PM Modi’s Asia tour: Strengthening ties with Japan and China amid global tariff turmoil

Heramba Nath

(herambanath2222@gmail.com)

In the shifting theatre of global politics, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s current Asia tour acquires an almost symbolic significance, representing not just a diplomatic itinerary but a calculated repositioning of India in an uncertain world. The visit, which begins in Japan and concludes with participation at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Tianjin, China, unfolds against the backdrop of an escalating tariff conflict with the United States, a volatile global economic order, and intensifying strategic rivalries across Asia. This journey cannot be reduced to ceremonial exchanges or routine bilateral engagements; rather, it embodies a deliberate effort to reaffirm India’s agency at a time when world powers are testing alliances, recalibrating partnerships, and redefining their notions of sovereignty, trade, and security.

The beginning of Modi’s engagements in Tokyo sets the stage for what he has described as the aspiration to co-create an “Asian Century”. India and Japan, two democracies bound by shared values but also by shared vulnerabilities, are looking to anchor their partnership not merely in sentimental rhetoric but in hard economic realities. With Japan pledging investments amounting to over ten trillion yen—nearly sixty-eight billion dollars—into India’s critical sectors such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and rare earth minerals, the bilateral relationship is assuming contours that go far beyond transactional trade. What emerges here is the outline of an economic security pact, one that seeks to shield Asia’s rising economies from the instability of global tariff wars and supply chain disruptions. In essence, Japan’s bet on India reflects both confidence in India’s demographic dividend and an acknowledgement of the urgent necessity to build resilient alternatives to China-centric production systems.

For Modi, the Tokyo leg of the visit is an opportunity to broadcast his “Make in India, Make for the World” narrative, reminding investors and policymakers alike that India’s youthful workforce and expanding consumer base are not just abstract statistics but an engine waiting to drive regional and global growth. The emphasis on semiconductors and artificial intelligence is not accidental. In an era where chips are to economies what oil once was, and where algorithms increasingly dictate production and governance, positioning India as a credible hub in these sectors is both an economic strategy and a national security imperative. The Indo-Japanese partnership, long nurtured in the domains of infrastructure and technology transfer, now seems poised to transcend into the architecture of twenty-first-century geopolitics.

This engagement is further coloured by the dynamics of the Quad, where India and Japan, alongside the United States and Australia, have been framing a vision of a free, open, and rules-based Indo-Pacific. Yet, as the U.S. slaps punitive tariffs on India, ostensibly to protect its own manufacturing sector, New Delhi’s task is to balance its participation in such frameworks with the imperative of diversifying its partnerships. Japan thus emerges as a stabilising force—a partner that can absorb shocks, provide investment, and reinforce India’s strategic options even when Washington’s posture appears transactional. Modi’s Tokyo visit is not about aligning against China or replacing one dependency with another; rather, it is about expanding manoeuvring space at a time when economic coercion and political unpredictability are increasingly being wielded as instruments of statecraft.

From Tokyo, Modi’s journey will lead him to Tianjin, marking his first visit to China in seven years. This itself carries an aura of political theatre, given the bitter legacy of the border clashes in Ladakh, the deep mistrust that has pervaded bilateral ties since 2020, and the prolonged absence of meaningful dialogue. The decision to re-engage, symbolised through resumed direct flights, relaxation of visa rules, reopening of border trade points, and preliminary military disengagement, indicates that both Beijing and New Delhi recognise the futility of perpetual confrontation. At a time when India is grappling with the fallout of U.S. tariffs and seeking to diversify its economic partnerships, there is a convergence of interests in lowering temperatures. The SCO summit offers the perfect stage for Modi and Xi Jinping to exchange not just pleasantries but perhaps recalibrate the grammar of their bilateral relationship.

For India, engaging with China is an exercise fraught with contradictions. On one hand, China remains the biggest source of imports, particularly in critical technology sectors. On the other hand, China is the most formidable strategic challenge, with its assertive posturing in the Himalayas and its expanding influence across South Asia and the Indian Ocean. Modi’s decision to participate in the SCO summit in China suggests that New Delhi is not willing to cede the regional space entirely to Beijing. Instead, it is determined to remain present, vocal, and engaged, even in forums where China’s weight is dominant. This posture, one of neither confrontation nor submission, highlights India’s aspiration to assert itself as a balancing force in Asia rather than a satellite orbiting one or another superpower.

The optics of Modi sharing a table with both Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin will resonate globally. In the wake of the Russia-Ukraine war, where India maintained a delicate position of neutrality while protecting its energy interests, the meeting in Tianjin will be observed closely by Western capitals. India’s insistence on multi-alignment rather than rigid bloc politics is being tested now more than ever. While Washington’s tariff actions reveal the limits of transactional friendship, Moscow’s partnership shows the risks of overreliance on energy trade with a sanctioned economy. Engaging with Beijing in this mix adds yet another layer of complexity, but it also underscores New Delhi’s refusal to let itself be boxed into a singular geopolitical narrative. Modi’s Asia tour is thus not just about strengthening bilateral ties but about demonstrating India’s stubborn commitment to strategic autonomy.

It is also crucial to situate this tour within the larger crisis of globalisation. The dream of a seamlessly interconnected world, where free trade would lubricate prosperity and reduce conflict, is now under siege. Tariffs, sanctions, supply chain bottlenecks, and the weaponisation of interdependence have turned globalisation into a contested terrain. For India, which has long sought to position itself as a beneficiary of global flows of capital and technology, this changing order demands adaptation. The engagements with Japan and China are part of this adaptation—two parallel tracks that together create hedges against volatility. While Tokyo offers trust, capital, and technological collaboration, Beijing represents reality: a neighbour too powerful to be ignored, too integrated to be wished away, and too complex to be approached with ideological rigidity.

The wider region is watching with keen interest. ASEAN nations, already jittery about China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea, will view India’s cautious re-engagement with Beijing as an indication of whether New Delhi can serve as a counterweight or will drift into accommodation. South Korea, a country competing in the same semiconductor and technology race, may see opportunities for trilateral collaboration involving Japan and India. Australia, which has deepened ties with India through the Quad, will seek to understand whether New Delhi’s presence at the SCO dilutes or complements its Indo-Pacific commitments. Russia, isolated from the West, will welcome India’s presence in Tianjin as validation that it is not entirely cut off from global diplomacy. Every handshake Modi makes in Tokyo and Tianjin reverberates far beyond the immediate room, carrying implications for alliances across Asia and beyond.

Domestically, the tour will be scrutinised through the lens of electoral politics. Modi’s image as a strong leader, one who has elevated India’s global standing, is a cornerstone of his political narrative. Japanese investments, if materialised into jobs and technology transfers, will reinforce his claim of delivering tangible benefits from diplomacy. Yet, the China leg is trickier. The Indian public, particularly after the casualties in Galwan, remains wary of any softness towards Beijing. Opposition voices may seize upon images of Modi and Xi sharing cordial gestures as evidence of compromising national security. The Prime Minister, therefore, must strike a delicate balance: engaging enough to extract economic and strategic benefits but cautious enough not to appear conciliatory to a public steeped in distrust.

There is also an element of timing that cannot be ignored. The global economy is at an inflection point. Energy transitions, climate crises, technological disruptions, and demographic shifts are colliding to create new uncertainties. For India, which must generate millions of jobs annually, attract capital, and modernise infrastructure, these uncertainties are not abstract but immediate. Japanese capital can ease some pressures, but it must be channelled wisely into manufacturing and skill development. Chinese stability can reduce border tensions, but it must not lull India into complacency. American tariffs may push India to look eastward, but abandoning ties with Washington would be self-defeating. The dance of diplomacy in such an environment is one of constant adjustments, where each step must be calculated not just for today but for the decade ahead.

To appreciate the full magnitude of this tour, one must also consider the symbolism of geography. Tokyo and Tianjin—two cities that represent two contrasting visions of Asia—Tokyo, disciplined, democratic, innovative, yet ageing and seeking new dynamism, and Tianjin, industrial, ambitious, authoritarian, and emblematic of China’s contested rise. Modi’s presence in both within the same week reflects India’s attempt to straddle these worlds, to refuse the logic of exclusive choice. It is a reminder that Asia’s future will not be shaped by one capital alone but by a mosaic of interactions, tensions, and collaborations. India, by engaging both, is placing itself at the centre of this mosaic.

India today stands at a crossroads where external turbulence intersects with internal aspiration. The Asia tour symbolizes both the fragility and the promise of this moment. Fragility, because global volatility can derail even the best-laid plans. Promise, because with the right mix of diplomacy, investment, and domestic reform, India can indeed move closer to the vision of becoming a pillar of the Asian Century. What is unfolding before our eyes is not just a prime minister’s itinerary but a chapter in the story of a nation seeking to write its destiny amidst storms not of its own making. The tariff wars of today, the border disputes of yesterday, and the investments of tomorrow all converge into this journey—one that captures the anxieties and ambitions of a rising India.

The implications for domestic governance are equally significant. India’s ability to absorb Japanese investments and transform them into meaningful industrial growth will test the robustness of policy frameworks, the efficiency of bureaucratic processes, and the coherence of federal-state coordination. Cities such as Ahmedabad, Pune, and Bengaluru are poised to become hubs of advanced manufacturing and technological innovation, but rural India must not be left behind in this narrative of progress. Skill development, vocational training, and educational reforms must align with the demands of foreign capital so that the youth, which constitutes the largest demographic advantage India enjoys, can participate fully in this transformation. In essence, the Asia tour is thus intrinsically linked not just to diplomacy and economics but to India’s internal social contract—the promise that global engagement translates into tangible benefits for ordinary citizens.

At the international level, Modi’s engagements offer lessons in patience, vision, and pragmatism. In Tokyo, he demonstrates that trust and historical goodwill can be leveraged into contemporary economic gains. In Tianjin, he illustrates that engagement with a rival need not mean capitulation; it can mean dialogue, patience, and incremental progress. These are lessons that resonate far beyond Asia, speaking to nations grappling with the complexities of diplomacy in an age where economic leverage, military presence, and soft power coexist uneasily. India’s example, carefully calibrated as it is, may serve as a template for other middle powers seeking to assert autonomy in a multipolar, unpredictable world.

Simultaneously, the tour underscores the urgency of domestic reforms. India’s infrastructural deficits, bureaucratic bottlenecks, and gaps in skill development cannot be ignored if foreign investment is to translate into sustainable growth. Urban centres must be prepared to host advanced industries, while rural regions require policies that prevent uneven development. Educational institutions must be aligned with the demands of high-tech sectors, ensuring that India’s workforce is not only large but also competitive globally. In essence, the Asia tour is not just an external mission; it is a mirror reflecting the internal work India must undertake to realise its full potential.

The political dimension at home is delicate. While the optics of engaging with both Japan and China reinforce India’s stature on the global stage, domestic narratives must balance optimism with caution. The memory of past border clashes and historical grievances cannot be overlooked. Modi’s ability to project strength while engaging in dialogue and to demonstrate economic acumen while safeguarding national security is central to sustaining public confidence. Political opposition may attempt to exploit perceptions of softness, yet a mature electorate is likely to recognise the strategic logic of nuanced engagement. Leadership in such times requires courage not only in action but also in communication, explaining to citizens the rationale behind complex, sometimes counterintuitive, diplomatic choices.

The Asia tour also serves as a strategic signal to the wider world. For nations in the Indo-Pacific, the message is clear: India is neither a passive observer nor a reactive player; it is a proactive force, capable of navigating complex alliances while safeguarding its interests. For Western capitals, particularly Washington, the visit conveys India’s determination to maintain autonomy, to avoid being drawn into transactional dependency, and to diversify partnerships. For Beijing, it is a reminder that while India is willing to engage, it remains vigilant, capable, and determined to protect sovereignty. Each handshake, each agreement, each meeting carries layers of meaning that extend beyond bilateral protocols into the realm of global strategic psychology.

Economically, the stakes are profound. Japanese investments in high-tech sectors have the potential to reduce India’s reliance on imports, create high-value employment, and accelerate technological self-sufficiency. Engagements with China, cautiously structured, can stabilise trade, secure supply chains, and mitigate risks arising from the broader geopolitical turbulence. American tariffs, while challenging, serve as a catalyst for diversification, prompting India to look eastward, strengthen regional ties, and enhance domestic manufacturing capabilities. Together, these factors underscore the importance of a multi-pronged strategy that integrates diplomacy, trade, and domestic capacity building.

The Asia tour, therefore, is not a mere diplomatic exercise; it is a complex interplay of history, economics, strategy, and philosophy. It encapsulates India’s aspirations, its challenges, and its agency in shaping outcomes. From the corridors of power in Tokyo and Tianjin to the factories and laboratories across India, the tour bridges the global and the local, the abstract and the tangible. Success will be measured not solely in signed agreements or memoranda of understanding, but in the transformation of promises into real, lived improvements in the lives of citizens.

Ultimately, PM Modi’s Asia tour represents a synthesis of vision and pragmatism. It demonstrates that diplomacy is not merely the art of negotiation but the craft of aligning history, geography, economy, and strategy with the aspirations of a nation. It shows that leadership requires patience, nuance, and the courage to engage with complexity rather than succumb to simplicity. It underscores that India, even in the face of tariffs, trade pressures, and strategic uncertainties, has the capacity to chart an independent course, strengthening ties with partners, balancing rivals, and navigating the intricate currents of a multipolar world.

India’s engagement with Japan and China, in the context of global tariff turbulence, thus stands as a testament to the country’s capacity to transform challenges into opportunities, to convert strategic imperatives into partnerships, and to translate aspirations into tangible outcomes. It reflects India’s ability to navigate a complex multipolar world with prudence, vision, and autonomy, asserting itself not merely as a participant but as a shaper of its own destiny. Modi’s Asia tour will be remembered not only for immediate diplomatic and economic gains but also for sending a clear message to the world: that India is a rising power, capable of balancing rivalries, embracing partnerships, and charting its own independent path while safeguarding national interests and promoting long-term growth.