Now that Democratic Senator Barack Obama has made history by being elected US president, people throughout the Asia-Pacific region fervently hope he will focus on Asia in a way that he did not during the election season. In the past few months, every time I visited an Asian country — whether South Korea or India, China or Japan — I was asked repeatedly about candidate Obama’s positions on three issues: trade, foreign policy and the new geo-economic order. We all now hope that president-elect Obama will provide the answers, not only in words, but also in actions.
Policy wonks and interested Asians alike often say that when Republicans are in power in the US, Asians breathe a confident sigh of relief. Their assumption is that Republicans will back free trade and oppose protectionism. This time around, they have not heard much from the president-elect on trade with Asia, and what they have heard about his position on the North American Free Trade Agreement — an alleged desire to rewrite that trade pact unilaterally — does not inspire confidence.
At the same time, countries like India feel that the US, along with Europe, have been on both sides of “free” and “fair” trade — but always from a narrow nationalistic perspective. If the US is serious about “fair” trade, they say, the new administration will need, for example, to deal with the unfairness of agricultural subsidies, which led to the collapse of the Doha round of WTO talks. Most importantly, a trade policy must be articulated that is both free and fair (not only for US workers, but also for Asian workers) and that reassures Asians that Obama will be aware of their needs.
While the US economy falls into a deep recession, the economies of large Asian countries like China and India will continue to grow at an annual rate of 7 percent to 9 percent. They will remain an important source of import demand, especially for high technology and industrial goods. This could be a great boon to the US economy.
Asian leaders have often complained that at a time when Asia became increasingly interconnected and China began to enlarge its sphere of influence, the US was largely absent in the region. Indeed, for the past seven years US foreign policy seems to have been conducted entirely through the prism of the “war on terror” and the Iraq War. While there were some singular bilateral accomplishments, such as the adoption of the US-India civil nuclear energy deal, the US has been perceived to be less effective in dealing with the region’s burgeoning multilateral frameworks.
Now, fully aware of Obama’s claims for a presidency that will be about the future, Asians are eager to hear about his vision of the Asia-Pacific region and how the US will deal with Asia’s giants — China and India — while maintaining strong connections to Japan.
The need for Obama to address the region’s new realities early in his tenure has been underlined by the current financial crisis, which has made abundantly clear that the center of global economic power has shifted toward the East. It is also clear that the West’s future role will depend on how the US manages this new distribution of power.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has begun to talk about a Bretton Woods II that would give a bigger voice to Asia in the world’s great multilateral financial and economic institutions, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy has asked that China help the West during these difficult times.
And, while scholars have begun to talk about building an Asia-Pacific community that can match the Atlantic community’s extensive network of relationships, there has been no clear signal from the US government about the US’ role in this transformation. So Asians are keen to hear Obama’s thoughts about a new or renewed international system, and hope that his vision of a new global order will incorporate the rising countries of Asia as US partners.
I was in Korea last week, and several of my friends and colleagues, some in prominent public positions, were thrilled at the prospect of the new US president. They marveled at the fact that US democracy can actually make it possible for a youngish African-American to become the leader of the free world. Now, this rising region is desperate to hear Obama’s thoughts about the US’ role in Asia, thoughts that are commensurate with Asia’s importance — and with the scope of his vision.
Vishakha Desai is president of the Asia Society.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS