President Bush's Asia policy lacks drive

Weston S. Konishi, The Daily Yomiuri, Asia News Network/Tokyo

In the future, U.S. President George W. Bush is likely to look back at 2005 as his annus horribilis -- a horrible year, when the Bush presidency was hit by the forces of politics and nature.

Amid the overwhelming problems in Iraq and the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, it may be understandable that Bush's attention is distracted from other policy areas -- but that does not make the implications any less troubling. Bush's Asia policy needs more consistent attention, yet there are signs that U.S. policy in the region lacks the drive and focus it had earlier in the administration. If this continues, 2005 may someday be seen as a watershed year not just for the president but for broader U.S. engagement in the region as well.

Bush's visit to Japan, China, Mongolia and South Korea in November is the most recent sign of the drift from the region. The White House had low expectations for the visit and by most accounts those expectations were met.

There was an odd sense of incongruity throughout the trip. Beginning in Japan, Bush gave a speech on democracy aimed largely at China. While in South Korea, mainly to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, Bush dubiously claimed that U.S.- South Korean ties have "never been better." In China, the summit with President Hu Jintao was notably low-key for a meeting of such potential magnitude. As expected, nothing of great consequence emerged from the Mongolia trip.

The lackluster visit to the region is all the more disappointing given the fact much more could have been accomplished. Bush might have used his meeting with Junichiro Koizumi to quietly convince the prime minister to end his Yasukuni Shrine visits, as they have done enough damage to regional interests.

The president's visit to Seoul did produce one intriguing proposal: A pledge for a ministerial-level strategic dialogue between the two allies. Yet this initiative remains undefined, and it is not clear how it will improve on the range of official channels both nations already enjoy.

In Beijing, Bush also passed up the opportunity to reinforce U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick's recent call for China to become a "responsible stakeholder" in the global community. In the absence of any tangible headway across these fronts it is hard to see what was accomplished in the Asia trip at all.

To be fair, summitry is not always the best measure of diplomatic achievement. Substance seldom accompanies state visits. However, what is striking about Bush's meetings in Asia throughout the years is how little he has to show for them.

Having come into office with a particularly strong Asia team, expectations were high that Bush would throw his weight behind a range of regional initiatives, from APEC to the alliance with Japan. While Bush's rapport with Koizumi is positive on a personal level, his record of concrete diplomatic accomplishments in Asia is less stellar.

Beyond Bush's personal involvement in regional diplomacy, there are signs that Washington has allowed ongoing diplomatic initiatives to founder as well. The administration's interest in the six-party talks over North Korea's nuclear ambitions seems to have waned since a set of principles was reached in September. The United States is not the only party responsible for letting the process stall. Pyongyang has done all it can to hamper next steps in the September agreement.

However, there is a general consensus among experts in Washington that, absent of presidential backing, lead U.S. negotiator Chris Hill's effort to sustain momentum in the process has been curtailed by hard-line elements in the administration. Indeed, there are no outward signs that Washington is gearing up for the next round of talks or giving top-level attention to the issue.

One area of Asia policy where the administration has shown persistence is in the bilateral alliance with Japan. After months of painstaking negotiations earlier this year, both allies came to an interim agreement in late October on proposals to transform the alliance and realign U.S. bases across Japan. Pentagon officials were clearly relieved to have completed the negotiations and turn the process back to their Japanese counterparts, who must now convince relevant local communities to accept the base realignment plans.

Still, the implementation of the transformation and realignment plans will require sustained bilateral coordination over the coming months and years, and the United States cannot afford to let that process recede into the background of broader strategic defense initiatives.

Keeping Asia a priority of U.S. foreign policy is a challenge for any administration, but as members of Bush's Asia team rotate out of the government, this endeavor may grow increasingly difficult. U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, perhaps the most senior Asia hand in the first Bush term, left the government earlier this year.

The White House is now in full campaign mode to recover from this year's political damage. It should take a page from former U.S. President Ronald Reagan's second term by reinvigorating its foreign policy agenda in general and focusing more attention on Northeast Asia in particular.

Indeed, the problems affecting the region right now, from historical disputes to the impasse over North Korea, cry out for more active and sustained U.S. leadership. A more ambitious Asia policy, with all the risks and rewards that that entails, could be one way to leave this annus horribilis behind.

The writer is program director at the Maureen and Mike Mansfield Foundation.