Australian Prime Minister John Howard is evidently worried that the US has once again turned to isolationism and he has cautioned both the US and other nations to be wary.
In a toast at a state dinner in the White House in Washington last month, Howard said he had a single message for the US: "The world continues to need America, and the world will be a better place for the involvement and the commitment of the people of the United States of America in the years that lie ahead."
With a nod toward anti-US outbursts around the world, he said: "Those foolish enough to suggest that America should have a lesser role in the affairs of the world should pause and think whether they really mean what they say, because a world without a dedicated, involved America will be a lesser world, a less safe world, a more precarious world."
Moving to Chicago, Howard was even more pointed in remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations: "It is vital, for America's interests as much as those of the rest of the world, that America not retreat."
Addressing politicians who attack the US, the Australian leader said: "To the voices of anti-Americanism around the world, to those who shout `Yankee Go Home,' let me offer some quiet advice: Be careful what you wish for."
The consequences of a US slide into isolationism coupled with ignoring Howard's advice could be substantial. In the US elections in November, the war in Iraq is sure to be an issue. Will the debate go into the deeper question of whether the US should continue to have alliances and deploy forces abroad?
US relations with allies in Asia, not only Australia, may be affected. Political leaders and defense officials in Taiwan privately asked this correspondent a few weeks ago whether the US would keep its commitments to help repel a Chinese attack. Japanese expressed the same anxiety but with less concern.
The combination of US isolationism and virulent South Korean anti-Americanism could hasten the demise of the US alliance with Seoul and lead to a reduction of US forces in Korea and possibly their withdrawal.
Then there is the question of how a perception of US isolationism may affect negotiations with North Korea and Iran over nuclear weapons, possibly encouraging Pyongyang and Tehran to take tougher bargaining positions. China, with whom relations are often fragile, may be emboldened if Beijing believes that US engagement abroad is declining.
Much of the revival of what a diplomat from the Asia-Pacific region called a "recurring theme" in US history seems to have been caused by a US reaction to widespread anti-Americanism abroad. The Pew Research Center in Washington asserted last year: "Anti-Americanism is deeper and broader now than at any time in modern history."
At the same time, Pew researchers found that more Americans believed that the US "should mind its own business internationally and let other countries get along the best they can on their own."
The researchers found that 42 percent of Americans felt this way, up from 30 percent only three years earlier. US President George W. Bush has recognized the surge of isolationism and cautioned against it.
In his State of the Union message in January, he said: "In a complex and challenging time, the road of isolationism and protectionism may seem broad and inviting -- yet it ends in danger and decline."
Dick Morris, one-time adviser to former US president Bill Clinton and a shrewd political analyst, wrote in April that "Americans are again turning inward and rejecting involvement with the rest of the world."
In Front Page Magazine on the Internet, Morris said that frustration over the prolonged war in Iraq had generated among Americans "this feeling of wanting the rest of the world to go away."
US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld warned Asia-Pacific defense leaders gathered in Singapore early this month: "In past decades, some of the people in the United States have questioned whether America should be engaged in the world. We've had strains of isolationism in our country which we are all aware of."
Richard Halloran is a writer based in Hawaii.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS