A CHNAGING ROLE IN ASIA FOR THE US : LEADERSHIP, NOT DOMINANCE
A CHNAGING ROLE IN ASIA FOR THE US : LEADERSHIP, NOT DOMINANCE
By James T. Laney
Summary
President Bush returned recently from a six-day visit to Asia, centered on the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum. American presidents have previously been the star attraction at this annual gathering. However, President Bush was confronted with a new role in Bangkok: equal billing. It turned out that leaders of the 21-member Apec forum were just as interested in Chinese President Hu Jintao, with whom Mr. Bush had to share the stage.
The change in Mr. Bushs status has significant implications for the United States in an area it has dominated for almost 60 years. It signals Beijings emergence as a new powerbroker in the region. Trade numbers help explain the transformation. Japan, the worlds second largest economy, now imports more from China than it does from the United States. Similarly, China has become the largest trading partner of South Korea, the worlds 12th largest economy. And many economists predict that within two years trade between China and the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or Asean, will equal if not exceed trade between the United States and Asean.
The economic transformation is significant in and of itself. Tokyo and Seoul are Washingtons two most important allies in Asia. If they are less than eager to take on Beijing out of concern about the potential impact on their economies, Washingtons influence in northeast Asia could be greatly diminished.
Chinas emergence as an economic power is even more important, however, because it comes at a time when its geopolitical power is also on the rise. Whether by design or the need to fill a dangerous void, Beijing has emerged as a critical player in resolving the North Korea crisis. As demonstrated by Washingtons failure to win support for its initial hardline stance towards the North, gone are the days when the regions security revolved around policy made in Washington. Today, Asias security revolves around policy shaped increasingly in Asia by Asians, with U.S. input.
The Bush Administration is must recognize the two-pronged nature of this transformation-economic and security-and develop a comprehensive, overarching vision that encompasses both components.
While it is addressing the economic component through Apec and a series of bi-lateral trade agreements, it has yet to find its footing with respect to the security component, particularly in northeast Asia.
Ironically, North Korea, the bad boy or the region, could unwittingly be of help. It could serve as the catalyst for a yet-to-be-formed security organization focused exclusively on this area. Such gathering the Northeast Asia Security forum-would initially consist of the players now involved in resolving the North Korea crisis. These include the United States, China, Japan, Russia, and South Korea. Over time other countries-including perhaps even North Korea-could also join. The forum would deal with security-related issued, including arms control, crisis management, conflict prevention, conflict resolution, and confidence-building measures. Its focus solely on northeast Asia would allow it to address issues that the broader Asean Regional Forum is unable to tackle.
The foundation for this new organization may be close at hand. The Bush Administration Grudgingly appears to be giving in to the demands of China, Japan, South Korea and Russia with respect to North Korea. It has announced it is willing to provide a written statement that guarantees Pyongyangs security in exchange for it giving up its nuclear ambitions. The statement would be signed by Beijing, Tokyo, Moscow, Washington and Seoul. In addition to resolving the nuclear issue, such a statement could formally pull together a group that might evolve into the Northeast Asia Security forum.
Ultimately, Washington may have little choice but to follow this route. After being passive in the face of U.S. dominance for many decades, the nations of northeast Asia-not just China, but South Korea and Japan- are once again coming into their own. Proud nations with long, fiercely nationalist histories, they are tired of taking direction, or, worse yet, dictation from the United States. The days of exclusive bilateralism are over, as is the dependence fostered by the security shield provided through the Cold War by the United States.
There is a delicate dance underway in the region today. It is imperative that the Bush Administration develop a comprehensive vision that encompasses both the economic and security components of the equation. It must embrace and strengthen regional organizations that tie together the interests of areas major players. If it fails to do so, it could force our allies to choose between placing their interests with us or closer to home.
To be sure, China, Japan, and Korea have historic rivalries that they must ultimately address. In this regard, the Unites States is well positioned as a mediation force or counterbalance. But we should not take the troubles that have existed between these nations in the past as a sign they will not work together in the future. While the outcome of a choice between joining with the U.S. or working together might not seem in jeopardy now, the future as our failure to win their support for our initial policy on North Korea recently demonstrated might well be very different. Having to work together to resolve the North Korean issue could be well evolve into the basis for a new security arrangement in which the several nations of East Asia achieve a new level of mature relations with each other and the United States. Such an entity would be the best way to entice North Korea out of its isolation and into the community of nations. Maybe the constraints of a U.S. public weary of Iraq, a military stretched very thin, and emerging power realities in Asia have conspired to bring the U.S. closer to a long-term policy re-alignment than since the Cold War. The comparison with NATO is worth thinking about.
정부지원금 0%, 회원의 회비로 운영됩니다
참여연대 후원/회원가입