Bush's eventful administration

Bush's eventful administration

By Karim Raslan

KUALA LUMPUR (JP): President Bush's new administration has
been eventful and three events stand out. All three will have
serious implications for American foreign policy in the Asia-
Pacific. The first is the mounting tension with China, rising
out of the Hainan spy-plane incident and the administration's
decision to sell a slew of high-powered weaponry (but not the
Aegis battle systems) to the Taiwanese. The second is the refusal
to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. The third is the American economy's
impending slow-down.

The handling of these issues underlines four key lessons for
those interested in business and politics in the Asia-Pacific.
Moreover the direction American foreign policy is taking means
Washington will have to focus more on Southeast Asia and
Indonesia in particular.

The most important thing to bear in mind -- before we get
over-excited over the return of the "Cold War" warriors to the
White House -- is that foreign policy is of little importance
within Washington DC's notoriously self-obsessed Beltway (the
highway that encircles the federal capital).

Contrary to what most Asians might like to think the economy
remains the President's chief concern. We, in Asia, including
China, are a sideshow. Moreover George W. needs to focus on his
domestic priorities -- education, tax cuts, health care -- in
order to push his legislative agenda on Capitol Hill. He cannot
afford to be derailed. His electoral mandate is too slim and the
chances of recouping any loss momentum are even slimmer.

Furthermore, Bush has had to clean up the mess left behind by
former president Clinton. His so-called "historic rapprochement"
with North Korea is a case in point. Clinton frittered away too
much attention and political capital on a rogue regime just as
vital allies such as Indonesia were being tossed onto the rubbish
tip.

The second point is the "Crouching Rumsfield, Hidden Bush"
syndrome. Frankly we would all like to know who is taking the
decisions in the White House. Bush's carefully staged TV
interviews leave one with the impression that he is a tightly
scripted performer: the political equivalent of a boy band. As a
consequence when he makes a slip-up -- witness the double-speak
on the American commitment to Taiwan's defense -- the results are
catastrophic.

Are the conservatives (led by Vice President, Dick Cheney)
directing foreign policy? Clearly many of their number are
unimpressed by the President. Their bible, The Weekly Standard
has accused Bush of a precipitating a national humiliation over
the spy plane. On the other hand, are the internationalists, such
as Powell, Jim Kelley and Paul Wolfowitz driving the agenda? No
one is too sure and this uncertainty is disturbing.

The third point is that the show-down between the Americans
and the Chinese has had a positive result because the new
administration has injected a note of realism into the discourse.

American policy-makers and businessmen have been seduced by
China. They visit Shanghai and then start swooning like teenage
girls. The view from the eightieth floor of the Grand Hyatt in
the Jin Mao Tower overlooking Pudong leaves them breathless. They
see the numbers -- by the end of 2001 China with 130 million
hand-phone subscribers will be largest mobile telephony market in
the world -- and can't stop drooling.

Greed makes people do silly things and powerful US
corporations have had far too much influence on China policy. In
their pursuit of the elusive Chinese market they've focused on
future profits whilst forgetting the present inadequacies: the
terrible law and order problems, the corruption, the
environmental degradation and the political uncertainties. In
strategic terms American over-investment could leave these same
corporations vulnerable to a sudden change in China's domestic
politics.

The fourth point is that there really are serious cultural
differences between the two countries. Dealing with China
requires caution, intelligence, confidence and consistency.
Moreover you must have learnt about Chinese culture and history.
For example, the Chinese still tend to view history in terms of
dynasties, many of which have lasted centuries. By way of
contrast the Americans tend to see historical events in terms of
presidents, ew of whom have survived for more than one term.

Learning about your adversary is the first step to
comprehending his strengths and weaknesses. However, many
conservatives (often funded by the influential Taiwanese lobby)
argue that acquiring specialist knowledge is the first step to
"commie-cuddling".

Unfortunately, these cultural differences will not be
disappear as China prospers. Materialism and westernization will
not make the Chinese people love the United States -- why do
Americans want to be loved anyhow? While the Chinese enjoy
American technology, fashion and popular culture they will never
become undying fans of the Stars and Stripes.

From my experience, the younger generation of Chinese leaders,
whether business, academic or political have been liberated from
the limitations of Confucian strictures by the Cultural
Revolution. They are bold, outspoken and aggressively
nationalistic. Their confidence and articulateness is quite
unlike the inexpressiveness of their Japanese equivalents.

The fourth point is that the Americans under Bush are in
danger of diplomatic over-reach. Acting unilaterally they have
been angering all their allies both in the Asia Pacific and
Europe without exception. The United States is an extraordinarily
powerful nation. However, it will need friends, especially as its
economy begins to grind to a halt.

In this respect the United States' obsession with China at the
expense of its traditional allies and friends in Asia is
particularly foolish -- though Bush is committed to reversing
this trend by focusing on Japan and Korea. However both countries
will be distracted by the implementation of domestic reforms.

The new administration must extend its attentions to Southeast
Asia. American policy-makers and businessmen must revisit the
region. We are the bulwark to China. Whilst we are close to the
Middle Kingdom we have long been wary of its strength
commercially and politically. It goes without saying that we will
work hard to avoid regional hegemony (American or Chinese) at all
costs.

In commercial terms we remain a great market and a superb
workplace. And, having undergone a measure of political
transition we are well ahead of the Chinese in terms of our
political stability and maturity. Moreover Southeast Asia is
culturally more open and diverse than China.

If the United States is serious about its role in the Asia
Pacific it must invest time, energy and money in Southeast Asia.
The new Secretary of State, Colin Powell should make a point of
visiting Indonesia when he visits the region next month. Stopping
off in Hanoi is not enough. America must send a clear signal of
its support and concern for Indonesia as a nation. This does not
mean siding with either Abdurrahman Wahid or Megawati
Soekarnoputri.

The United States must work to prevent the Indonesia's
disintegration. It is unwise to treat Indonesia as a pariah. The
ignominy of forcing the world's third largest democracy to beg in
front of the IMF and the World Bank will come back to haunt the
Americans. In extending the hand of friendship to Indonesia, the
Americans will bolster their authority in the region.

Making friends is a sign of wisdom, not weakness.

The writer is a Kuala Lumpur-based lawyer and writer.