Visitors are often catalysts for change. US President Barack Obama’s just concluded visit to Asia may be no different, for his trip left Asia and its leaders wondering just what sort of regional community they are building.
The modern sense of building a pan-Asian community began with the traumatic East Asian financial and economic crisis of 1997, when all the countries of the Asia-Pacific region learned the hard way that national reforms and protections could turn out to be woefully inadequate. Soon afterwards, a consensus formed among many Asian leaders that broader cooperation and coordination were needed.
Even during that 1997 crisis, this lesson was already being recognized, for the members of APEC remained committed to trade liberalization, one of the key forces that helped restart growth in Asia’s economies. Indeed, the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in 1997 designated 15 major sectors — including automobiles, chemicals, energy assets and environmental measures — for early liberalization. Looking back at Asia’s economic growth over the past 12 years, it is clear that liberalization of trade and investment paid off.
Realizing that economics cannot be neatly separated from politics, APEC soon began to include security issues in its agenda. In 2002, APEC leaders launched the STAR initiative, establishing a “Secure Trade Area in the APEC Region.”
STAR safeguards the flow of goods and people through measures that secure ships, aviation and travelers — thereby enhancing cross-border security, customs networking and protection of corporate supply chains. This was followed in 2003–2004 by heightening security cooperation through the Counterterrorism Task Force, as well as the Asian Development Bank’s Trade and Financial Security Initiative.
These initiatives have undoubtedly deepened Asia’s sense of community. But now that community must confront its greatest challenge: the rise of China. As China grows mightier economically and politically, how can long-term stability in the Asia-Pacific be ensured?
I believe that a shift from Pax Americana to Pax Asia-Pacifica could be the answer. Just as the nations of Western Europe exploited the Cold War stalemate to build the EU, Asia must exploit the common interests that the US, Japan, China, India, South Korea, Russia, Australia, New Zealand and all the Southeast Asian countries have in securing a peaceful and stable Asia-Pacific.
Under the Cold War “balance of terror,” Western Europe organized an economic, political and cultural community that has now brought about a modern era of “perpetual peace” on that continent. APEC members, too, should use the existing umbrella of Pax Americana to accelerate economic, security and political integration before new rivalries emerge to thwart their efforts.
Many of the instruments for greater integration already exist. There is, to start, the ASEAN. But larger groupings — “ASEAN plus China” and a future “ASEAN plus Japan, South Korea and India” — are being negotiated.
Among the political tasks these broader groups are beginning to broach are strategies to defeat terrorism without alienating the region’s large, indigenous Muslim population. Asian leaders must somehow also manage the pace of globalization. Just as Southeast Asia’s peasant rebellions of the 1930s were a reaction to the breakdown of an earlier episode of globalization, so Islamism in Asia is a response to our new secularist/consumerist societies.
Across Asia, APEC is playing the central role in creating a Pax Asia-Pacifica. Unlike Pax Americana, which has been imposed by US military force, this will be a peace among virtual equals. The new Asia-Pacific security architecture should emanate from cooperation based not on a “balance of power” but on burden-sharing to bring about a “balance of mutual benefit.”
Clearly, Pax Asia-Pacifica must be built on an unswerving commitment to peace among APEC’s most powerful countries — the US, China and Japan. A productive Chinese contribution would demonstrate its commitment to being a responsible stakeholder in the wider world community.
Japan, too, must play an active role in security and peacekeeping. A crucial factor in ensuring Pax Asia-Pacifica is the synergistic relationship between China and Japan. In the interest of regional peace, both major powers must stop letting historical resentments obstruct a more harmonious and prosperous future for the Asia-Pacific region.
Once these political shifts begin, APEC can begin to transform itself into an Asia-Pacific Community for Economic Cooperation and Security. The strategic test will be for regional organizations — such as APEC — to ensure that the spirit of cooperation always outweighs the member states’ competitive impulses. European nations recognized this a half-century ago, and Asian countries must make that same, self-restricting choice now.
Whatever our shared endeavors, Asians must take care that they are undertaken through shared responsibilities, shared burdens, shared values and shared benefits. Only in this way will Asia achieve a higher quality of life and greater security for all its peoples.
Fidel Ramos is a former president of the Philippines.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS