Bush's eventful administration<\/p>\n
By Karim Raslan<\/p>\n
KUALA LUMPUR (JP): President Bush's new administration has
\nbeen eventful and three events stand out. All three will have
\nserious implications for American foreign policy in the Asia-
\nPacific. The first is the mounting tension with China, rising
\nout of the Hainan spy-plane incident and the administration's
\ndecision to sell a slew of high-powered weaponry (but not the
\nAegis battle systems) to the Taiwanese. The second is the refusal
\nto ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The third is the American economy's
\nimpending slow-down.<\/p>\n
The handling of these issues underlines four key lessons for
\nthose interested in business and politics in the Asia-Pacific.
\nMoreover the direction American foreign policy is taking means
\nWashington will have to focus more on Southeast Asia and
\nIndonesia in particular.<\/p>\n
The most important thing to bear in mind -- before we get
\nover-excited over the return of the \"Cold War\" warriors to the
\nWhite House -- is that foreign policy is of little importance
\nwithin Washington DC's notoriously self-obsessed Beltway (the
\nhighway that encircles the federal capital).<\/p>\n
Contrary to what most Asians might like to think the economy
\nremains the President's chief concern. We, in Asia, including
\nChina, are a sideshow. Moreover George W. needs to focus on his
\ndomestic priorities -- education, tax cuts, health care -- in
\norder to push his legislative agenda on Capitol Hill. He cannot
\nafford to be derailed. His electoral mandate is too slim and the
\nchances of recouping any loss momentum are even slimmer.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, Bush has had to clean up the mess left behind by
\nformer president Clinton. His so-called \"historic rapprochement\"
\nwith North Korea is a case in point. Clinton frittered away too
\nmuch attention and political capital on a rogue regime just as
\nvital allies such as Indonesia were being tossed onto the rubbish
\ntip.<\/p>\n
The second point is the \"Crouching Rumsfield, Hidden Bush\"
\nsyndrome. Frankly we would all like to know who is taking the
\ndecisions in the White House. Bush's carefully staged TV
\ninterviews leave one with the impression that he is a tightly
\nscripted performer: the political equivalent of a boy band. As a
\nconsequence when he makes a slip-up -- witness the double-speak
\non the American commitment to Taiwan's defense -- the results are
\ncatastrophic.<\/p>\n
Are the conservatives (led by Vice President, Dick Cheney)
\ndirecting foreign policy? Clearly many of their number are
\nunimpressed by the President. Their bible, The Weekly Standard
\nhas accused Bush of a precipitating a national humiliation over
\nthe spy plane. On the other hand, are the internationalists, such
\nas Powell, Jim Kelley and Paul Wolfowitz driving the agenda? No
\none is too sure and this uncertainty is disturbing.<\/p>\n
The third point is that the show-down between the Americans
\nand the Chinese has had a positive result because the new
\nadministration has injected a note of realism into the discourse.<\/p>\n
American policy-makers and businessmen have been seduced by
\nChina. They visit Shanghai and then start swooning like teenage
\ngirls. The view from the eightieth floor of the Grand Hyatt in
\nthe Jin Mao Tower overlooking Pudong leaves them breathless. They
\nsee the numbers -- by the end of 2001 China with 130 million
\nhand-phone subscribers will be largest mobile telephony market in
\nthe world -- and can't stop drooling.<\/p>\n
Greed makes people do silly things and powerful US
\ncorporations have had far too much influence on China policy. In
\ntheir pursuit of the elusive Chinese market they've focused on
\nfuture profits whilst forgetting the present inadequacies: the
\nterrible law and order problems, the corruption, the
\nenvironmental degradation and the political uncertainties. In
\nstrategic terms American over-investment could leave these same
\ncorporations vulnerable to a sudden change in China's domestic
\npolitics.<\/p>\n
The fourth point is that there really are serious cultural
\ndifferences between the two countries. Dealing with China
\nrequires caution, intelligence, confidence and consistency.
\nMoreover you must have learnt about Chinese culture and history.
\nFor example, the Chinese still tend to view history in terms of
\ndynasties, many of which have lasted centuries. By way of
\ncontrast the Americans tend to see historical events in terms of
\npresidents, ew of whom have survived for more than one term.<\/p>\n
Learning about your adversary is the first step to
\ncomprehending his strengths and weaknesses. However, many
\nconservatives (often funded by the influential Taiwanese lobby)
\nargue that acquiring specialist knowledge is the first step to
\n\"commie-cuddling\".<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, these cultural differences will not be
\ndisappear as China prospers. Materialism and westernization will
\nnot make the Chinese people love the United States -- why do
\nAmericans want to be loved anyhow? While the Chinese enjoy
\nAmerican technology, fashion and popular culture they will never
\nbecome undying fans of the Stars and Stripes.<\/p>\n
From my experience, the younger generation of Chinese leaders,
\nwhether business, academic or political have been liberated from
\nthe limitations of Confucian strictures by the Cultural
\nRevolution. They are bold, outspoken and aggressively
\nnationalistic. Their confidence and articulateness is quite
\nunlike the inexpressiveness of their Japanese equivalents.<\/p>\n
The fourth point is that the Americans under Bush are in
\ndanger of diplomatic over-reach. Acting unilaterally they have
\nbeen angering all their allies both in the Asia Pacific and
\nEurope without exception. The United States is an extraordinarily
\npowerful nation. However, it will need friends, especially as its
\neconomy begins to grind to a halt.<\/p>\n
In this respect the United States' obsession with China at the
\nexpense of its traditional allies and friends in Asia is
\nparticularly foolish -- though Bush is committed to reversing
\nthis trend by focusing on Japan and Korea. However both countries
\nwill be distracted by the implementation of domestic reforms.<\/p>\n
The new administration must extend its attentions to Southeast
\nAsia. American policy-makers and businessmen must revisit the
\nregion. We are the bulwark to China. Whilst we are close to the
\nMiddle Kingdom we have long been wary of its strength
\ncommercially and politically. It goes without saying that we will
\nwork hard to avoid regional hegemony (American or Chinese) at all
\ncosts.<\/p>\n
In commercial terms we remain a great market and a superb
\nworkplace. And, having undergone a measure of political
\ntransition we are well ahead of the Chinese in terms of our
\npolitical stability and maturity. Moreover Southeast Asia is
\nculturally more open and diverse than China.<\/p>\n
If the United States is serious about its role in the Asia
\nPacific it must invest time, energy and money in Southeast Asia.
\nThe new Secretary of State, Colin Powell should make a point of
\nvisiting Indonesia when he visits the region next month. Stopping
\noff in Hanoi is not enough. America must send a clear signal of
\nits support and concern for Indonesia as a nation. This does not
\nmean siding with either Abdurrahman Wahid or Megawati
\nSoekarnoputri.<\/p>\n
The United States must work to prevent the Indonesia's
\ndisintegration. It is unwise to treat Indonesia as a pariah. The
\nignominy of forcing the world's third largest democracy to beg in
\nfront of the IMF and the World Bank will come back to haunt the
\nAmericans. In extending the hand of friendship to Indonesia, the
\nAmericans will bolster their authority in the region.<\/p>\n
Making friends is a sign of wisdom, not weakness.<\/p>\n
The writer is a Kuala Lumpur-based lawyer and writer.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/bushs-eventful-administration-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }