Tokyo looks at energy security differently than does Washington, or other major global capitals. This persistent and deepening reality—so incongruously at odds with the continual affirmations of solidarity and alliance in the US–Japan bilateral relationship—has substantial grounding in economics. Yet, the contrast in mindset between Japan and the broader world is sharply amplified by differences in domestic institutions and politics. This perceptual gap has major implications for East Asia's energy future and for global geopolitics as well.

Economic globalisation, coupled with geopolitical instability and international terrorism, has made it impossible for any single country to secure its energy supply entirely on its own. The urgent energy security issue has resulted in brisk energy diplomacy with aspirations for cooperation running high among both producing and consuming countries. The concept of energy security needs to be expanded, however, because the real risks are not 'below ground' (a lack of resources) but 'above ground' (political instability). We need a new energy security concept to ensure global energy security.

As the world's fastest growing energy consumer, China has attracted enormous attention over the last few years. This paper looks at the factors influencing China's policies and strategies in its search for energy security and examines whether China can be persuaded to adopt a more integrative stance with respect to energy. It argues that China's pursuit of a policy to secure preferential access to oil and gas resources in politically unstable states could lead to heightened competition with other major importing states and to geopolitical tensions.

A new great game is under way in Myanmar. The huge offshore gas findings stretching from the borders of Bangladesh down to Thailand have resulted in a flurry of diplomatic manoeuvring with China, Thailand and other ASEAN countries as well as United States, India, the European Union, Australia and Russia all playing key roles. The equations are bound to change and many countries, for fear of losing influence with Yangon, are seeking a more 'pragmatic' approach.

Energy security has become a major component of India's national security thinking and policy as its economy has begun to record high rates of growth. The criticality of ensuring access to foreign oil and gas resources will only increase with time as the gap between its demand and its domestic production widens. Furthermore, India's dependence on the seas is particularly overwhelming for its energy 'logistics' in terms of both its domestic supplies and overseas imports.

The central thesis of this article is that the Asian energy consumers would serve their interests well if they look again at their energy frontiers and define them within the contours of Asian energy interdependence rather than triggering an Asian energy race. The three leading Asian consumers, China, Japan and India, are principal actors in the Asian theatre, and their needs, assessments and policies are going to be central in defining the regional energy security agenda. Their current approaches have placed them more as competitors, which could trigger conflict situations.

China's dependence on ship-borne energy resources forms the bedrock of its energy security. Critical to this is the issue of sea lane of communications (SLOCs) safety. SLOC safety is at once a non-conventional security challenge and a military one, which may trigger maritime conflicts. The difficulty in dealing with this challenge is that it is integral to geopolitics and hence subject to complicated major power relations. Geo-strategic politics will increasingly determine Beijing's SLOC policy of political cooperation and military hedging.