INDIA
AND JAPAN
Making hay under the rising sun
By
M.L. SONDHI
The Pioneer, March 5, 1992
India must
impress upon Japan that its liberalization is not merely to
overcome the BoP crisis but that it is an earnest process to
join the global economic mainstream, says M.L. Sondhi
Indian insensitivity to Japan was in evidence from the time
Prime Minister Kishi paid a visit to India, the first ever
by a Japanese Prime Minister. He was keen to
institutionalize mutual understanding between India and
Japan as part of a new peace order. Unfortunately, Nehru
was so caught up with the hipolarity of the cold war system
that he refused to respond to Kishi’s initiative in any
meaningful manner. As a self-declared interlocutor on behalf
of the Afro-Asian world, Nehru in so many words pooh-poohed
the importance of Japan and refused to foresee any changes
in the global distribution of power. One of the major
weaknesses of Indian foreign policy-making on Japan has been
the lack of deep understanding of Japanese political culture
and the evolution of Japanese foreign policy in both its
political and economic dimensions.
Although there is an impressive record of economic, political
and cultural relations between India and Japan, the cold war
confrontation between East and West inevitably resulted in
Tokyo and New Delhi remaining passive spectators with regard
to many issues on which it was necessary to develop an
integrated approach. Policy makers and intellectuals were
reluctant to evaluate the past on a scientific basis. For
example, the archives of the period of Subhash Chandra Bose
and the Indian National Army were not seriously studied with
the possibility of building a solid future relationship.
Now that the cold war is over it should be recognized that
Bose’s contribution to Indo-Japanese relations is crucial
and it is an important task for historians and policy makers
to sort out the legacy of cooperation between the Indian
freedom movement and Japan so as to build future
Indo-Japanese relations on a firm foundation. To begin
with, the popular misconceptions about the Tokyo Verdict and
the Enemy clause in the UN Charter need to be removed. To
those who are familiar with the documentary sources on the
Tokyo Verdict, the arguments of Judge Radha Binode Pal, the
eminent Indian Jurist sound more convincing and logical
today than the majority judgement which comes out poorly on
grounds of objectivity and rationality.
It is critically important for India and Japan to take the
initiative to develop a movement to depart from the frozen
official attitudes towards the Tokyo Verdict. Although it
may be a long and difficult process, the time is approaching
when the reversal of the Tokyo Verdict will be regarded as a
stage of maturity in international law and relations in the
post-cold war era.
As for bilateral relations, the prospects and possibilities
of cooperation may be categorized under five main programme
areas and prescriptions offered for adjusting Indian and
Japanese policies to the new international environment.
First, initiatives arising out of the liberalization of the
Indian economy. Policy makers of both the countries have to
understand that the changes that have now begun to take
effect in the Indian economy are related to a broader vision
of international, economic and political problems. Both the
Indian government and business firms have to tap the best
sources of economic information and technologies and
managerial expertise to mobilize Japanese surplus for India.
Second, giving impetus to Indo-Japan economic ties. An
important question for economic negotiators from India is
how well they can communicate to the Japanese side the
reality of India’s movement towards global integration.
Japan has enough reason to be cautious about
socialist-minded officials from India, but Indian companies
which are involved in trading with Japan can be important
links for influencing Japanese sensitivities to the Indian
reform package and for stimulating government action for
attracting foreign direct investment from Japan.
The channeling of non-traditional items from India into the
Japanese distribution system requires energized export
drives and penetrating analysis of India’s export
structure. New initiatives should be undertaken to learn
from the experience of other countries which have histories
of export-led growth, and government and private sectors
should join hands to boost Indo-Japanese economic ties.
Third, international capital transfer. Indian officials who
handle economic cooperation with Japan have often failed to
realize that if India is going to make a breakthrough on the
economic front it can only be by tapping Japan as the main
source of capital and technology. Many of India’s economic
actions in the past decades have been painfully out of step
with what was needed for a genuine Indo-Japanese economic
partnership.
The crisis in the former Soviet Union has revealed that much
of Indian economic cooperation with the communist block was
never subjected to real scrutiny. Soviet insolvency has now
placed India in a difficult position. India’s efforts to
move into a free market economy can only succeed by a real
commitment to international competitiveness; viable economic
decisions must therefore be taken in a timely manner if
Japan is to be convinced that India has removed the last
vestiges of Soviet-style economic practices.
Fourth, Japanese overseas investment policy. It is
reasonable to say that if Japan continues to adopt a policy
of “wait and see” towards the Indian effort to become fully
integrated with the world economy, it will not be an
encouraging sign to other countries. For both aid and
commercial borrowing, Japan’s role is crucial if India is to
aim at a high rate of sustained economic growth.
There is no point in only harping on the undesirable
developments on the Indian economic scene. The recognition
that many of India’s problems are of a structural nature is
accepted by the general consensus in the policy making
process. It is therefore necessary that the Japanese side
should reconsider the first impressions about India and
Japanese companies should draw up their investment plans in
India in terms of the new chances for Japan in a changing
India.
On the other hand, India should learn to lobby in Japan in an
effective manner so the Indian liberalization policy is not
seen as an expedient for overcoming the balance of payments
crisis but is perceived as a process which India is
addressing in earnest for realistic solutions to our
economic problems.
Lastly, peace and prosperity in Asia. The Asianisation of
Indian foreign policy and the Asianisation of Japanese
foreign policy are both necessary for developing salient
approaches to major changes in the global political system
and to develop new mechanisms to promote peaceful management
of conflicts in Asia. The Japanese involvement in the
Indian economy should be viewed in the context of the
emerging world order and as an indicator of the
possibilities for long term peace and security in Asia.
At a time when the Soviet Union is facing both economic
bankruptcy and political and social disruption, the new
Indo-Japanese economic relationship will be an evidence of a
programme in developing a more orderly world and help to
strengthen democracy and freedom in Asia.
It is necessary that both India and Japan should find their
place as Permanent Members of the Security Council in the UN
system so that both countries should lend historical and
political perspective to the emerging reality of Asia in the
new world order. |