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
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Shen You-chung (沈有忠) on Thursday last week urged democratic nations to boycott China’s military parade on Wednesday next week. The parade, a grand display of Beijing’s military hardware, is meant to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in World War II. While China has invited world leaders to attend, many have declined. A Kyodo News report on Sunday said that Japan has asked European and Asian leaders who have yet to respond to the invitation to refrain from attending. Tokyo is seeking to prevent Beijing from spreading its distorted interpretation of wartime history, the report
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase