The Japanese visit

BY darius| IN Opinion | 02/05/2005

You don`t say!

Darius Nakhoonwala

After nearly three decades of analyzing editorials, I have come to the conclusion that foreign dignitaries must not end their visit on a Friday evening or a Saturday morning. The reason: by and large the editorials about their great achievements during the visit tend to be very casually written because there is no edit meeting on the weekend and the poor chap who has to write the edit does so in beery resentment.

The Koizumi visit was no exception. It was an important visit for two reasons but most of the main English newspapers (barring the Hindustan Times) missed the point altogether -- and the Indian Express didn`t write one at all, which is surprising consider the paper fancies itself a bit on foreign policy.   

The first reason why visit was important was that in several foreign policy matters Japan is a proxy for the US. Often what it says or does can be interpreted as something the US would like said or done, without getting directly involved. The Hindu did refer to the Proliferation Security Initiative which Japan is keen on. The idea is American and aims to patrol the sea-lanes of the Indian Ocean to intercept illicit trade in nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. China hates the idea. The Hindu said that "India has nothing to gain by getting sucked into dubious security arrangements." Really?

The second reason was that there were no references to nuclear issues. The N-word, for obvious reasons, is total anathema to Japan but of late there have been indications that it could re-consider its policy on developing nuclear weapons. Japan also did not say anything about India`s nuclear weapons.

Having missed the main points, doubtless because of the weekend, the editorials focused on the obvious: trade, investment and the permanent seat, with veto not less, on the Security Council. Increase the first two and may the best man win the third.

The Hindu said the two countries should not place "undue emphasis on their common quest for permanent membership in the United Nations Security Council" because it could "prove a needless distraction. A setback in this endeavour could also dull the enthusiasm in other spheres."

The Pioneer which sort of represents the BJP view, also focused on the UN seat. But it was the only one to point out that "the US has endorsed Japan`s bid, giving it an advantage over all other contenders."  It then went to point to the China factor and wrote that "for Japan, a strategic alliance with India is important to neutralise Chinese posturing and promote the concept of alternative power centres in Asia. A Tokyo-New Delhi axis is not in Beijing`s interest -Mr Wen Jiabao made that more than apparent during his visit." 

Then it vetoed the idea, saying "it will be wiser for New Delhi to separate the enmeshed strands of self-interest and pursue a path that serves our national interest, which is served more by harnessing the tremendous potential of our relations with China."

The Times of India focused on trade and trotted out a lot of boring statistics and went on to utter some inanities about strategic cooperation. Amongst the Hindi papers, both the Navbharat Times and the Hindustan made the same trite points.