Could Europe be a Democratic “blue state” and Asia a Republican “red state?”
US presidential elections provide a near perfect test to understand the difference between European and Asian worldviews, even if the two continents are far from united internally. If you want the US to lead by the power of example, you favor Democratic Senator Barack Obama; if you want to be reassured by the continuation of US power in a traditional security sense, you probably prefer Republican Senator John McCain.
Whereas a majority of Europeans — with the exception of those who for historical and geographic reasons are obsessed with the return of the “Russian bear” — support Obama, a majority of Asians, particular among the elite, seem to support McCain. This difference stems above all from strategic considerations, but it probably also contains a cultural dimension.
In Asia, Indonesia may look “European” in its Obama craze, but it essentially constitutes an anomaly, easily explainable by Obama’s brief Indonesian upbringing. Otherwise, and for very different reasons, a majority of Asian elites are awaiting the growing possibility of an Obama victory with some bewilderment and even apprehension.
For example, Japanese elites tend to favor continuity over change. In their mind, the hard power of the US is more important than its soft power, and their vision of a US “bound to lead” is largely unchanged. For them, the US is above all the strategic counterweight needed to balance China.
But the Chinese, too, may very likely be favoring McCain, for the opposite reason. The decline of the US’ image and influence in the world does not annoy them. As Asia’s leading power, China has seized the mantle of “hope” from the US. The US could regain it under Obama, but not under McCain. Why favor change, when continuity works so well for you?
Indian elites reach the same conclusion for different reasons. The Bush years are seen positively, for they coincide with the consolidation of India’s international status and emergence as the US’ key diplomatic partner in Asia. In Singapore, ideological considerations reinforce strategic interests. A very conservative regime naturally tends to prefer a Republican candidate over a Democrat.
But, beyond strategic considerations, something else must be mentioned (with prudence). It is too early to say that the “yellow man’s burden” is about to replace Rudyard Kipling’s “white man’s burden” in world history. Asians are slow to acknowledge that power entails international responsibility.
But Asians who have more than caught up with the West may have difficulty adjusting to the idea that the US would for the first time in history not be headed by a white president. How can you define yourself to the West, when the West has so spectacularly and visibly changed its appearance, if not its essence?
In Europe, the reverse is true. The complex essence of Obama is an absolute plus. For the former colonial countries, who have no equivalent to Obama, to support him fully is a sort of exorcism, if not redemption. The US is once more paving the way for what Europeans should be able to achieve one day with their own minorities: a land of dreams made possible. In a more classical sense, the depth of anti-Bush sentiment in Europe explains the depth of pro-Obama feeling and Europeans’ relative distancing from McCain’s candidacy.
Europeans have felt oppressed by the US’ excessive demonstration of hard power. They would not mind a US that was more modest abroad and more ambitious at home. They are in fact secretly wishing that in these tough economic times, at least part of the “culture of hope” incarnated by Obama would reverberate on them and transform them for the better. They do not want the US only to protect them, but to transform them.
The perception that Obama can transform the view that the US and the West have of themselves is an important factor in the emotional gap that may exist between Asia and Europe on the eve of the US presidential election.
On that count, Asia tends to be a status quo continent, while Europe is a revisionist one. For many Europeans, a reinvention of the US is Europe’s last hope.
It is a noble hope, but also a dangerous one, for dreams can easily turn into nightmares. That might very well happen if the next US president fails to redress the financial and economic threats facing his country, and thus the rest of the world.
Dominique Moisi, a founder and senior advisor at IFRI (French Institute for International Relations), is a professor at the College of Europe in Natolin, Warsaw, Poland.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
I think it is fair to say there is a widespread sigh of relief among many Americans — particularly those of us focused on foreign policy — that the chaotic and unpredictable Trump years will soon be over. Mr. Trump brought little real knowledge or experience to his foreign policy, and it showed. He also — in my humble opinion — did not err on the side of expertise in his choice of top foreign policy officials. Nor was he particularly open to listening to advice. All in all a poor set of traits for overseeing the complex foreign policy
After more than eight years of talks, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) was signed on Nov. 15, combining the individual free-trade agreements signed between ASEAN member states on the one hand, and China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand on the other. Under the leadership of ASEAN and China, most observers did not expect the RCEP to provide a high degree of openness, and the announced agreement lives up to these expectations, containing few surprises. All products covered by the RCEP tariff reductions are agricultural and industrial products, but reductions of agricultural product tariffs are very limited, for example covering
While the nation grapples with its falling birthrate, it is also imperative to address how parents are raising their children. The phenomenon of “dinosaur parents” — who lash out at teachers, store staff or people on the street when confronted about their children misbehaving — has been an issue for a while, but there seems to be an uncomfortably high number of incidents making the news lately. On Saturday, a preschool teacher on an online forum wrote about a mother who often visited the school and screamed at the staff for various reasons — including her child being late to school
On Nov. 14, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) commented on the nation’s low birthrate, claiming that young people would surely have children if only they married first, and that the low marriage rate among young people is the cause of the rapid aging of Taiwan’s society. The Taipei City Government therefore proposed to offer subsidies to couples willing to marry. Ko’s comment stirred up a great deal of protest. As a sociology student, I would like to remind the mayor that his remarks not only decontextualized the population aging issue, but also oversimplified the low birthrate problem. First, a look at systemic