I have always, always argued for greater Sino-Japanese cooperation in developing the Asian region, in particular the ASEAN framework since this region seems to be heavily inundated with issues ranging from geopolitical sensitivities (security , resource-related matters) to integration policies that have called for freedom of travel for inter-ASEAN members , and the FTA framework that Japan, China have with in ASEAN.
In this regard i see the competition between Japan and China in ASEAN as not something considered negative since these are mostly developmentalist based and focused, why in fact prior to China's opening of her doors to market economics through the leadership of Deng Xiaopeng, it was mostly Japan that helped fund the development of our key partners in SEATO now ASEAN through platforms like JICA-ODA, through ADB-loans, to private processes as well.
As you may see the amount of capital needed to develop the region is significant and the rise of China as the 2nd largest economic machine , with the potential to become the largest economic machine in the world is rather positive for the region. Even for Japan. China now has opened her doors to ASEAN through individual FTAs, this streamlines trade, provides preferential treatment , reduces instances of tariffs for both markets. With the recent genesis of China's AIIB, China is now directly providing the necessary developmental loans to help the region in their quest for development.
Developing nations in Asia like Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Thailand, Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Afghanistan, Iran et al -- can now avail of ADB, IMF, and also AIIB. The point is that the competition amongst these institutions is not to be seen as a negative, but should be appreciated since the end result is increased qualitative measures on the other two institutions to offer better 'rates' to applicable countries. Yes? Competition drives qualitative improvement , which in the long run improves organizational efficacy , output, and production capability.
Now that i covered the "business management" theoretics part, let me give you some practical , real-time example of how Japan has been cooperating with Indonesia in regards to infrastructural development(s). Okay?
The Japanese financial institutions have been providing financing for the telecommunications company Telekomunikasi Indonesia. Telekomunikasi Indonesia has received funds from Japanese banks to help finance the purchase of submarine fibre optic cable systems form NEC coprorations to be used as part of the Southeast Asia Japan Cable System (SJC) network. The full loan was valued at $32 million, with the Bank of Japan for International Cooperation (JBIC) provied $18 million and Mizuho Corporate Bank $13 million. Nexi has provided buyer's credit insurance on Mizuho portion of the loan. The insurance covers 97.5% political risk and 95% commercial risk, with a tenor of six years.
Get this,
@Shotgunner51 , SJC is an international project that links Japan with Singapore, Hong Kong, China, the Philippines, Brunei, Thailand and Indonesia with over 11,000 km of sub-sea telecommunications cable. So you see, bro, as the Southeast Asian region sees rapid economic growth and expansion, the demands for internet and telecom service will increase. As we speak the network growth is growing to 18,500 km; and this is a direct venture of Japan with China and Indonesia and the greater Asia-Pacific Region. Mind you, bro, this is happening sans political differences and gepolitik getting in the "way". It is a testament to the level of maturity in regards to how Japan and China cooperate and compete with each other in the region , case point in Indonesia.
Chinese competition breeds Japanese qualitative improvement; Japanese improvement breeds Chinese counter-qualitative improvement. This is the application of Kaizen theory, on a pragmatist nature.
Regards,
Kenji
@Nihonjin1051