U.S. rethinking ties to Asia groups<\/p>\n
WASHINGTON (Reuters): The Bush administration, girding for
\nbattle for influence in Asia, is rethinking its relationship to
\nregional organizations there, according to U.S. officials.<\/p>\n
The brainstorming is still in the very early stages and
\nofficials told Reuters in interviews there are no plans to
\nwithdraw from the main regional groupings -- the Association of
\nSoutheast Asian Nations (ASEAN), its related Asian Regional Forum
\n(ARF), a security body, and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation
\nforum (APEC).<\/p>\n
But they said they are mulling over ways in which the United
\nStates might strengthen ASEAN as well as firm up Washington's
\nties to the region's democracies. It ties in with President
\nGeorge W. Bush's overall increased focus on Asia as the primary
\nvenue for potential security threats.<\/p>\n
\"We're having a battle for influence in Asia\" with China on
\none side and the United States-Japan on the other side, said one
\nsenior official who spoke on condition of anonymity.
\n\"ASEAN plays the field in the middle,\" he added.<\/p>\n
Another official said there is a \"general sense\" in the
\nadministration that ASEAN \"expanded too quickly and incorporated
\ncountries that lag behind the other ASEAN states in terms of
\neconomic, political and social development.\"<\/p>\n
\"This has made it difficult for ASEAN to do things concretely.
\nProductivity of ASEAN meetings has dropped,\" giving stimulus to
\nadministration officials \"who are scratching their heads and
\ntrying to think about alternative ways to look at Asia and deal
\nwith some of the Asian countries,\" he said.<\/p>\n
Plans on ASEAN<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, he insisted: \"The United States is not going to
\nboycott or leave ASEAN in any sense.\"<\/p>\n
A leading proponent of new thinking in the Asian-Pacific
\nregion has been Adm. Dennis Blair, commander in chief of U.S.
\nforces in the Pacific.<\/p>\n
He has been promoting the idea of developing a \"hub and spokes
\nseries of bilateral relationships into a network of multilateral
\nrelationships, which have a strong bilateral basis but then go on
\nto new forms.\"<\/p>\n
ASEAN was founded in 1967 in response to a perceived threat of
\nCommunist insurgency in Asia. Its members were Singapore, the
\nPhilippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Brunei when in the
\nlate 1990's the grouping expanded to include Vietnam, Laos, Burma
\nand Cambodia.<\/p>\n
ARF, established in 1994 to focus on security, combines
\nASEAN's 10 members in talks with the United States, China,
\nRussia, Japan, the European Union, Canada, Australia, India,
\nPapua New Guinea, New Zealand, Mongolia and North Korea.<\/p>\n
The hard-line view on ASEAN is represented by Republican
\nanalyst Ellen Bork, who argued recently in the Asian Wall Street
\nJournal that the group has \"outlived its usefulness.\"<\/p>\n
\"Hopes that ASEAN, and its corollary ARF, can promote harmony
\nand stability in Asia are misplaced,\" she wrote.<\/p>\n
\"The regional group's membership, history and principles are
\nirreconcilable with the most important element in achieving them
\n-- democratic principles,\" she said, adding:
\n\"What Asia needs is an alliance of democratic nations committed
\nto the freedom and security of its members.\"<\/p>\n
Bork's analysis caught the attention of the White House, where
\na senior official called it a \"very good piece\" that correctly
\nconcluded \"we have more in common with countries that are
\ndemocracies.\"<\/p>\n
But he rejected Bork's remedy, that ASEAN is unfixable and the
\nUnited States should turn its energies towards helping to
\nestablish \"a regional political and military alliance committed
\nto strengthening the democracy and security of its members and
\nexpanding it in the region.\"<\/p>\n
\"I don't agree that ASEAN and ARF are a waste of time. I think
\nthey are important and it's worthwhile for the United States to
\nparticipate in all of that,\" the official said.<\/p>\n
ASEAN gives Asian states an organizing structure and a role in
\nregional affairs, a place where more powerful nations come to
\nconsult and court their support. Any attempt to replace it would
\nbe opposed by ASEAN members, he said.<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, he said \"maybe there is something else ... we
\nshould look for what are those institutions that we should be
\nputting the government's energy behind for the new century.\"<\/p>\n
U.S. officials said their thinking is still very undefined and
\nit is far too early to foreshadow with any certainty what will
\ncome out of the exercise.<\/p>\n
\"Maybe we need to do more with the Philippines than we are
\ndoing,\" as well as with Thailand, Singapore, Australia, South
\nKorea, Taiwan, Japan and other \"like-minded countries,\" one
\nofficial said.<\/p>\n
The expectation is not that the United States would throw its
\nweight behind one new multilateral institution but that it would
\nstrengthen bilateral relations or a \"network of bilateral
\nrelations\" or negotiate \"more aggressive free trade agreements\"
\nwith various Asian countries, he said.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/us-rethinking-ties-to-asia-groups-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}