The military dialogue seems likely to remain suspended over the arms sales issue; discord over Iran’s nuclear issue may increase and more war of words may define the relationships between the two countries.
The Joint Statement catapulted India-Japan strategic and global partnership to a “New Stage” in which the bilateral relationship is going to be deepened on all fronts, embracing regional, global and economic issues.
To assuage fears, Japan might see merit to take India on board in the form of a naval cooperation framework to secure peace at sea. Developments in the past 4-5 years in India-Japan relations point towards that direction.
After Yukio Hatoyama assumed the office of Prime Minister, Japan’s foreign policy has begun to look different with an element of assertiveness and a greater focus towards Asia.
There is a growth trajectory in defence cooperation between India and Japan, complemented by the burgeoning economic relationship providing robustness to the partnership.
Notwithstanding the community formation ideas in different shapes coming from Japan and Australia, the EAS came out with as many as 42 deals on issues ranging from outstanding trade and economic matters to the launch of a human rights commission.
The appropriate option for the Hatoyama government would be to take incremental steps aimed at building greater confidence and trust amongst Asian nations across a number of policy fronts rather than indulge in advancing grand ideas which appear at the moment unachievable.
The Futenma issue is therefore unlikely to be allowed to derail the decades-old alliance relationship, irrespective of the fact that there is now a government in Japan headed by the DPJ, which was in the opposition since World War II.
True to its planned schedule, North Korea defied warnings from the international community on 5 April 2009, launching a rocket capable of reaching Alaska and Hawaii. As was expected, it stirred a chorus of worldwide criticism. Yet, the emergency meeting of the United National Security Council convened for the specific purpose of debating the North Korean issue remained deadlocked. China armed with veto power remained inflexible in its position and called for “calm and restraint” from the international community in an effort to “safeguard peace and stability of the region”.
