Effects of the U.S. presence in Asia

Effects of the U.S. presence in Asia

By Sayidiman Suryohadiprojo

JAKARTA (JP): During his visit to Southeast Asia this month,
U.S. Secretary of Defense William Cohen stated firmly that the
U.S. government had decided to maintain its military presence in
East Asia. He said that the forward deployment of U.S. military
forces in East Asia was not only to guarantee his nation's
interests, but to benefit Asian nations interested in the
maintenance of stability and the balance of power in the region.

This is quite easy to understand because the U.S. has many
interests in East Asia which must be guarded. The economic boom
that has taken place lately in the U.S. under the Clinton
administration has been facilitated by developments in East Asia.
The U.S. certainly wants to gain more economic benefits from its
relations with East Asian nations. Although many East Asian
nations currently are facing very serious economic problems, U.S.
leaders are convinced that the present situation is only
temporary and that the region will overcome its grave
difficulties and move forward again with a dynamism that it has
demonstrated in the past.

That is why the U.S. has always wanted to be a part of East
Asian developments, preferably a leading part. That is why it
will never agree with Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's concept
of an East Asian economic grouping without U.S. membership. The
U.S. military presence should take care of this interest.

Politically, the U.S. does not wish to see China develop into
a rival that is capable of threatening U.S. interests in the
global arena, let alone in Asia. China shows a potential to
develop into a world power since it has been able to grow
economically by more than 10 percent annually on a continuous
basis. It has also been able to modernize and strengthen its
military which is increasingly becoming capable of projecting its
power both in the region and globally. This development is
certainly not very agreeable to the U.S.

The U.S. is right if it concludes that its military presence
in East Asia also benefits many East Asian nations. Japan is
definitely interested in a U.S. presence because it does not have
the obligation to start a military buildup to balance China's
growing military capabilities. A change in Japan's defense policy
could start a political chain reaction which could change
perceptions of the balance of power and create tension.

The Koreans are certainly glad with the U.S. decision for a
continued presence since it supports a peaceful and systematic
unification of the two Koreas.

In Southeast Asia, most members of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) warmly welcome the U.S. military
presence. Some of them are worried about the growth of China's
military power. Others are also concerned about a Japanese
military buildup, while one or two of them view the U.S. military
presence as a guarantee of ASEAN harmony. It is common knowledge
that certain parties in ASEAN hold some anxiety about a strong
Indonesia and its potential assertiveness toward its neighbors.

We can therefore say that the U.S. decision is generally well
accepted in East Asia. There are even rumors that certain
elements in China view the U.S. decision somewhat favorably since
there are some who are worried about a remilitarized Japan. They
regard the U.S. decision as a safeguard against that possibility.

There are, however, some possible problems for the future
which could harm the relations between East Asian nations and the
American people. When, in the 1970's and the 1980's, Japan
demonstrated its formidable economic prowess, which was viewed as
a cause of the economic slowdown in the U.S., the American people
reacted angrily.

When the Japanese yen became very strong in relation to the
U.S. dollar and wealthy Japanese started buying up American
property in the U.S., including the famous Pebble Beach Golf
Course, the RCA building in New York and other significant
American realty, the American people became very critical of the
Japanese. They accused Japan of taking a free ride under the
American nuclear umbrella to enrich themselves, while at the same
time destroying the American economy.

Many American companies could not compete with Japanese
companies and had to go bankrupt resulting in thousands of
Americans being laid off. All this could only happen, according
the American view, because the Japanese did not need to make
heavy expenditures for defense since the U.S. military protected
Japan.

Many Americans were very disgusted with the situation. Some
federal legislators demonstrated their strong sentiments against
Japanese economic superiority by destroying a Japanese-made car
in front of the Congressional building. In other demonstrations
of emotions, laborers damaged Japanese properties in the U.S.
There was a strong anti-Japanese sentiment throughout the nation.
Some people were crying for war against Japan -- at least an
economic or trade war.

Could the same thing not happen if East Asian nations were
able to overcome their present economic difficulties, become
wealthy and effectively compete against the Americans? The
American people could certainly accuse East Asian nations that
they were free from large defense spending because of the U.S.
military presence, much as they did with the Japanese.

If East Asian countries were able to strongly compete with
U.S. companies, we would have to anticipate the growth of an
anti-Asian sentiment in the U.S. What the consequences of such a
sentiment would be only the future could tell. This negative side
of the U.S. military presence in East Asia cannot be overlooked.

The writer is an ambassador at large to the Nonaligned
Movement. He is a former Indonesian ambassador to Japan and a
former governor of the National Resilience Institute.