Beyond the Imphal and Kohima Campaigns: Japan and Northeast India

In this edition of Sambandh Scholars Speak, Anindita Sinh interviews Mayumi Murayama on her book, Northeast India and Japan: Engagement through Connectivity, co-edited with Sanjoy Hazarika and Preeti Gill and published by Routledge in 2022.

This book is an effort by Indian and Japanese scholars to not only fill the gap in scholarship with regard to the Northeast region (NER) but also improve Japanese scholarship on India and the region. Through a series of essays, this volume attempts to trace the connections between Japan and the NER from the legacies of the Second World War up to contemporary Japanese Overseas Developmental Assistance (ODA) projects in the region. It focuses on various aspects of connectivity ranging from economic engagements, infrastructure development projects, people-to-people interactions, and oral history narratives. Many of the topics covered in this collection, particularly those concerning Japan’s engagements with the NER, have been examined from a Japanese perspective for the first time.

Japan has become a major investor in the NER, focusing on improving connectivity, water supply, and hydroelectricity. It actively promotes sustainable development, especially under the India-Japan Act East Forum. The NER also holds strategic significance for Japan in realising its vision of a free, open, and inclusive Indo-Pacific. The book serves as a repository of economic and connectivity projects undertaken in the region and showcases the perspectives of the inhabitants of these borderlands. It casts the old relationship between Japan and the NER in a new light by exploring the “shared history” (p. xxvi) of the people of the NER and Japan. One of the significant contributions of this book is the guide to Japanese literature on the Battles of Imphal and Kohima in Chapter 13 by Kanako Sakai, Institute of Developing Economies, Japan External Trade Organization (IDE-JETRO). It lists relevant Japanese accounts of the interaction between Japan’s military personnel and local inhabitants in the NER during the War, with English translations of the titles and short summaries of these works.

Under India’s Neighbourhood First and Act East policies, the strategic location of the NER has been leveraged by New Delhi to engage not only with the immediate neighbourhood but also with ASEAN countries, and beyond, including Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea. Despite the growing importance of the NER in India’s foreign policy formulations, the situation on the ground remains vulnerable and remote, as intraregional connectivity remains low. Due to its proximity to India’s international borders and tense situations with neighbouring countries, cross-border infrastructure in the region continues to remain under-developed and the NER is characterised as a “buffer” (Izuyama, p. 40).

This collected edition brings together scholars who discuss what connectivity means for the people of the NER.

Anindita Sinh: As you highlight in your book, the NER is unique in terms of the Japan–India relationship as it is the only Indian region where “the Japanese Imperial Army fought alongside the Indian National Army against the British Army and the British Indian Army during WWII” (p. xx). How has this shared history influenced Japan’s perceptions of the region and its engagements?

Mayumi Murayama: For most of us in Japan, the Imphal and Kohima Campaigns or the Imphal Operation, as we call them, are quite familiar. They are a part of our bitter memories of the Second World War. Nevertheless, in current times, very few of us are aware of the exact locations of Imphal and Kohima. It is more than likely that they are mistaken as places in Myanmar (former Burma) instead of India. For the twelfth chapter of our book, I went through Japanese literature on the Imphal Operation, including analytical reports and memoirs written by individuals, as well as those compiled by some institutions, to see how people in India’s Northeast region were perceived and described. To my surprise, references to local inhabitants in Japanese writings were remarkably limited, except for some observations regarding their settlements and lifestyle, and the military’s limited interactions with the local populace to acquire food and labour, many a time forcibly. The absence is particularly conspicuous when compared with Japanese writings on Burma and Burmese people. The prime reason may be that the stay of Japanese soldiers in the NER was much shorter compared with their engagements in Burma, where some of them spent enough time to pick up local languages. It was only after the War, when Japanese veterans had visited the NER to collect the bones of their fellow soldiers that they realised that the people of the NER had been equally affected and they began to appreciate the generous cooperation extended by the latter.

One of the main objectives of my research was to shed light on the limited mutual perceptions we [Japan and NER] had in the past and to instate a foundation on which we can start building a shared future.

Answering your question, I would say that history was not shared by the people of both countries in the true sense. Keeping in mind current attempts to promote war tourism in the NER, also discussed in our book (Chapter 11), one of the main objectives of my research was to shed light on the limited mutual perceptions we had in the past and to instate a foundation on which we can start building a shared future.

AS: One of the primary aims of the book is to re-cast the policy and public imaginary of the NER, moving it away from the lens of securitisation and focusing on its socio-economic development. Given your previous work on human development in eastern South Asia to address illegal migration and economic backwardness, how can sub-regional cooperation mitigate these concerns and improve connectivity in the region?

MM: I first visited the NER in 2004. Until then, I had been conducting research solely on Bangladesh as I joined the Institute of Developing Economies (IDE), Japan, in 1984 as a graduate. Therefore, my perception of South Asia, especially India, was greatly influenced by the perceptions of the people of Bangladesh. A typical view there is that Bangladesh is India-locked: it has an inferior position compared to India, which acts as a big brother and not an elder brother, which connotes a caring character. When I listened to the views of the people of the NER — say, academics, businessmen, journalists, a young guide, whomever it may be — they echoed that the NER was Bangladesh-locked and thus, negatively affected by the country. This made me realise that my perceptions were coloured by stereotypical images of statehood and critiques of what central governments do and do not do. Similarly, when I heard what they said that the flood in Assam that year (2004) was due to the opening of a dam in Bhutan, I recalled the prevailing view in Bangladesh, which often attributes the causes of floods or drought to India.

The NER has faced many issues surrounding national security, ethnicity, migration, and development. Some are sceptical about the potential of cooperation across borders, and some are even against it. There are views that the free movement of goods or people may have a negative effect on the secured market, spaces, or opportunities of the people of the NER. After all, any cooperation, whether by government or private initiatives, is selective on where to be connected and where not to be. Nevertheless, to me, sub-regional cooperation in the eastern part of South Asia should bring more opportunities for the people and the states and countries to get to know each other. The idea that they have somewhat similar cultures, and a shared history seems to hamper fresh initiatives to get to know and learn from the other, who may have undergone different trajectories after the borders were redrawn.

AS: Bangladesh is an important actor in India’s eastern connectivity agenda. Not only is Japan significantly involved in the NER, but it also has close ties with Bangladesh. Based on your experience as a political advisor to the Japanese embassy in Dhaka as well as your prior research experience there, what lessons can the NER draw from Bangladesh to improve connectivity in the broader region?

MM: Bangladesh has been long recognised as one of the poorest countries in the world. This image still prevails in Japan, but the recent economic growth of the country, and its success as the second-largest manufacturer and exporter of ready-made garments, has started to draw the attention of the business sector of Japan and other countries. Such a remarkable transformation of Bangladesh was achieved primarily through the human resources of the country, both creative entrepreneurs and patient and diligent labour. The large population, once considered a cause of poverty, has now become an asset.

Similar to Bangladesh, human resources are one of the most promising endowments of the NER.

Compared with the NER, Bangladesh has fewer inhibiting factors. Nevertheless, similar to Bangladesh, human resources are one of the most promising endowments of the NER. However, this fact is hardly known outside of the NER. Thus, there remain untapped human resources, equipped with fluency in English and a global orientation. I can give you one example. There is an association based in a region of Japan. It was established in 2013 to promote cooperation with India. Now, they have established a strong network in Kerala, which was the native state of the Indian ambassador to Japan at the time. They send business missions to Kerala regularly. I met two young IT engineers from Kochi working in a Japanese IT company based in that region. People-to-people contacts are important to market the NER as a source of excellent human resources. In a small way, I try to introduce the NER whenever I get a chance to talk about India.

AS: As this book attempts to improve engagement between Japan and India through academic research, what views do Japanese scholars and analysts hold of South Asia? How are these perceptions different from those held of other regions in Asia, and is there a growing interest in Japan regarding the subcontinent?

If we compare research on India and China, the latter is much more directly related to the political and economic interests of Japan, and private think tanks and law firms are closely watching the country in addition to academia, while research on South Asia is more academic oriented.

MM: When IDE (where I work) was established in 1958 based on the combined interests of the government, business, and academia, India and China were the two most researched countries. In the following years, the countries and areas of our research expanded to Southeast Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East, Arica, and Latin American countries. The topics are varied and no single view about any country or region exists. However, broadly speaking, if we compare research on India and China, the latter is much more directly related to the political and economic interests of Japan, and private think tanks and law firms are closely watching the country in addition to academia, while research on South Asia is more academic oriented in broad fields including both social sciences and the humanities.

One of the bright signs in South Asian studies in Japan is that research on the NER is increasing. The first Japanese scholar who entered the NER after the War was Prof. Chie Nakane, a renowned social anthropologist. This was in 1954. After that, the region was closed to foreign scholars. It was after the 1990s that Japanese researchers started to do fieldwork in the region. Currently, there is a plan to produce an edited book on India’s NER in the area studies series of a Japanese publishing house. This series covers various countries of the world and some countries are discussed over more than one book, across different themes. India has four editions, including one focusing on the country from a caste perspective. I co-edited the Bangladesh edition and contributed articles to the Maldives edition. When the book is published, I hope India’s NER becomes a more familiar region for Japanese readers.

About the author

Mayumi Murayama serves as Executive Vice President of Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO) in charge of the Institute of Developing Economies (IDE-JETRO). Her research interests include industry, labour, gender, and youth issues as well as the regional relationship between India and Bangladesh. Some of her publications include Gender and Development: The Japanese Experience in Comparative Perspective, (editor), Globalization, Employment and Mobility: South Asian Experience, (co-edited with Hiroshi Sato), and ‘Borders, Migration and Sub-regional Cooperation in Eastern South Asia’, among others.