honoluluadvertiser.com

Sponsored by:

Comment, blog & share photos

Log in | Become a member
The Honolulu Advertiser
Posted on: Sunday, August 28, 2005

COMMENTARY
U.S. can't back away from Asia

By John Griffin

Because it's so vital to Hawai'i, I often ask myself and others what are the important points for Americans to think about regarding Asia, the world's most dynamic yet potentially dangerous region.

What follows are some of those points from such talks, from reading and from sitting through this month's East-West Center 6th Senior Policy Seminar. The seminar brought together 28 top diplomats, including five former U.S. ambassadors, leading government officials and academic experts from 10 nations in the Asia-Pacific region.

As I see it, then:

  • East Asia, which often has been seen as an accidental collection of nations large and small, is becoming more of an entity. It's still far from a Europe-like unity, but this "new" East Asia, from Japan down to Indonesia, is moving toward more cooperation and maybe more organizations that don't include Americans.

  • This trend poses challenges for the United States, long seen (especially by itself) as the center of power in the Pacific and into practically everything.

    Americans are still welcome for providing military security for some, trade and investment for many, and disaster aid when needed quickly. But questions remain about how gracefully we can make the looming transition from being king of the hill to a special kind of partner.

    The EWC seminar produced some hopeful statements on several sides:

  • The United States must remain involved in Asia on many levels. That includes small ad-hoc groups like the one dealing with North Korea, longtime but modified security treaties with old allies, relations with regional organizations like ASEAN, and the "big picture" that covers the whole Pacific region and stretches to India and others in South Asia.

    All that plus relating to any new Asians-only East Asia community group that may be formed at a conference in Malaysia later this year.

    This would not be easy in the best of times, but now some fear Asia will get less American attention because top people in the Bush administration will be even more preoccupied with the mess in Iraq and continuing war in Afghanistan, as well as other Mideast challenges.

    The hopeful side is that our Mideast problems should make Washington more eager to avoid trouble and to promote peace and unity in an Asia that wants America to be "on tap but not on top."

  • In contrast to other such gatherings, the war on terror got less priority at this year's EWC meeting. That seemed right, not because the threat is gone but because it allowed more focus on the social and people problems that are the root causes of terrorism.

    More Bali or London-type bombings in East Asia could change that, but for now it seems the terror-issue pendulum is in a better balance. Asians, who often undergo much more domestic terror-type violence than Americans, are generally less preoccupied with it.

  • For all that, Asia does not lack for ongoing crises. The center's seminar dealt with three of them: the North Korea nuclear weapons issue, the China-Taiwan standoff over control of that offshore island, and the India-Pakistan dispute over Kashmir. All three involve the potential for nuclear warfare involving major powers.

    None of the three are believed close to a settlement. Yet they were not seen as exceptionally explosive at this time. So some see a certain merit in the status quo as buying time, although Americans are less inclined than Asians to accept that relative quiet concerning North Korean nukes.

  • The rapid rise of China economically, and to some uncertain extent militarily, is Asia's big story and a proper top priority with Washington. Internal political and social problems could later provide a disruptive speed bump on China's super highway to major power status. The question now is not if China is on the road but how fast it is getting to that elevated status.

    The accepted wisdom is that an economically growing China is good for everyone, as long as Beijing becomes a good citizen of the new Asia and not threatening anyone. Responsible debate is needed on pros and cons for U.S. policy, not the short-range paranoia seen from some in Congress.

  • Globalism remains a growing fact of life with a mix of good and dark sides. In a kind of yin-yang relationship, however, we are also getting what was called "the dangerous rise of emotional nationalism."

    This is seen in Chinese feelings and demonstrations about Japan, in lingering Japanese attitudes, and in some South Korean feelings about the United States and its military role on the peninsula.

    The United States is not immune when you look at some of the alarmed American statements about the rise of China. Also noted as a new element by some, including Americans, was the rise of religious fundamentalism in the United States. This may be normal at home, but red- and blue-state factors can also influence and complicate some American foreign policy decisions.

  • Last year's Indian Ocean tsunami was a horrible disaster for several nations. And yet the response is now also cited as a textbook example of international cooperation between the United States, those Asian nations and others. Its speed and effectiveness were the product of years of working together in various international ways, including military exercises.

  • While the U.S. alliance with Japan seems good and in transition toward a more equal partnership, Japanese relations with China are at a low point of conflicting nationalisms. That is a problem for regional cooperation and U.S. interests.

  • Indonesia's recent settlement with its rebellious Aceh province is a major positive development speeded by the tsunami. Still, at the seminar, Southeast Asia came across as a mixed picture.

    A prominent Southeast Asian Muslim pictured an "arc of instability" running across parts of Indonesia, the troubled Islamic provinces in south Thailand, and Muslim areas in the southern Philippines. Yet he also said that because Islam in Southeast Asia is more moderate and flexible, that region could be a model for U.S. dealings with the Muslim world in general.

  • South Asia remains largely separate from East Asia, but that also is evolving. For one thing, India is rising economically and is in a new outward-looking era in its relations with the United States and the larger Asian region. U.S influence is a delicate factor.

  • Trade, like globalization, is woven into much else in Asia today. Several speakers lamented the "spaghetti bowl" proliferation of bilateral trade agreements among the countries in the region. While it's in America's interest to be a vigorous part of the picture, a key question seems to be how we can and will relate to any new East Asia trade zone.

    Overall then, despite some serious remaining and evolving problems ranging from resurgent nationalism to pockets of terror to new diseases to the scramble for oil, the Asia picture looks better for now.

    I heard fewer complaints about American arrogance and narrow unilateralism than at conferences during the first Bush administration. The region is growing, is more stable and is largely at peace.

    Critics of past U.S policies in the region might be tempted to say that more benign neglect from the Bush administration could help as Asia fashions its own way. But that's not the case in our globalizing world.

    American preoccupation with Mideast problems now is a fact of international life, just as a preoccupation with Europe was in the past. Now the rallying cry for those who see much of America's future in and across the Pacific should be "Equal time for Asia."