In one of the longest US presidential campaigns in history, neither party has addressed one of the most critical issues of the day: How can the US successfully integrate its domestic concerns with an increasingly competitive global marketplace?
At home and abroad, it is impossible to miss the breadth and depth of change sweeping the globe, particularly in Asia. While the US economy is in the final stages of a seismic shift from manufacturing to service-oriented industries, China and India are ascendant, and Muslims throughout Asia are clamoring for a greater role in global affairs.
And yet the Democratic presidential candidates, Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Barack Obama, and the Republican nominee, Senator John McCain, continue to tiptoe around such issues. Instead, their campaigns' treatment of US foreign policy has been reduced to endless debates about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and about the wisdom of the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
Surely this is unacceptable to every American committed to a safe and prosperous future. The next US president needs to provide a clearer understanding of how he or she will prepare the US for a 21st century in which local issues are tied to global developments, global trends can have local implications, and the US' international authority will confront Asia's newfound clout.
With this in mind, here are five questions that should be posed to the US' presidential candidates:
One, big construction firms and technology companies such as Microsoft, IBM and Cisco Systems already have huge campuses in India. But now we see Asian companies beginning to acquire valuable US-owned economic assets -- witness India's Tata Group's proposed acquisition of Jaguar and Land Rover from Ford. Do you see foreign investment and acquisitions in the US as a positive development or a potential peril?
Two, the US once defined free trade for the new global economy, but many Americans are now using demands for "fair trade" to impose reactionary and protectionist trade policies.
As Democrats suggest renegotiating NAFTA, Asian countries are watching with increasing trepidation. South Korea, in particular, is left to wonder whether or not the US is serious about pursuing similar trade agreements with one of Asia's strongest economies and one of the US' oldest regional allies. Will you back -- or back away from -- free-trade pacts with Asia?
Three, the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, regardless of their relative merits, have unquestionably poisoned the US' standing among Asia's 900 million Muslims, from Pakistan to the Philippines and all points in between. A 2006 Pew poll found that support for the US in Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim country, has plunged to around 30 percent. How will you engage Muslims in Asia and how will you garner support at home for stronger ties with Muslims around the world?
Four, the Asia Society recently co-presented a new education study that showed US 15-year-olds' science proficiency ranked 25th out of 30 countries tested, and lagged far behind their peers in Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong. Meanwhile, US colleges and universities are struggling to attract the best and brightest minds from abroad, because those students -- and their professors -- are increasingly being denied US visas or subjected to harrowing entry delays when they arrive.
Business leaders, such as Microsoft's Bill Gates, have also complained about shortages of skilled workers and have called for large increases in "H1-B" visas, which allow professionals to work in the US for short periods of time. How will you help US students compete globally, while ensuring a level playing field at home for talented foreign students and workers?
Five, both China and India are demanding concessions from the US before they will even consider caps on greenhouse-gas emissions. Are you willing to sacrifice some economic growth domestically -- or, conversely, are you willing to jeopardize relations with China and India -- for the sake of the environment?
The US' next president must re-engage with Asia not as an afterthought, and not as a corollary to the "war on terror," but as a central component of a roadmap to a safe, secure and prosperous future. He or she should start now by answering Asia's questions.
Vishakha Desai is president of the Asia Society.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS