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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS