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
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
Workers’ rights groups on July 17 called on the Ministry of Labor to protect migrant fishers, days after CNN reported what it described as a “pattern of abuse” in Taiwan’s distant-water fishing industry. The report detailed the harrowing account of Indonesian migrant fisher Silwanus Tangkotta, who crushed his fingers in a metal door last year while aboard a Taiwanese fishing vessel. The captain reportedly refused to return to port for medical treatment, as they “hadn’t caught enough fish to justify the trip.” Tangkotta lost two fingers, and was fired and denied compensation upon returning to land. Another former migrant fisher, Adrian Dogdodo
RSS