The evolving strategic balance in Asia

The evolving strategic balance in Asia

By Juwono Sudarsono

The following article is based on prepared remarks made at the
China-Indonesia Security Dialog, organized by the China Institute
of International and Strategic Studies and the National Defense
University in Beijing on March 28-29, 1996.

BEIJING: The evolving strategic balance in Asia and the
Pacific today comprises the changing political, economic and
military priorities of China, the United States, Japan and
Russia. By 2010 the strategic quadrangle should be consummated
into a new stable distribution of power reflecting a more
enduring political, economic and military arrangement among the
four major powers.

The strategic balance has far reaching implications for the
Asia-Pacific and profoundly affects the development trajectories
of other states in the region. More importantly, the effective
implementation of cooperative engagement and comprehensive
security require understanding of the current transition from a
situation largely determined by the combined preponderance of the
United States and Japan to a more balanced equilibrium
incorporating the role of China and Russia.

The transition is definitely moving toward a more Asia-centric
security paradigm with China and Japan as chief determinants.
China's role is especially pivotal for the simple reason that it
will be the second largest economy in the world by 2005. China's
vast physical expanse, population and its geopolitical setting
connecting the Asia land mass of Northeast Asia and Southeast
Asia merit the attention and understanding of all of its Asia-
Pacific neighbors.

Although greater attention and effort will continue to focus
on economic interaction involving all APEC economies, the
continued success of that process will be determined by how the
security dimension will be handled within a new distribution of
power among China, Japan, the United States and Russia. A clearer
identification of the convergence between economic transformation
and changing security priorities need to be mapped out and
periodically assessed. Therein lies the challenge of matching
progress in Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) with
tangible benchmarks in the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF)
consultative process.

As economic growth in the region advances and the need to
secure energy resources becomes more acute, military tensions in
the region increase the possibility that combined strategic,
conventional and low intensity considerations will have to be
factored in along with diplomatic maneuvering over global trade,
investment and financing rules. Nations which need to sustain
growth rates of 8 percent to 10 percent for the next decade must
calibrate their energy needs and link that strategy with
appropriate security policies commensurate with the region's
specific features.

Although in security terms Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia
are related, there is merit in separating the two regions into
distinct categories. Each region has its peculiar strategic
circumstance and local characteristics. The South China and East
China sea lines of communication, for example, are crucial for
Japan's economic viability since they comprise more than 80
percent of Japan's sea-borne trade. That viability affects the
quality of U.S.-Japan alliance structure which in turn influences
the strategic balance in the Korean peninsula.

The sensitivity of the North Korea nuclear weapon build-down
through the October 1994 Agreed Framework attest to the delicate
nature of combining nuclear, conventional, and low intensity
levels of military strategy. These will influence the scope and
timing of Korean unification.

The Spratly Islands dispute is too intricate to be discussed
through diplomatic means alone. Every percentage growth rate that
an Asia Pacific nation strives to sustain ultimately affects the
energy needs of its immediate and region-wide neighbors.
Depending on the situation, forward based strategies through
prepositioning and selective theater forces deployment will have
to be linked to a credible deterrence capability.

In the decade ahead, that deterrence will increasingly involve
the use of electronic-based air and naval forces capable of
integrating radar, surveillance and communications systems. The
air, sea, rail traffic and logistical systems which China is
developing with its neighbors in mainland Southeast Asia are
enhancing inter-region cooperation. New technologies employed in
conjunction with the imperative to secure access to off-shore and
undersea energy resources will become more significant. Along
with increased regionalism and globalism in trade, investments
and finance, all economies in the region must factor in the
security dimension.

Increased linkages between enhance economic imperatives and
need for commensurate military capabilities result in four
national trends that merit special attention.

* The availability of surplus weapons and equipment from NATO and
ex-Warsaw Pact countries have also encouraged substantial growth
in defense expenditure. Though these developments do not
necessarily lead to a regional arms race, even phased
modernization sustained well into the next century can affect
priorities and perceptions of national security.

* Given the uncertainties of the evolving strategic environment,
many Asia Pacific countries are developing their defense industry
capabilities. In the past five years Japan, China, the two
Koreas, Singapore and other countries in the region have invested
heavily in local defense industries. No country can be completely
independent of foreign suppliers. But the emphasis towards
greater self reliance is understandable, since a significant
portion of defense industry enhancement may result in spin-offs
to the broader civilian economy;

* Following the adoption of the Law of the Sea Convention in
November 1994, many nations in the region have legally acquired
territorial rights of the exclusive economic zone. Substantial
resource opportunities have led to expanded security concerns and
responsibilities. Since jurisdiction over these territorial
waters overlap, there is greater need to coordinate policies
exploring options on establishing joint responsibilities rather
than claims of based on sovereignty.

* The paradox of growing economic success leading to
affordability in purchasing new weapons and new equipment pose
serious challenges to building confidence among nations that have
facilitated, if not stimulated, defense spending. Intra-regional
defense cooperation on a bilateral and or multilateral dimensions
require skill and patience to match progress reached in economic
cooperation. Additionally, there has been an important image-
building and prestige factors involved depending on the
leadership style adapted in individual countries.

The writer is Vice Governor of the National Resilience
Institute, Jakarta.