Message for Japan: Engaging Japan after the earthquake

When Japanese and ASEAN ministers met in Jakarta on Saturday, the moment was both poignant and potentially significant for future policy.

The meeting, called by ASEAN and hosted by current chair Indonesia, came about a month after Japan suffered the twin tragedies of the earthquake and tsunami. Many Japanese citizens remain in temporary shelters even as authorities grapple with leaks at the Fukushima nuclear power plant just outside Tokyo.

The poignancy comes from the demonstration of solidarity among Asians. Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono opened the meeting by expressing  ASEAN’s intention to “enhance cooperation and respond quickly at a time when one of us faces a grave disaster”.

Philippine Foreign Minister Albert Del Rosario was quoted as saying he believed Japan “will emerge and ASEAN will be with Japan all the way”.

The acknowledgment of Japan as “one of us” delivers a political message. Building on decades of Japanese economic assistance and political cooperation, the tragedy has crystallized a sense of solidarity.

Practically speaking, there are limits to what disaster relief ASEAN could possibly lend. Japan is by far better resourced and ASEAN members still struggle to meet their own needs, as the current floods in Southern Thailand show. But the meeting is not without potential significance for future policy.

The most immediate of these will be for energy. Four ASEAN countries — Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia — have plans to develop nuclear energy plants while Singapore is conducting a pre-feasibility study to better understand the technological choices, costs and risks.

Some countries — Indonesia and Thailand — are exposed like Japan to risks of earthquakes and tsunamis. No ASEAN country currently has existing nuclear power plants and must turn to foreign expertise if they move ahead, including Japanese energy companies. What has happened at the Fukushima nuclear power plant must therefore be watched and closely studied, especially as Southeast Asians have long admired the Japanese culture of safety and engineering know-how.

At the meeting, Japan agreed to increase its transparency and communication of the still unfolding situation. Subsequent news that the incident is now comparable to Chernobyl, the world’s worst ever nuclear incident, only heightens this need for on going and candid assessment.

A second energy concern that is emerging is the need for alternatives. It is likely that Japanese imports of gas will surge and long term contracts will likely be pursued from Indonesia and others. Additionally, Japanese companies should be assisted in moving forward on innovative alternative energy, as Kyushu Power from Japan is now doing with geothermal energy production in Sumatra.

A third policy implication will be for industrial production. In the months before the earthquake, leading Japanese companies were looking to expand manufacturing operations in Southeast Asia. This was originally to deal with higher costs in Japan from the strong yen, and to diversify from production in China, as the Kan government encouraged a new openness.

These reasons remain. Indeed the need is compounded by domestic energy shortages, even in the middle and longer term. The outward push by major Japanese companies should therefore be expected to continue, although the initial pace must be managed to ensure jobs are not lost in affected provinces, further affecting the Japanese economy.

Overseas expansion will help with another knock-on effect — the impacts on the global supply chain when some production halted in Japan. Given this phenomenon, Japanese manufacturing operations in the region will look to further indigenize production with higher value-added components and products. By so doing, manufacturing in Southeast Asia — beyond cheaper land and labor — can help Japanese companies diversify to minimize potential future disruptions to their global production.

Political engagement in the wake of the tragedy is also critical for the wider region. Some have tended to looked past Japan to a rising China in recent years and 2010 marked the shift in the absolute economic size between the two giants. But this is not and never should have been an either/ or choice.

Japan’s participation in Asian regionalism has many dimensions that are different and indeed complementary to a rising China. Without involvement and commitment from Japan, the still emerging institutions for the region will be weaker or otherwise move in directions that may not be fully comfortable for some Asian governments.

Some hope the Kan government will gain support in the wake of the tragedy as society rallies around it, and Japan can show consistent leadership. But even if this does not happen, reaching out to Japan will be fundamental for ASEAN as a group to serve as a hub for the wider Asia.

Japan remains important and indeed is fully integrated in Asia as “one of us”. This was the case before the earthquake and remains so. This is so not only in high politics and industry, but also in the consciousness of everyday citizens across the region. Sadly, it has taken this disaster to remind more of this.

Simon Tay is chairman of the Singapore Institute of International Affairs