Note: forwarded message attached.
---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Mail is the ultimate force in competitive emailing. Find out more
at the Yahoo! Mail Championships. Plus: play games and win prizes.--- Begin Message ---
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201061.html
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
America's Quiet Victories in Asia
By Michael J. Green
Last month the leaders of 16 Asian nations met in the Philippines for the
second East Asian Summit and agreed to work for better energy security and
reduced poverty. The 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
signed an agreement with China on trade and services and pledged to work toward
a broader free-trade agreement. President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo of the
Philippines, a traditional U.S. ally, declared that "we are happy to have China
as our big brother in this region." No Americans were invited to the summit.
Is America's Pacific Century over? Is America losing Asia to China? Not yet. As
with all things Asian, the appearance of harmony in the meetings in Cebu does
not entirely match reality. Almost all the major leaders at the summit still
trust Washington more than their neighbors, China in particular. And while
China may be key to the region's economic dynamism, the political model the
leaders are increasingly embracing for long-term success is the one championed
by the United States.
Take the East Asia Summit itself. When China proposed hosting the meeting two
years ago, many in the region reacted with alarm. Singapore and Japan pushed
successfully for the inclusion of leaders from India, Australia and New Zealand
to balance Chinese influence, and ASEAN won agreement that only its members
could host the summits. Meanwhile, Singapore signed a strategic framework
agreement granting greater access to U.S. forces, Indonesia took steps that
allowed the United States to resume bilateral military contacts, and Vietnam
signed an agreement allowing greater religious freedom to help ensure a
successful summit with President Bush and closer strategic alignment with
Washington. Arroyo's obsequious nod to "big brother" in Beijing aside, Asian
leaders are not about to let the Pacific become a Chinese lake.
The regional trade agreements are also less threatening to U.S. interests than
they sound. Most economists expect little trade distortion or barriers to
American firms from these agreements, which are pockmarked with exemptions. To
the extent that more advanced economies such as those of Japan or Singapore are
using these intraregional economic discussions to increase transparency,
capacity and governance in the less-developed economies, such as Indonesia's,
it helps U.S. business. Ultimately, Asia still depends heavily on U.S. capital
and foreign direct investment and markets to sustain economic growth.
America's greatest source of soft power in Asia is the Asian embrace of
democracy. At its founding, ASEAN members were all led by authoritarian leaders
or dictators; the guiding principle of the organization was "noninterference in
internal affairs" -- a platitude that essentially represented a rejection of
universal values. Today, China is embracing that principle of noninterference,
but ASEAN is moving on. The most important document at Cebu was not about trade
or energy but the draft of ASEAN's new governing charter, which says regional
peace and stability rest on "the active strengthening of democratic values,
good governance, rejection of unconstitutional and undemocratic changes of
government, the rule of law, including international humanitarian law, and
respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms."
Thomas Jefferson could not have put it better, but this is the thinking of
Indonesia's first directly elected president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. It is
the vision of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, who has rejected decades of
mercantilist thinking in an effort to define a new purpose for a resurgent
Japan. It is a central theme of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, who is
moving India beyond non-alignment and championing democracy as the answer to
the increasing threat of failed states and terrorism in India's neighborhood.
None of these leaders embraced democracy because it was imposed by the United
States, nor are they contemplating imposing democracy on their neighbors. Many
continue to have major governance and democracy challenges (Thailand's coup for
one) and are torn over how to manage the undemocratic disaster that is Burma.
Yet all recognize that their economic development and national security depend
on the spread of democratic principles and good governance. As these values are
consolidated across the region, they will inevitably affect China, Burma and
even North Korea.
The United States has a winning hand in Asia and needs to play it. This means
more engagement at senior levels -- with China, but particularly with
like-minded leaders in India, Japan and Indonesia. It means completing our
free-trade negotiations with Korea so that the United States sets the standard
for trade liberalization in the region. Above all it means not abandoning our
commitment to the promotion of democracy in Asia, where we are succeeding
despite setbacks in Iraq and the Middle East.
The writer was senior director for Asian affairs at the National Security
Council from January 2004 to December 2005. He is at the Center for Strategic
and International Studies and Georgetown University.
--- End Message ---
