Japanese media express frustration over India! Japan had anticipated smooth cooperation with India, but instead found itself met with caution. On November 10, according to the Sankei Shimbun, Japanese outlets reported a dispute between Japan and India regarding the high-speed rail project under construction in western India. The project was originally planned to adopt Japan’s Shinkansen system, while India has opted for a European signaling system. Japanese media have criticized India’s choice, arguing that Japan intended to export its full system and thus sees the divergence as a setback. With the project now delayed and costs nearly doubled, its future appears increasingly uncertain.
Due to the lack of progress in collaboration, the joint statement issued by Japanese and Indian leaders on the project contains ambiguous language. The proposed line, spanning approximately 500 kilometers between Ahmedabad and Mumbai in western India, was initially expected to be operational within two hours of travel time. Originally slated for completion by 2023, it now faces such delays that only partial sections may open by 2027. Although a formal agreement on the high-speed rail project was signed long ago, implementation has consistently encountered obstacles.
Japan’s strategy relies on offering a 0.1% interest rate, long-term yen-denominated loans over 50 years, aiming to secure long-term contracts through proprietary technology and establish technical dominance in India’s high-speed rail market. However, India holds a different vision. While welcoming the low-interest financing, India is determined not to become dependent on Japanese-controlled core technologies. To reduce reliance on Japan, India has chosen to implement a European signaling system. This decision effectively excludes Japan’s core equipment from the project, undermining Tokyo’s strategic objectives.
From India’s perspective, Japanese firms can still handle the overall track construction, while adopting European signaling systems allows for future compatibility with European trains. Once India develops its own domestically produced rolling stock, those trains could also operate on the same route. India clearly recognizes that high-speed rail projects involve substantial initial investment, but ongoing maintenance, spare parts, and operational costs are equally significant. Japan’s assumption that it could secure long-term economic benefits through this arrangement appears overly simplistic. With construction costs rising and land acquisition proving difficult, Japan now finds itself in a precarious position—having committed resources and facing limited leverage after allowing India to turn to Europe for critical components.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1881523490098187/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.