Japan to propose strategic dialogue with U.S., India and Australia

What a stupid idea. Where is China ? China is bigger then Japan and India and Australia combined, how can it be contained ?

The proposal is for the leaders of the four nations to promote free trade and defence cooperation across the land and sea to Southeast, South and Central Asia, and beyond to the Middle East and Africa, Kono said in the interview with the Nikkei.

The Sea, I can understand. But apart from India I don't see a basis for defense cooperation on land.

AkieToday  07:04 am JST

What a stupid idea. Where is China ? China is bigger then Japan and India and Australia combined, how can it be contained ?

Easy. By not rolling over and letting China do whatever it wants anywhere in it's sole interests without any regard to other nations or the international community. Not a stupid idea at all in fact currently supported by pretty much the entire world.

Ossan, the world is supporting China's one world concept. Japan is super stupid at this moment to not engage China on silk road. Japan would be badly suffered if Abe wouldn't change his policy toward China. Japan benefited from the silk road 2000 years ago. Japan will be benefit by it 2000 years later. There is no fundamental difference between Japan and China. Japan needs to get along with neighbors. Without China, Japan would be quickly diminished from her current status as the third world economy.

AkieToday  07:27 am JST

Ossan, the world is supporting China's one world concept.

No, the world is supporting the economic aspects, not the geopolitical aspects. Try not to get the two confused.

Japan is super stupid at this moment to not engage China on silk road. Japan would be badly suffered if Abe wouldn't change his policy toward China. Japan benefited from the silk road 2000 years ago. Japan will be benefit by it 2000 years later. There is no fundamental difference between Japan and China. Japan needs to get along with neighbors. Without China, Japan would be quickly diminished from her current status as the third world economy.

Welcome back Mulan.

A good move by Japan. China has become much more assertive in their foreign policy in recent years with very dark motives. Once again China shows its true face by taking control of much of the infrastructure of neighboring Central Asian nations, yet somehow cannot contain puny NK with an economy the size of a small Chinese city. This shows China's true colors and they must be countered at every opportunity.

The Commie is no friend, and never will be. to the free world

dcog9065, China doesn't need Japan, friend or not. I can bet Japan $5 trillion GDP with you. Quiet honestly, only China can calm NK down to avoid a terrible war against Japan, admit it or not.

The Quadrilateral is back?

The Quadrilateral is back?

Did it ever go away? The idea has been around a long time and it makes a lot of sense.

I live in Australia. China is our major trading partner, by far. If the Chinese economy hits a hurdle, we feel it. Australia does not have a particularly intelligent Government at the moment, but I can’t imagine we would do anything to seriously jeopardise our mostly cordial, and growing, relationship with China. However it’s important to be able to let China know - within the normal diplomatic frameworks - that we don’t necessarily agree with them when it comes to political/strategic issues. It’s also important for us to recognise our limitations when it comes to any actions we might take. This article doesn’t detail China’s reactions to any US-Japan-India-Australia joint push against its influence.

China, it seems to me, has a smart and pragmatic Government, not given to North Korea-style brinkmanship. There should be room for everyone in the Asia-Pacific Region without escalating the security risks too far - as long as we can deal sensibly with the biggest threat to stability in the region, the DPRK. Maybe that's the real "strategic dialogue" that needs to be undertaken.

I'm Australian too and generally speaking I agree. We have a solid and growing relationship with China in trade, university level research, student exchange, but you know outside of that, its pretty limited. We don't have a common history, like we do with the U.S (and India, given the British role in India) we don't share political models, we don't share a language (U.S and about 250 million Indians speak English), we don't have sporting ties (like we do with India) and of course there is no doubt there are fundamental differences in outlook. Politically and socially we are far closer to the U.S, India and Japan. Surely we don't have to outline the fact China is a one party state that demands complete obedience, especially under XI. No such thing as freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of association etc etc etc. Its all control, control, control. You could write all day about the differences in fundamental outlook and the ongoing human rights abuses that China carries out all the time.

We also don't truly know what China's intentions are, and how far they are prepared to go in their territorial ambitions regarding the disputed Japanese Islands, disputed Indian territory, the Natuna Seas, South China Sea and of course, Taiwan.

The big one is how the relationship between China and India plays out. They have a LOT of border issues to sort out. Other countries might be tempted to buckle under Chinese pressure, but there is no way the Indians will. They have too much too lose. They fear the Chinese will attempt to seize their eastern territories. If Australia has to make a choice between China and India, it is very obvious we will choose India, as the world's largest democracy and increasingly, as a key partner of Japan, our second biggest trade partner and the United States, our major security partner.

While we all wish for peaceful relations, but we must be prepared to backup our partners. We must be prepared to ensure that our trade with the rest of the world is not impacted by what China does. And if, heaven forbid, war breaks out, we need to be prepared as best we can.

dcog9065, China doesn't need Japan, friend or not. I can bet Japan $5 trillion GDP with you. Quiet honestly, only China can calm NK down to avoid a terrible war against Japan, admit it or not.

Akie: I agree with you, only China can reign in NK. However they aren't doing that or even helping right now with NK so unfortunately it's looking like NK will have to be destroyed because of China. No one can trust a dirty Commie

“...reign in NK.” or “...rein in NK.”?

Amounts to the same, perhaps....

BigYen,

Certainly there are differences between the democracies in the region, none of them are part of the core Anglosphere (U.K, Canada etc), although you could argue Canada is a country we need to talk about more. India is the largest member of the Commonwealth, which is something else we haven't mentioned. When compared to China, the differences between Australia are very, very significant, in a multitude of areas, it's not just politics.

My essential point is that while we should strive for peace with China and cooperate where we can cooperate, and their are plenty of areas where we should, like climate change, medicine, space exploration etc. we MUST also be prepared for a breakdown in relations because we simply do not know what China will do in future and we cannot afford to be divided and conquered by failing to backup our partners. This is why China says it does not want to see anyone take sides, because they know, one on one, they likely have the advantage.

So whether it's an attack on Japanese territory or an attack on India, we must be prepared to back each other up. I disagree with you on India. In my mind, they are our most important partner of the future, more important than China. They have a population as big as China, likely bigger in future due to age distribution, they are a democracy, they are major players in a very important industry, I.T, they are also potentially a bigger market for our exports, although that is difficult to judge at this point, and they are a strategic partner of the U.S, if not yet, a treaty ally, something China will never be. We haven't even spoken about the E.U yet, but you can expect them to engage more and more with India, certainly the French are pushing hard on the defence front.

Its all very well to say we have great trade with China, and obviously we do not want war, but trade really means very little when you are talking about democratic freedom versus subservience to one party, whether you agree with them or not and ever increasing control by the government of your private life. I can't imagine many Australians volunteering to live like that. Even somebody like John Howard, the elder of the Liberal party, who you would expect to be pro China because of the trade dollars involved has come out and said that he thinks under a situation in which the U.S is fighting a war with China, any thought of saving our trade will go straight out the window.

(P.S Sorry for this wordy post and I know its a bit off topic...)

Abe says he wants to improve relations with China and then issue such a statement?

Such a personality makes

Trump and Kim more mature than Shinzo .

As expected, this suicidal China-contain policy was perceived badly in China. While Japan is trying to build its arc cross oceans Japan doesn't own, China is moving fast forward from her east end to east western end, away from Japan. Now, goods from east China, where Abe's grand father used to rule, can be shipped to Germany in 2 weeks, instead of 4 weeks by seas. Japan wants to be a leader of free world ? I am not even sure if Japan would be relevant in North East Asia by the end of Abe's rule.

To me, this sounds like it's just a reactive policy........that they still have to talk about. There's no leadership there. China's Belt and Road initiative is more proactive, and it's already in the works.

No, the world is supporting the economic aspects, not the geopolitical aspects. Try not to get the two confused.

Try not to deny the close relationship of the two.

ThePBotOct. 28 12:24 am

No, the world is supporting the economic aspects, not the geopolitical aspects. Try not to get the two confused.

Try not to deny the close relationship of the two.

Yes with China they are intermingled. Chinese companies lent money to Sri Lanka for port deveoplment. Sri Lanka couldn't pay it back. Did these Chinese companies take the normally accepted actions for a loan default? No, the port became a Chinese Naval Port.

Which why even with the "success" of the Belt & Road initiative there are already alarms ringing in Europe. Moves to limit Chinese acquisition of certain industries has already begun.