Tokoyo for
bilateral talks but it got postponed due to the sudden
announcement of election for the Japanese parliament. Despite
that Japanese Prime Minister telephoned to Dr. Manmohan Singh
and stated that our relationship would be deepening further and
that shows the warmness between both the countries. It also
vindicates the point that Japan India relationship is one of the
most important defining the Asian and global relationship of the
21st century.
In recent election ( November-December 2012) former Prime
Minister , Shinzo Abe party has returned into power after gaining
large majority in Diet and declared Abe as the new Prime Minister
of Japan. Since the World War II, Japan has been struggling for
political stability. Frequent change of government has weakened
Japan's standing on certain key foreign policy issues. Prime
Minister, Abe is known for his strong nationalist views. Asked
how he could maintain his staunch stance on the East China Sea
islands, called Senkaku in Japanese and Diaoyu in Chinese, while
protecting Japan's substantial business interests in China, Abe
blamed Beijing for any deterioration in business ties.
20
Chenllancy , Brahma, Asian Juggernaut; The Rise of China , India and Japan,
Harper Collins, New Delhi, 2006.
276
"It was wrong for China, as a country responsible to the

international community, to achieve a political goal by allowing
damages to Japanese-affiliated companies and Japanese nationals
that have made contributions to Chinese economy, Abe said. "I
want to clearly state that."21 In his previous tenure, Prime Minister
Abe was known for his inclination for India. In the fast changing
geopolitics of East Asia, Chinese assertive initiatives will further
cement India-Japan bilateral relationship.
Given the Kautilyan notion that there are no permanent friends or
foes in a foreign policy and only convergences of interests are the
pushing factors in the foreign policy, India Japan relations are
bound to reach new heights in the foreseeable future because of
the growing convergences of interests of both the countries. Since
both countries are important stakeholders of Asian balance of
power their increasing bonhomie is all set to keep up the multi-
polarity within the emerging Asian security architecture.
21
China's island dispute moves 'wrong': New Japan PM, The Daily Star, Dhaka,
January 11, 2013.
277
'From Rhetoric to Reality'Examining the Potentials of
Indo-Japanese Partnership in 'Emerging Asia'
Sabu Thomas
Abstract
Foreign policies after 9/11 are becoming more realistic and collaborative in
attitude and structure. Every actor promotes alliances and partnership not
only in the economic front but also deep into the strategic framework. The
networking of terrorism and extremism made it impossible to validate the
moorings of a lone power. The argument is that the multipolar power
structuring initiated by globalisation was further accelerated with post 9/11
international psyches and later culminated into a working model by
economic crisis. The present international system refutes the hegemony
implications and reinstates larger interdependence among the states.
Regional arrangements and regional solidarity are the pivots of new global
order.
Along with these developments, the concept of 'emerging Asia' occupies a
dominant issue of debate in the foreign policy circles, particularly after the
global recession. Many economists visualize 'Asian Rise' that may
revolutionise political equations in the international arena in the near future.
This necessitated a rethinking of the priorities of Indian foreign policy. It has
to build up strong partnership with Japan. Being founded upon strong
democratic principles the two nations have much to share and a possible
coalition will be more stable and sustainable. There are many potential
avenues of co-operation between the two states. In this context the future of
Asia as well as the global order is well determined by a strategic alliance
between the two powerful democratic states. The present paper attempts to
examine the significance and prospects of Indo-Japanese relations in a
multipolar world order.
Keywords: India, Japan, Multipolarism
Introduction
The global power structure is becoming multilateral and
competitive. It is moving to a multipolar system whereby
regional power blocks assert significance in the international
power game. The global financial crisis also altered the power
equations, consequently ensuring a larger venue for stable and
emerging economies.1 In a changed world the power factor in
278
'From Rhetoric to Reality'Examining the Potentials of Indo-Japanese Partnership in 'Emerging Asia'
international politics is redefined in terms of realistic concerns.

Dependence on mere military power renders the national
equations unstable and fragile. Power equations in the
international political scenario indicate a new polarity trend. In
the post world war framework, the graph was a straight line, with
two major actors setting the global agenda and priorities. But the
scene shifted towards a unipolar movement with the accidental
demise of one of the major players.
However the post cold war unipolar scenario was undermined by
a global recession which put all the structures in rumbles. Political
equations were rendered complex, fixing a multipolar framework
of power operations. In the context of turbulent globalisation2
many of the former major powers including the USA were forced
to make structural power adjustments to sustain with the new
international order. The globalisation of the economy has
provided for more economic independence throughout the world
and less reliance on superpowers controlling the world's supply
lines.3
The economic situation in a post crisis society is more favorable
for the emerging economies in the East. During this period a few
developing powers, including India and China proved their
capacity and strength against the global wave of economic
recession. This implies the emergence of an 'Asian age'. The future
of the international system is heavily dependent on the Asian
power equations. Political and strategic considerations invalidate
the possibility of an Indo-Chinese alliance to exert Asian power.
In this background the debate on India- Japanese relations
assumes larger significance. The two countries have many
common interests and heritages. Unlike their regional partners,
the two democracies have lesser but directly confronting issues
and concerns. There is a larger venue for mutual give and take
scenario between these powers.
New Global order
For a long period of history, the Europeans dominated much of
the world. Later America joined the former to determine the
279
destiny of the world. With their advanced technological and

economic tools United States emerged as a superpower within a
short span of time. During this time the concept of polarity was
clearly identified and accepted in the vocabulary of international
politics. Polarity is in fact relational and conditional. It is a
dynamic concept moving with various power structures in a
given time and given situation.
Multipolarity is defined as a distribution of power in which more
than two nation-states have nearly equal amounts of military,
cultural, and economic influence. The classical realist thinkers are
of the opinion that a multipolar system is more stable and secure.
Differing from the historical and ideological perspective, foreign
policy in a multipolar setting will be guided by prudent
strategies, taking into account the larger security and economic
concerns.
In 2008, when the EU world share of GDP reached 14,820 trillion
dollars, the USA lost its leadership as the biggest economy in the
world. The gap between these two entities was insignificant, but
for several years it was constantly increasing showing quite
persistent negative tendency for the USA. This issue became more
grave with the unprecedented economic growth of China. The
UN report on global economic situation 2012 clearly brings out
the new global growth pattern. The United States is steadily
losing its growth dominance against China and India. The
emergence of the European Union also provided no alternative
power fulcrum. The resultant vacuum provided space for a
multipolar model.
Table.1 Global Growth 2012
GDP Growth (Percentage) 2011 2012* 2013* 2016*
United States 1.6 2.7 3.2 3.2
Europe 1.7 2.4 2.4 2.3
Japan and Other developed countries 0.2 2.3 2.3 2.5
China and India 9.0 9.0 8.8 8.5
(Source, Compiled from World Economic Situation and Prospects 2012, UN 2011, P-39 *Anticipated figures)
280
Asian Dreams
The global recession and globalization paved way for a new
player in the power game-Asia. It is assumed that Asia's time has
come. Its role in the world economy continues to growboth in the
world trade and finance and in the economic governance.
Countries all over the world are interested in Asian successes in
development and managing globalization (Singh 2010). The
region's economies offer a broad range of experiences from
countries at various stages of development and faced with
different sets of challenges, and the broader global economy can
draw from them a rich set of lesson. Consequently Asia's voice is
becoming increasingly influential in global economic and
financial discourse.
With the acceleration of globalisation in the late 90's South Asia
became a dear shopping mall for financial globalisation. With the
ever-growing population and unexplored market potentials,
multi national corporations fondled the Asian dream in a big way.
At the same time a number of Asian states grabbed the
opportunity to improve their capacities. China and India were the
first to equip themselves with right tools to face the challenges of
globalisation. China provides a typical example. According to
2006 figures the annual gains to the United States from increasing
economic interaction with China was about $70 billion.
India can be considered as the second largest power in the region.
In the matter of trade and economy the country achieved parity
with global standards. According to the International Monetary
Fund statistics, India is the eleventh largest economy in terms of
GDP and fourth largest economy in terms of purchasing power
parity. It managed to fight the global financial crisis and to secure
its economy. As such it becomes a preferred investment spot for
foreign investors. With regards to military power India is well
equipped to meet any challenges. Indian nuclear capabilities are
now part of the normal Asian geopolitical scene in a globalizing
world that is defined more than ever before by Asian growth and
dynamism(Kraig 2009).
281
Japan and India

India and Japan have certain common heritages. It can be traced
back to the 6th century when Buddhism was introduced to Japan.
Japanese support and assistance to Subhash Chandra Bose and
the Indian National Army (INA) during the Second World War
can be considered as the corner stone of bilateral relations
between the two countries in the modern era.
In India, there was a great admiration for Japan's post-war
economic reconstruction and subsequent rapid growth. This
admiration is still a dominant factor in Indo-Japanese relations.
Japan and India signed a peace treaty and established diplomatic
relations on 28th April, 1952. This treaty was one of the first peace
treaties Japan signed after the World War II. In the post World
War II period, India extended great assistance for Japan's
recovery from the devastation. Following Japanese Prime
Minister Nobusuke Kishi's visit to India in 1957, Japan started
providing loans to India in 1958. Since 1986, Japan has become
India's largest aid donor.4 As of 2012 statistics 76.2% of India's
bilateral sovereign debt originates from Japan.
Fig-1, India's Composition of Bilateral Sovereign
Debt at end-March 2012 (per cent)
(Compiled from Government of India, Ministry of Finance, 2012:28)
New World and New Partnership

During the Cold War period, India-Japan relationship remained
cordial, but the outcomes were very low. This low hype in
bilateral dealings can be traced back to the particular nature of
282
political alliances in the cold war period. Japan was evidently a

close ally of USA whereas Indian foreign policy was more
inclined towards the soviet bloc. The psychological barriers
which were created between the two, however, started
disappearing when NAM of which India was a leading member,
lost its relevance at the end of the Cold War. India adopted an
open economic model with which Japan was comfortable with.
The warmth in Indo-Japan relations coincided with the economic
liberalization of India. With the end of License Raj, a number of
Japanese companies viewed India as a potential market.5
The Japanese interest in India also coincided with the global
financial crisis. The crisis rendered many strong economies
unstable. Public debt in advanced economies has climbed to its
highest level since World War II. In Japan, the United States, and
several European countries, public debt now exceeds 100 percent
of GDP. Correcting fiscal imbalances have become a high priority
for every state (IMF, 2012). The situation forced strategic thinkers
to design new alliances and relations. The potential of Indian
market was a major attraction for policy makers in Japan. India,
on the other hand, was in urgent need for Japanese technology
and investment to boost its growth potentials. Japan is an
economic giant on a declining curve. Japan is rich in high
technology and flush with investible capital. India, meanwhile, is
entering a high growth trajectory. Its growing economy is hungry
for technology and investments. There is a clear complement
here, which has enormous potential. Table-2 indicates the new
global investment scenario. India and China are the golden spots
for private investors and hence Japanese interest in India can be
well justified.
Table-2 Emerging Investment Scenario
Growth of private investments (Percentage) 2011 2012 2013 2016
United States -1.1 -2.2 5.2 6.9
Europe 2.4 .05 3.9 3.9
Japan and Other developed countries 3.7 2.8 4.9 3.1
China and India 8.9 8.1 8.1 7.4
(Source. Compiled from World Economic situation and prospects 2012, UN 2011, P-39)
283
Regional security issues also invoked new vibrancy in the

relations. The strategic thinking in both sides visualized Indo-
Japanese alliance as an effective check to Chinese hegemony in
the region. USA also favour an “Asian power equilibrium.”6 The
US is trying its best to utilize the existing India-Japan security
framework in its interest and has been arguing for a network of
security alliance in Asia. To them this may provide a democratic
security network to contain issues like terrorism in the region.
Seen from the Japanese perspective, Japan need a likeminded
partner such as India as it envisages a relative decline in the US's
power in East Asia.
The Indo-Japanese alliance was elevated to the status of "Global
Partnership in the 21st Century" with the Japanese Prime
Minister's landmark visit to India in August 2000. Yoshiro Mori,
the then Prime Minister of Japan, Atal Behari Vajpayee, the then
Prime Minister of India announced that Japan and India are
partners in peace, with a common interest and complementary
responsibility for promoting the security, stability and prosperity
of Asia as well as in advancing international peace and
development. The partnership was further extended to deeper
economic collaborations with the 2005 visit of the then Japanese
Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi.7 Possibilities of larger
cooperation in areas such as environment, energy, disarmament
and non-proliferation were also focused during the discussions.
In 2006 Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh paid an
official visit to Japan and the two Prime Ministers signed a Joint
Statement 'Towards India Japan Strategic and Global
Partnership'.
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Japan in 2010 was
another progressive step in bilateral relations. The countries
agreed to foster increased business exchanges and people-to-
people contact. There was also an agreement on tariff abolition.8
In 2011 Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement
(CEPA) was also signed between the countries, ensuring closer
ties between India and Japan.9
284
The 2011 India-Japan Defense Ministers' Meeting in Tokyo

widened the door for further cooperation in the field of defense.
The major issues discussed during the meeting include, maritime
security, anti-piracy measures, freedom of navigation and
maintaining the security of Sea Lanes of Communication to
facilitate unhindered trade by the sea routes. At present India and
Japan are exchanging escort schedules of their naval vessels
deployed in the Gulf of Aden region signaling coordination in
anti-piracy efforts.10
Conclusion
In the current scenario Indo-Japanese relations are presumed to
be in the right track. India is widely seen as a key geopolitical
player in helping bring stability to a South Asian region
overshadowed by violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. At the
same time the Japanese determination and commitment together
with its technological advancements offer a polestar in the region.
A close and intimate alliance between the two powers will lead to
the emergence of a new power bloc. India and Japan share a
global vision of peace, stability and shared prosperity. In a
multipolar world India and Japan have a larger role and
responsibility. A strategic alliance between the two is the best
possible and ethical option in international scenario.
Endnotes
1
In the present context global recession refers to the financial crisis started in
2007. It is a crisis triggered by a liquidity shortfall in the US banking system. It
has resulted in the collapse of financial institutions and subsequently of
many national economies.
2
“The term 'globalisation' is widely used to describe a variety of economic,
cultural, social, and political changes that have shaped the world over the
past 50-odd years, from the much celebrated revolution in information
technology to the diminishing of national and geo-political boundaries in an
ever-expanding, transnational movement of goods, services, and capital.
The increasing homogenisation of consumer tastes, the consolidation and
285
expansion of corporate power, sharp increases in wealth and poverty, the

'McDonaldisation' of food and culture, and the growing ubiquity of liberal
democratic ideas are all, in one way or another, attributed to globalization”.
(Guttal, 2007:523).
3
Silva M.N., Multipolarism is Upon Us, The Westphalian post, March 20,
2010,http://westphalianpost.wordpress.com/2010/03/20/multipolarism-
is-upon-us/ accessed on 05-08-2012.
4
Source, http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/india/index.html,
accessed on 22-10-2012.
5
During the earlier periods Japanese regarded India as a local power, always
hyphenated with Pakistan. India's nuclear program also was an issue of
contention, which ruled out closer bilateral relations. India's nuclear tests in
1998 marked the lowest point in bilateral relations. Japan suspended all
political exchanges; even economic assistance was frozen for nearly three
years. However in 2011 notwithstanding its own nuclear disaster, Japan
assured India of taking forward the civil nuclear cooperation during the fifth
b i l a t e r a l S t r a t e g i c D i a l o g u e . S o u r c e ,
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-japan-discuss-nuclear
pact/article2580648.ece, accessed on 15-10-2012.
6
In this context it should be noted that Japan and India are natural allies, with
no negative historical legacy and no conflict of strategic interest. New York
Times observes, “India's growing economic strength in recent years has seen
it adapting its foreign policy to increase its global influence and status and to
meet the challenges of the 21st century. In the past few years, New Delhi has
expanded its strategic vision, most noticeably in Asia, and has broadened the
definition of its security interests. As a result, India-Japan relations have
undergone a paradigmatic shift which has seen an attempt to build a
strategic and global partnership between the two countries. India and Japan
share a special relationship as fellow democracies without hegemonic
interests and with a similar propensity to seek peaceful resolution of conflicts
and greater economic engagement in the Asian continent”. See. Aarti Betigeri
, J a p a n a n d I n d i a : A s i a ' s O d d C o u p l e ,
http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/26/japan-and-india-asias-odd-
couple/, Accessed on 25-10-2012.
7
During the visit it was decided that both the countries would strive to
develop closer dialogue and collaboration to secure peace, stability and
prosperity in Asia, promote democracy and development, and explore the
possibilities of closer regional cooperation in Asia.
8
As per the agreement, tariffs will be removed on almost 90 per cent of
Japan's exports to India and 97 per cent of India's exports to Japan.
286
9
CEPA is an important milestone in the trade and economic relations
between the two countries. It was designed to deepen the economic
engagement between the two countries in terms of trade in goods, services
and investment.
10
Prasad KV,India, Japan to step up defence cooperation,The Hindu, New
Delhi,3-11-2011, http://www.thehindu.com/news/international/india-
japan-to-step-up-defence cooperation/article2593792.ece, accessed on 12-
10-2012.
Bibliography
Egberink, Fenna, and Frans-Paul van der Putten. "ASEAN and Strategic
Rivalry Among the Great Powers in Asia." Journal of Current Southeast Asian
Affairs, 29, 3, (2010): 131-141.
International Monetary Fund. World Economic Outlook. Washington, DC:
International Monetary Fund, Publication Services, 2012.
Guttal, Shalmali. "Globalisation." Development in Practice 17, 4-5 (2007): 523-
531.
Government of India,. India's External Debt,A Status Report 2011-12. New
Delhi: Ministry of Finance, 2012.
Kraig, Michael. "India as a Nuclear-Capable Rising Power in a Multipolar
and Non-PolarWorld." Strategic Analysis 33,. 3 (2009): 365-380.
Rajamohan, PG, Dil Bahadur Rahut, and Jabin T Jacob. Changing Paradigm of
Indo-Japan Relations: Opportunities and Challenges,Working Paper 212. New
Delhi: Indian Council For Research on International Economic Relations,
2008.
Rostiashvili, Ketevan. "The USA: Challenges of the Superpower." Journal of
Global Analysis 3, no. 1 (2012): 23-51.
Sincai, Iulia Monica Oehler. "The Strategic Character of the Cooperation
Relationship Between the EU and The BRIC Countries." Romanian Journal of
European Affairs Vol. 11, No. 2, 2011 11, no. 2 (2011): 31-46.
Singh, Anoop. "Asia Leading the way." Finance and Development, June 2010: 5-7.
Wang, Qingxin Ken. "In Search of Stability and Multipolarity: China's
Changing Foreign Policy towards Southeast Asia after the Cold War." Asian
Journal of Political Science 6, no. 2 (1998): 57-78.
287
India-Japan Relations: A Historical Perspective
N. Sreeramulu
The political and economic aspects of India-Japan relations have

evolved gradually over the years. The idea is to identify the
drivers bringing the two sides together as well as issues of
common concern which could be built on to strengthen the ties. It
will conclude by highlighting the opportunities and challenges
the two sides are likely to face in the process of building relations.
The rich cultural, literary and religious linkages coalesce to
provide a positive bedrock to India-Japan relations. Historically,
India-Japan relations have existed for more than a thousand
years. It is said that Japan first came into contact with India during
the reign of Emperor Kimmei (539571 A.D). Buddhism was the
first common link between both the sides, although it did not
really find its way directly between the two countries. Korea was
instrumental in introducing Japan to the Buddhist philosophy.
Buddhism became the state religion of Japan under the rule of
Prince Umayado (593622 A.D). The Indian missionary,
Bodhisena, also visited Japan in 736 A.D. along with his followers
and became the Buddhist Bishop (known as the Brahmin Bishop)
of Japan till he died in 760 A.D. The Buddhists promoted art,
culture and philanthropy, thereby gradually spreading the roots
of the religion to many parts of the country, even as it branched
out into several cults and sects of their own like Tendai and
Shingou. The influence was deep and widespread. According to
Haijima Nakamura, “Without Indian influence, Japanese culture
would not be what it is today.”
These Japanese links with Buddhism in India continue even today
with a number of Japanese visitors travelling to cities like Bodh
Gaya. The Japanese initiative (along with Singapore) behind the
resurrection of the Nalanda University in Bihar, India as a
288
prominent seat of learning also has its roots and connections with
Buddhism. The aim is to establish the Nalanda International
University by the year 2013.
The second vital connection between both the sides was a result of
the common feeling of Pan-Asianism. During the period of the
Indian Renaissance (18811905), India was keenly looking at
building a spirit of Asian oneness. The trend towards Asian-ness
identifying with and aligning with the rest continued as
intellectuals like Swami Vivekananda travelled to many parts of
the region. Swami Vivekananda visited Japan in 1893 and was
impressed by Japanese nationalism. He advised Indian students
and intellectual leaders not to waste their time on “touchableness
and untouchableness of this food or that” and emulate the
Japanese for what they were doing. An Oriental Youngman's
Association formed in 1900 served as a platform for increased
interaction between Japanese, Indian and other Asian students in
Japan. The Association became a ground for the conditioning of
many Indian students who began to deplore British colonialism.
This was the time when the Indian national movement against
colonialism by the British East India Company was vibrantly
active. The British were upset with the negative influence of
Japanese on them and put forth a rule whereby Indian students
visiting Japan had to produce a “certificate of identity signed by a
responsible officer”.
Despite Japan's aloofness with the rest of the world, the
connectivity between India and Japan remained with the fast-
growing Japanese spinning industry, which found India as a
source of raw cotton. India also became a destination for the
finished Japanese goods. Perhaps the most significant bilateral
contact was that of Indian industrialist J.N.Tata who visited Japan
in 1893 and set up an office there. The initiation of trade ties led to
the establishment of a Japanese consulate office in Bombay and
consulate general office in Calcutta. An Indo-Japanese Trade
convention was also signed in 1894 which marked the beginning
289
of “opening of regular ocean transport” between the two sides.

Japanese calls for an Asian identity incorporating countries like
Persia, India, China and Japan emerged during the Russo-
Japanese war in 19041905. A number of Chinese, Korean, Indian
and Vietnamese students came to Japan in order to see how the
Japanese dealt with Europeans. Following its victory in the war
with Russia in 1905, Japan came to be perceived as a role model on
combating colonialism, even as its own negative imperial
dominance was watered down. In India, there was an obvious
and vocal admiration of the Japanese success. In her address to the
Indian National Congress in 1917, Annie Besant spoke about the
Japanese victory. Indian leaders like Gandhi, Nehru, Gopal
Krishna Gokhale and Bal Gangadhar Tilak were all unanimous in
their jubilation over Japanese victory. This spirit and inspiration
drawn by Indians, according to some “partly influenced the
growth of extremism in Indian politics”, which in turn marked
the third strand in historical linkages between India and Japan.
The Japanese responded positively to the Indian enthusiasm. The
speaker of the Japanese House of Peers said: “It was the sacred
duty of Japan as the leading Asiatic state to stretch a helping hand
... to India, who is capable of civilisation, and free them from
European yoke.” An Indo-Japan Friendship Association had been
formed in 1903. As many as 54 Indian students travelled to Japan
in 1906. Trade also grew manifold after the Japanese victory in
her war with Russia. There was clearly a genuinely positive and
friendly feeling among the Japanese with regard to Indian
independence struggle much to the consternation of the British.
The fourth and very close historical linkage evolved during the
period of the Indian national movement. The Indian
independence movement did not nurture and grow in isolation
but grew greatly from the neighbouring countries in Asia which
were also reeling under the Western imperialism. The feeling of
affinity with Japan was such that even when Indians decided to
follow the swadeshi system of boycotting foreign goods, Japanese
290
goods were excluded from the banned category. In fact, a

prominent Indian newspaper Kesari clearly called on people to
choose Japanese goods over all other foreign manufactured ones.
India-Japan relations during this period would thus be
incomplete without a brief discussion of how prominent Indian
revolutionaries like Rash Bihari Bose and Subhash Chandra Bose
developed intimate links with Japan and the Japanese. R.B.Bose
who came to be known as the “Bose of Nakamuraya” not only
took political asylum in Japan, married a native woman, but also
spent his entire life in the country as a Japanese citizen (from 1924)
till his death in January 1945. Bose's journey to Japan started off in
1915. He eventually not just mastered the language over the years,
but also wrote extensively in the Japanese press and literature
soliciting support for Indian independence struggle. Perhaps one
of the most significant impacts of Bose's shifting to Japan was the
kind of public opinion he could influence and tilt in India's favour
through his writings as well as his network of connections with
opinion leaders. Prominent Japanese journalists like Minetaro
Yamanaka who were associated with the Asahi Shimbun and later
with the Shonen Kurabu and King magazines were impressed from
their interactions with Bose and projected the image of Indian
revolutionaries as an intelligent group from a civilised country.
The noted historian, nationalist and ardent supporter of Indian
independence, Shumei Okawa, wrote a book entitled The Current
Status and the Origin of the People's Movement in India in 1916, in
which he warned the Japanese people that by trusting the British
they were making a grave mistake and endangering themselves
to incurring the wrath of 300 million Indians. There was
tremendous public sympathy and contempt for the British
government which ordered the deportation of Bose and a few
other nationalists from Japan. Japanese groups like the Genyosha
and Kokuryukai began to connect with spirit behind the Indian
freedom struggle (despite having ideological differences over the
means) as part of their larger aim to work towards the liberation
of Asia.
291
Bose also formed an “Indian Club” in 1921 to promote friendship

among Indians in Japan so as to discuss the emerging political
situation in India. He also authored articles for Japanese
magazines like Kaizo, Gekkan Nippon and Toho Jiron. Bose was able
to evoke empathy amongst several Japanese through his effective
and powerful writings. For instance, Chief Editor of Michi
magazine in which Bose was a regular contributor noted in 1932,
“I have been publishing Mr. Bose's articles every month and each
time I am moved to tears on reading them ... My Indian brethren,
wait! Japan is not always going to be ruled by weak kneed
politicians.” He also launched his own magazine New Asia in
1933.
R.B. Bose's legacy of revolutionary streak in seeking
independence for India as connecting with the Japanese was in
many ways carried forward by another BoseSubhash Chandra
Bose, who was fast emerging on the horizon of the Indian freedom
struggle. S.C. Bose came to Tokyo in 1943 via Germany and met R.
B. Bose. He had made it clear that he would not mind working
with British enemy statesJapan and Germany in his struggle for
independence. R. B. Bose decided to hand over charge of the
Indian Independence League to S. C. Bose in Singapore and came
back to Tokyo.
Subhash Chandra Bose met Prime Minister Tojo who seemed to
be impressed with Bose's intelligence. According to some, the
INA had been “encouraged” by the Japanese in the hope that it
would lead to a Japanese invasion of India. Bose formed a
Japanese-approved and recognised independent “Provisional
Government of (Azad Hind) Free India” based in Thailand. In
1943, Bose attended the Greater East Asia Conference in Tokyo.
Japan also captured the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and
handed them over to Bose's provisional government as a mark of
recognition to it.
The Indian National Army then, under the leadership of S.C. Bose
decided to enter India with the Japanese Army. Following some
292
initial discomfort over the inclusion of Indian soldiers in its

assault on Indian borders, the Japanese conceded. The INA
attacked and took over the British post at Mowdok in India. The
Japanese had started to feel the heat of the British counter-
offensive. The INA reached and captured Kohima (Assam) and
their counterpart Japanese forces tried in vain to gain control over
Imphal. The combined Indian and Japanese forces finally buckled
under British attack and had to retreat in 19441945. There were
conflicting views on whether the attack was meant to bring parts
of India under Japanese influence. However, evidence points to
the contrary. In a report prepared by the Director Military
Intelligence after assessing public opinion on the Japanese
aggression, it was clearly stated that “to a large extent, the public
opinion is not hostile to Japanese. They are more anti-British than
anti-Japanese and consider if Japanese win the war and come to
India, Indian national aspiration will benefit rather than suffer.”
On the cultural and literary front, the legendary friendship
between Okakura Tenshin and Indian poet Rabindranath Tagore
during this period is well known and documented. Okakura first
visited Kolkata in 1902 with the aim of inviting Swami
Vivekananda for the Parliament of Eastern Religions to be held in
Japan. He also utilised this visit to study Indian architecture and
arts as well as also assist India in its struggle for freedom through
inspiring young Indians to aim for complete independence.
Tagore also visited Japan three times and became a key cultural
ambassador of India in Japan. His school, the Shantiniketan,
hosted several Japanese artists, sculptors and poets. Although
Tagore had tremendous regard for Japan's progress, he
nevertheless warned them to refrain from getting affected by the
ill effects of Westernisation.
This positivity revolving around the notion of Asia and pride over
spirituality gradually melted away to give way to the Japanese
notion of the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere, which was
in no way altruistic and only brought misery to countries under
293
its influence. India did not find a mention in the proposed sphere,
which included China, Manchuria, Indonesia (under Dutch
control) and Indo-China (under French control). The long-term
aim of the Japanese was to create a political and economic bloc
independent and self-sufficient in itself. Japan's wartime Prime
Minister Tojo referred to India in his speech to the Japanese Diet in
1942 after the defeat of Singapore:
This is the best opportunity for India to rid itself of the despotic
policy of oppression by the British and participate in building the
Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere. The Japanese Empire
hopes to restore India to its original status, whereby the nation
belongs to Indians, and we will provide all help to the patriotic
efforts of the Indian people. It would be really unfortunate if India
does not return to its history and traditions; awaken to her mission.
Some scholars are of the view and have contended that the Indian
freedom struggle movement had been “encouraged” by the
Japanese. According to their viewpoint, the Japanese hoped that
they would ultimately invade India. The idea was to invade the
whole of China along with India in order to complete the sphere.
Thus, with Japan's militarisation and imperialist lash-out in the
1930s, relations between India and Japan began to deteriorate.
Japan's advancement into Chinathe Manchurian Incident, its
actions in Korea (19101911) eroded the positivity which defined
and underlined bilateral relations between both the sides. Nehru
was critical of Japan and openly criticised Tokyo for its
Westernisation, expansionism and imperialistic tendencies. He
noted, “Japan not only followed Europe in industrial methods,
but also in imperialistic aggression.” When India gained
independence, India took on the yoke of anti-colonialism and
anti-imperialism. Nehru organised a conference on Asian
relations in March 1947. The Bandung Conference was held in
1955. This was Nehru's “honeymoon” period with China.
Following what became the starting point of a relative
294
estrangement in India-Japan relations, came the end of the Second

World War in which Tokyo was defeated. Following this defeat in
the War in 1945, Japan came under the control of the US-led Allied
Forces led by General Douglas Mac Arthur. The foundation of
Japanese post-war foreign policy was laid within the paradigm of
the “Yoshida Doctrine”. The San Francisco Peace Treaty was
signed between the Allied Powers led by the United States and
Japan at the Peace Conference held in 1951 bringing an official end
to the War. As many as 48 countries signed the controversial
document. Countries like the former Soviet Union, Poland and
Czechoslovakia refused to sign the treaty, while India, Myanmar
(former Burma) and Yugoslavia abstained from the conference
itself.
India was keen on the need to bring Japan into the normalcy of
statehood based on the idealism and non-alignment in foreign
policy pursued by first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. India
feared that if Japan fell prey to a great power, Cold War rivalry
would be a cause of friction and concern. India was also critical of
the treaty on two clausesone, it perceived the presence of
Occupation forces as a limit on Japan's sovereignty; two, India
was in favour of returning Ryukyu and Bonin islands to Japan.
The treaty was rejected outright by the newly independent India
for being unable to give Japan honour and equality among
nations. However, it was clearly stated that India would conclude
a separate bilateral treaty with Japan. The San Francisco Peace
treaty effectively demilitarised and democratised Japan. In the
aftermath of the conference and signing of the treaty, the
International Military Tribunal for the Far East was set up and
became the platform for another well recognised, documented
and accepted symbol of India-Japan friendship.
During the early post-war years, Japan's positive image of India
came with appreciation of Justice Radhabinod Pal's dissenting
judgement at the Tokyo International Military Tribunal for the
Far East in 1948. The tribunal was instituted in order to try major
295
leadersboth civilian and militaryfor the Second World War and

Japanese actions prior to the War. The trial by the 11-nation
tribunal convicted about 28 Japanese leaders and sentenced seven
to death and 16 to life imprisonment in 1946.
In a landmark statement, India's Justice Pal gave the only
dissenting vote declaring all 28 war-time Japanese leaders not
guilty. In a verdict comprising of seven chapters like “preliminary
question of law”, “rules of evidence and procedure” and finally
“recommendations”, Justice Pal stated:
I sincerely regret my inability to concur in the judgement and

decision of my learned brothers28... For the reasons given...I would
hold that each and every one of the accused must be found not guilty
of each and every one of the charges in the indictment and should be
acquitted of all those charges.
… I have indicated the difficulties that I feel in defining “aggressive
war”, keeping in view the generally prevalent behaviour of the
Powers in international life.
Justice Pal became a symbol of reverence and continues to find a

prominent mention in the context of any mention of Japan-India
relations even today. Thereafter, Prime Minister Jawaharlal
Nehru and his Japanese counterpart visited Tokyo and New
Delhi respectively in the 1950s and were given a warm reception
each.
A fresh chapter in India-Japan relations began with the signing of
the bilateral treaty of 1952. The first Indian Ambassador to Japan
arrived in May 1952, which was followed by the signing of the
Indo-Japan Peace Treaty on 9th June the same year. The treaty
was simple in both content and intent. In terms of content, it
comprised of only 11 articles and some exchange of notes. Under
the clauses of the treaty, the two sides decided to maintain peace
and amicable ties and negotiate on commerce, shipping and
aviation and most importantly, India decided to waive off all
296
reparations claims which might have been due to India in keeping

with wartime actions by Japan. The intent of the treaty was purely
to establish friendship between the two sidesone was trying to
find its post-independence feet from a long era of colonial legacy
and the other was to re-enter the world stage as a defeated yet free
Asian nation. India also became the first recipient of Japan's ODA
in 1958.
However, this enthusiasm did not translate into an upswing in
relations as the Cold War also cast its shadow on India- Japan ties.
The chill in relations was evident since Japan became an ally of the
United States, while India chose to espouse the path of non-
alignment, but with a definitive tilt towards the former Soviet
Union.
The Cold War era was characterised by a division of the world
into two opposing camps led by the former Soviet Union and the
United States. Both sides used economic and military assistance
to build a bloc of their own. There was an active formation of
regional alliances patronized by these two superpowers
including the Central Treaty Organisation (CENTO) and
Southeast Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO). The distance
between India and Japan grew wider in this era. India, despite
choosing to follow a policy of non-alignment, had a definitive tilt
towards the former Soviet Union. Japan, on the other hand, had
become an ally of the United States, placing both sides in opposite
camps. Besides, India chose to follow the import substitution
economic model unlike the liberal capitalist developmental
model followed by most of the East and Southeast Asian
countries. Different economic systems and beliefs therefore
became a barrier in relations. The third reason which chilled ties,
according to Japanese diplomat Takio Yamada, was the Indian
nuclear test of 1974“a huge shock for Japan”which was trying to
work towards a non-proliferation regime. Japan's sensitivity and
deep commitment to a nuclear weapons free world is a result of its
wartime experience of the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
297
Japan, which had become a close ally and a junior partner of the
United States after the war also kept India at an arm's length.
These gaps in relations became only too evident as Japan chose to
remain neutral in India's wars with China in 1962 and Pakistan in
1965. There was also a feeling that Tokyo did not wish to
encourage India as an active player in the region to ensure that
India does not drain the limited resources of regional groupings
like ASEAN countries through her involvement in them.
Conclusion
South Asia was largely a “distant region” for Japan till the late
1990s and did not fall within its definition of the Asia Pacific or
Asia. A common expression among the Japanese, “Beyond the
Arakan Yoma” [in Myanmar] is the “outer world”, clearly reflects
this outlook. Intermittent interactions between Tokyo and New
Delhi did occur, but what they achieved was at the most minimal
level of interaction. Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone
visited India in 1984 and stressed on nuclear disarmament and
economic inter-dependence. The then Indian Prime Minister
Indira Gandhi urged Nakasone to ensure that Japan plays a wider
role than that of an economic superpower, noting that in a
troubled continent like Asia, “Japan is a factor for stability”.
Japan's economic engagement grew somewhat after the visit as
Japan granted a larger yen credit to India for specific projects.
Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi's visit to Japan in 1985 led to an
agreement on technology transfer and assistance in
modernization of Indian railways and textile industries. Rajiv
Gandhi also became the first ever Prime Minister to address the
Japanese Diet where he said, “Our rediscovery of each other must
not be limited to the market place. Let us rediscover ourselves in
the minds and hearts of people ... it is not only for mutual benefit
that we should work together. We must do so in the larger interest
of humankind.”
To sum up, historically India and Japan shared much in terms of
religion and culture, which should have ideally provided enough
298
bedrock for a stable superstructure of relationships. There were a

number of potential binding factors which could glue the two
sides more effectively than they did. Japan had an important
indirect participatory role in the Indian National Movement.
However, the post-war period was underscored by a chill in
relations which summed up to be a considerable loss for both
sides in terms of opportunities which they could have possibly
built upon. This, of course, had to be attributed greatly to the Cold
War international environs which were not a positive incubator
for the furtherance of bilateral ties between Tokyo and New
Delhi. The lack of economic interactions only added to the
problem. It is however very significant to understand this
historical backdrop to help put the relationship in perspective in
the chapters ahead. It is also required to understand what really
drives the two countries towards making efforts to re-build their
relationship in many ways after decades of lull. At the same time,
positive historical legacy has worked to the advantage of ties
simply because today India stands contrasted with many other
Asian neighbours of Japan which harbour and relate to Tokyo
with negative and painful historical memories of the pre-war and
war era. Unlike Japan's relations with neighbours like China and
South Korea, at least India and Japan can look back at history with
some amount of positivity and lack of distrust that tinges its other
relationships.
References
T. R. Sareen, “India and Japan in Historical Perspective”, Lecture Series on
Japan, Issue No. 4 (New Delhi: The Japan Foundation), January 2007, p. 9.
Birendra Prasad, Indian Nationalism and Asia, 1900-1947 (Delhi: B. R.

Publishing Corporation, 1979), p. 31.
Sareen, “India and Japan in Historical Perspective”, p. 12.
299
For these and other details, read Sareen, India and Japan in Historical
Perspective, pp. 1011.
Nakajima, Bose of Nakamuraya, p. 65.
Sareen, India and Japan in Historical Perspective, p. 38.
Nanda, Rediscovering Asia, p. 235.
Deborah L. Haber, “The Death of Hegemony: Why 'Pax Nipponica' is

Impossible”, Asian Survey, Vol. 30, No. 9, September 1990, p. 900.
Foreign Affairs Record, Vol. XXXI, No. 11, November 1985, p. 367 as cited in
Nanda, Rediscovering Asia, pp. 236237.
300
View publication stats

India-Japan Relations: Culture, Religion and Regional Integration

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

India-Japan Relations: Culture, Religion and Regional Integration

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

India-Japan Relations: Culture, Religion and Regional Integration

Book · March 2014

Gundre Jayachandra Reddy

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

©Copy rights 2014 by the editor

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a

First Edition: 2014

Layout & Printed at: D&Dee - Designing and Creative Production,

M. Deenadayal : Research Scholar, Department of History,

About the Book iii

Conflict resolution in North Asian: The impact of culture on 1

Cultural relations between India and Japan: A descriptive 25

Rabindranath Tagore and Miyazawa Kenji: A Vision of a 40

Indo-Japan Cultural Relations, with a Reference to Urdu in 51

Elegant Escalation of Indo - Japan Cultural Relationship 66

India Japan Relations through Buddhist Culture for 97

Buddhism: a comparative analysis between Dalits and 112

Challenges to Japan's Foreign Policy in the Twenty First 128

China-Japan rift and Implications for India 147

Rising China and India-Japan Ties 184

Indo-Japan Relations in the Wake of Emergence of China 201

India and Japan in Asian Regionalization 212

India-Japan Relations in the Era of Strategic Partnerships: 224

Contribution of India and Japan in Asian Regional Integration 245

Indo-Japan Relations & Asian Balance of Power 263

'From Rhetoric to Reality' Examining the Potentials of Indo- 278

India-Japan Relations: A Historical Perspective 288

As Economic borders come down, cultural barriers go up, presenting new

apology, goodwill and forgiveness. The ethics of reconciliation

expected to be reciprocated in the next stage described as

The stage of reciprocal constraint follows on the steps of unilateral

will both see the adversary concession as a sign of weakness and

Kupchan uses several case of histories, among them the German-

collaboration or win-win approach), obliging, dominating, avoiding

a) Implication for the peace-seeking process

approach of conflict resolution. Why is that? In the peace-building

First steps to peace Major criteria Conflict resolution aspect

Before I review Japanese and Chinese styles of negotiation, a few

relationship rather than reaching preferential economic outcome,

b) Conflict resolution among Chinese

A critical aspect of Chinese social relationship and conflict

common way of resolution is to appeal to the detractors' sense of

d) Implication for a peace seeking process involving Japanese

Reciprocal Show of understanding China might not oblige as a

In the right column of Table-IV, I have summarized my

relationship between Japan and China slowly emerged as unable

After all, exchanges between Japan and Chinese society are

Finally, European history has proven that there is more to gain

Lind, J. (2009). “Apology In International Politics”. Security Studies, 18:pp.

Thomas, K.W. (1992). “Conflict And Negotiation Processes In

K. Manjusree Naidu and Sankar Mukherjee

Keywords: Historic Relation, Pre & Post Independence Relationship,

always play a catalistic role in designing other model of

Cultural exchanges between India and Japan began early in the

Japanese Army Academy and Imperial Japanese Army Air Force

after Buddhism developed through the efforts of both the Chinese

the doctrines of Buddhism significantly tried to find a new

Root of culture cemented with the impact of Indian Pre-Independence in

independence movement. The alliance arose from talks between

were made to strengthen bilateral ties. India's 'Look East' policy

US$4.5 billion to construct a railway project between Delhi and

Exchange of expatriates between the countries augments the