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
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
US President Donald Trump’s seemingly throwaway “Taiwan is Taiwan” statement has been appearing in headlines all over the media. Although it appears to have been made in passing, the comment nevertheless reveals something about Trump’s views and his understanding of Taiwan’s situation. In line with the Taiwan Relations Act, the US and Taiwan enjoy unofficial, but close economic, cultural and national defense ties. They lack official diplomatic relations, but maintain a partnership based on shared democratic values and strategic alignment. Excluding China, Taiwan maintains a level of diplomatic relations, official or otherwise, with many nations worldwide. It can be said that
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
RSS