top of page

By:

Commodore S.L. Deshmukh

31 October 2024 at 3:00:19 am

A Diplomatic Detour

The Japanese Prime Minister’s decision to skip Assam is a setback for the Northeast, but not for the larger India-Japan partnership. India and Japan share one of Asia’s most understated yet enduring partnerships. Long before the relationship acquired strategic significance, it rested on the quiet foundations of culture and civilisation. Buddhism travelled from the Indian subcontinent to Japan over many centuries, leaving an imprint that still shapes Japanese society. In the modern era, that...

A Diplomatic Detour

The Japanese Prime Minister’s decision to skip Assam is a setback for the Northeast, but not for the larger India-Japan partnership. India and Japan share one of Asia’s most understated yet enduring partnerships. Long before the relationship acquired strategic significance, it rested on the quiet foundations of culture and civilisation. Buddhism travelled from the Indian subcontinent to Japan over many centuries, leaving an imprint that still shapes Japanese society. In the modern era, that cultural affinity has been reinforced by expanding economic ties, institutional cooperation and an increasingly convergent strategic outlook. Strong Bonds The architecture of this relationship is extensive. Organisations such as the Indo-Japanese Association have nurtured cultural and intellectual exchanges since the 1950s, while the Indo-Japanese Economic Cooperation Council has promoted investment, technology transfer and commercial collaboration. Diplomatic forums on both sides have steadily deepened mutual trust, reflecting a shared commitment to peace, stability and prosperity across the Indo-Pacific. Security cooperation has become an equally important pillar. A turning point came in 2008, when India and Japan signed their Joint Declaration on Security Cooperation during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's visit to Tokyo. Since then, bilateral ties have expanded to include regular “2+2” ministerial dialogues, defence exchanges, coast guard cooperation and joint military exercises. The Acquisition and Cross-Servicing Agreement, which entered into force in 2021, has further strengthened operational cooperation between the Indian armed forces and Japan’s Self-Defence Forces. Together with their collaboration through the Quad, these initiatives underscore how the two democracies increasingly view each other as indispensable strategic partners. The diplomatic warmth between the two countries, however, predates the present geopolitical moment. One of the earliest symbols of goodwill came in 1949, when Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru gifted an Indian elephant to Tokyo’s Ueno Zoo. At a time when Japan was struggling to recover from the devastation of the Second World War, the gesture carried emotional significance far beyond diplomacy. Three years later, India signed one of the first post-war peace treaties with Japan, formally establishing diplomatic relations on April 28, 1952. India’s exports of iron ore contributed to Japan's post-war industrial recovery, while Japan gradually emerged as one of India's most dependable development partners. Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi’s visit to India in 1957 marked another milestone, paving the way for decades of Japanese official development assistance. Today, that legacy is visible in projects ranging from metro rail systems to the Mumbai-Ahmedabad high-speed rail corridor, one of the largest Japanese-backed infrastructure investments overseas. Against this backdrop, the decision by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi to cancel the Guwahati leg of her July 2026 India visit has understandably generated disappointment, particularly in Assam. The annual India-Japan summit will now be held entirely in New Delhi. Official explanations have cited parliamentary commitments in Tokyo and scheduling constraints. Diplomacy often leaves little room for certainty, and itinerary changes are not uncommon. Yet symbolism matters in international relations, especially when a region is striving to position itself as a gateway to Southeast Asia. Past Incidents This is not without precedent. In 2019, then Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was forced to cancel his visit to Assam amid protests over the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. That cancellation deprived the Northeast of an opportunity to showcase its growing strategic relevance within Japan’s vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific. It also served as a reminder that domestic political turbulence can sometimes carry unintended diplomatic costs. The latest cancellation comes at an equally delicate moment. Assam has spent years projecting itself as an emerging investment destination. Improved law and order, expanding infrastructure and greater connectivity have encouraged the state government to court foreign investors with unusual vigour. Preparations for the Japanese delegation reflected those ambitions. Guwahati witnessed beautification drives, road improvements and hospitality planning. Japanese officials reportedly spent weeks assessing the local ecosystem, infrastructure and investment climate ahead of the proposed visit. The economic stakes were hardly insignificant. Prime Minister Takaichi was expected to be accompanied by executives from more than 50 Japanese companies and organisations, including Suzuki Motor. Discussions were expected to cover industrial investment, energy resilience initiatives and financing mechanisms that could support infrastructure development in India and Southeast Asia. For Assam, hosting such a delegation would have provided a valuable opportunity to present itself not merely as a peripheral state but as a strategic hub connecting India to East and Southeast Asia. Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has understandably expressed disappointment while indicating that the state would seek greater clarity from the Ministry of External Affairs. Such restraint is prudent. More importantly, one cancelled visit should not be mistaken for a weakening of Japanese interest in the Northeast. Indeed, there are indications that a high-level Japanese business delegation may still visit Assam separately. If that materialises, much of the economic momentum generated by the preparations could yet be preserved. The larger trajectory of India-Japan relations remains firmly positive, driven by strategic necessity as much as by historical goodwill. Both countries seek resilient supply chains, diversified manufacturing, secure maritime routes and greater stability across the Indo-Pacific. These interests transcend the calendar of summit diplomacy. For India, however, the episode offers a useful lesson. The Northeast has acquired unprecedented geopolitical significance as New Delhi's gateway to ASEAN and as an integral component of the Act East policy. Maximising that potential requires not only infrastructure and connectivity but also careful diplomatic management and political stability. Foreign investment is ultimately attracted by predictability as much as by opportunity. While a cancelled visit may disappoint, but it need not derail a partnership built patiently over seven decades. If both New Delhi and Dispur draw the right lessons, the next Japanese delegation may arrive not merely as honoured guests but as long-term partners in the economic transformation of India’s Northeast. (The author is a retired naval aviation officer and a defence and geopolitical analyst. Views personal.)

When the Storm Knocks Twice: A World Caught in the Climate Crosshairs

Climate Crosshairs

Mukhtar Babayev, COP29 President, speaks during the opening plenary session at the COP29 U.N. Climate Summit in Baku, Azerbaijan.


The gravity of the climate crisis was laid bare in Baku as more than two dozen world leaders detailed the escalating toll of extreme weather on their nations at the United Nations’ annual climate conference. From Grenada to Pakistan to the Marshall Islands, their accounts stood as sombre reminders of relentless droughts, fierce hurricanes, and torrential downpours that had grown both unpredictable and unmerciful, underscoring that no nation - regardless of wealth or might - was immune.


Grenada’s Prime Minister, Dickon Mitchell, illustrated the precarious existence of small island states, recounting a gruelling 15-month drought abruptly shattered by the violence of a Category 5 hurricane. The message he conveyed was clear: while today it might be the island nations bracing for catastrophe, Spain or Florida would not be spared tomorrow. The implication was simple, if chilling: we all share one vulnerable planet.


This shared sentiment underscored the interconnectedness of the crisis, a rallying cry that small island nations amplified throughout the conference.

Philip Edward Davis, Prime Minister of the Bahamas, voiced the urgency felt by vulnerable countries, particularly as political instability in major economies like the U.S. and Germany often stalls climate progress.


Among the most pointed critiques came from the High Ambition Coalition, a consortium of nations demanding robust climate action. The group highlighted what they termed an “inverted morality” where the heaviest polluters sidestepped their responsibilities, leaving those least culpable to pay the steepest price. Gaston Browne, the Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, did not mince words, suggesting that some nations were “deliberately burning the planet” through inaction. The unfulfilled pledges of climate aid, he warned, might soon push smaller countries to seek redress through international courts.


Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif highlighted his country’s vulnerability to climate disasters, including severe monsoons and heatwaves. He urged developed nations to honour their climate finance promises, citing the 2022 floods that displaced millions and caused $30 billion in damages. With cities like Lahore now among the world’s most polluted, Sharif emphasized the urgent need for financial support.


The issue of climate finance has been a sticking point, with Pakistan advocating for grant-based support rather than debt-financed assistance. Sharif called for grant-based climate support, arguing that loans would only worsen the debt burdens of vulnerable nations. Despite the 2022 agreement on a “loss and damage” fund, only $700 million has been pledged—far less than needed. Sharif reminded attendees that, though Pakistan contributes little to global emissions, it is among the hardest hit, and climate finance must reflect this disparity.


While Pakistan has made strides toward climate adaptation, such as developing a National Adaptation Plan and a National Carbon Market Framework, it is clear that domestic initiatives alone cannot suffice. Sharif reaffirmed Pakistan’s pledge to generate 60% of its energy from renewable sources and transition 30% of its vehicles to electric by 2030, but emphasized that these targets are contingent on international support.


Reflecting on past pledges, Sharif underscored the need for accountability in fulfilling climate finance commitments, drawing a clear line from the unfulfilled $100 billion annual pledge to the new, more ambitious goals. Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar emphasized the necessity of early warning systems for countries like Pakistan, where unpredictable floods, heatwaves, and glacial melt present an existential risk. Citing the UN’s Early Warning for All initiative, Dar outlined Pakistan’s plans for disaster preparedness, from mangrove restoration to policies encouraging electric vehicle adoption. Yet, he maintained that even these steps require stable and predictable financing from wealthy nations.


Meanwhile, negotiations for a climate finance deal at COP29 continued, with a draft proposal setting the stage for possible agreements. The latest version included new demands from developing nations, led by the G77 plus China, for $1.3 trillion in annual climate finance.


Pakistan’s leaders used the conference to convey that the climate crisis requires far more than short-term political gestures; it demands a structural shift in how the world finances adaptation and mitigation.


In meetings with world leaders from the UAE, Turkey, and the UK, Pakistan’s delegation emphasized the need for grant-based support instead of loans, which they argue trap vulnerable nations in debt. Sharif described these loans as a “debt trap” and called for transformative climate finance to address the urgent needs of affected countries.


The absence of leaders like Joe Biden, Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi was notable, but Pakistan remained focused on building consensus for a unified climate response. For Pakistan and other vulnerable nations, COP29 marked a pivotal moment in the fight for climate justice, emphasizing shared vulnerability and reinforcing calls for accountability and decisive action.


As COP29 draws to a close, Pakistan’s delegation leaves with a renewed hope that the world will heed their call to action. With early warning systems, grant-based financing, and meaningful support, developing nations can adapt and thrive in the face of an evolving climate landscape. The global community must now rise to meet these demands, translating pledges into tangible action to bridge the gap between rhetoric and reality.


(The author is a senior journalist based in Islamabad. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page