U.S. losing Asian influence role to Japan

By Edward Neilan

Indian nuclear test, Indonesian disruptions expose Washington policy neglect while Tokyo has power leverage.

TOKYO (JP): The United States is losing its predominant position in the Asian power equation, as seen in weak Washington responses to India's surprise nuclear test and the downward spiral of public order in Indonesia.

Japan, with low-visibility policies sometimes seen as unimaginative but with a plodding persistence, is subtly gaining influence in the region at U.S. expense, according to some analysts. Because it is quiet, seldom asserted and often belittled, Japan's role as an Asian leader gets little media attention and focus.

"U.S. policy entered the 20th century in Asia and dominated it with a bang, but if the current trend persists, it may depart the century in Asia-Pacific with a whimper," said a retired Western diplomat who visits Tokyo often.

He added that previous American boldness and leadership in the region -- couched in an engaging earnestness and even naivete -- had given way to arrogance and neglect. The characterization may be overly dramatic but there are threads of accuracy in it.

The sentiment finds echoes among many expatriates. There are feelings of misgivings among Americans with experience in Asia that the U.S. will come out of the current crises with India and Indonesia in a weakened position. Japan's position, partly by default, partly by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' consistent if sometimes maddeningly uninspired policies, will be strengthened.

The Indian nuclear test has already revised the agenda for U.S. President Bill Clinton's visit to China next month.

Japan, with a wartime reputation still to live down in Asia and a financial and societal restructuring struggle at home, is emerging as the nation with the most levers of power at its disposal in Asia. In Indonesia, Japan is far and away the foreign power with the most influence.

While the internal U.S. debate over the effect of sanctions against India persists -- an issue which rendered the G-8 leaders indecisive in their Birmingham summit -- Japan is confident that its sanctions against India will work.

Recalled Japanese Ambassador to India Hiroshi Hirabayashi said in Tokyo that economic sanctions which Japan imposed on New Delhi to protest its five nuclear test explosions last week "will have a serious impact on the Indian economy."

Japan uses imposing and eventually lifting of sanctions for diplomatic and business advantage as in the case of the temporary restrictions Tokyo imposed on China after the Tiananmen Square incident of 1989 and China's nuclear tests.

Overall, the U.S. clout in Asia has diminished with the relative emasculation of its military presence in all but Japan and South Korea. There are pressures in both places to reduce the levels further or at least to make more careful bilateral, instead of unilateral, decisions on the continued presence.

Beyond the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty (1951,1960) and the Mutual Cooperation and Security Treaty with South Korea (1954) there are few remaining elements of U.S. power in place.

Aside from programs in which selected officers from 23 Asian nations go to the U.S. for advanced training, the U.S. offers scant military assistance. Two decades ago, most Asian armies received the bulk of their tactical training and considerable hardware from the U.S.

The fact that the United States' supposedly ultrasophisticated and all-seeing spy-in-the-sky satellites couldn't detect preparations for the first Indian nuclear test is further erosion of the American military technological mystique. In Indonesia, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is likewise a "no show" on political turf where it used to be a major player in the 1960s and 1970s.

Reports from insiders indicate that the Japanese evacuation of those of its 20,000 nationals who wanted to leave Indonesia was better planned and executed than that of the United States in evacuating its nearly 15,000 nationals, another indication of declining U.S. contingency preparedness. Even South Korea's removal of many of its 15,000 nationals was said to be proceeding more smoothly than the U.S. effort.

American businessmen have taken up the slack from the disappearance of U.S. military and aid program presence, winning admiration for more than US$100 billion invested in the region and two-way trade with Asia in 1997 of nearly US$515 billion.

But U.S. exports to India were only US$3.3 billion last year and imports were US$6.2 billion, placing the world's second most-populous nation 27th among American trading partners. U.S. economic aid to New Delhi amounts to only US$157 million.

American exports to Indonesia amount to US$4 billion with imports at US$8.3 billion. U.S. economic aid to Jakarta is a pipsqueak US$54 million.

Japan is now the dispenser of the world's largest amount of foreign aid or Official Development Assistance(ODA). In 1996 it disbursed US$966 million to Indonesia, US$861million to China and US$579 million to India.

Japan imported US$2.7 billion from India and exported US$2.3 billion. Japan imported US$14 billion from Indonesia and exported US$8.6 billion to Indonesia last year. The nation of 206 million is Japan's fourth largest trading partner.

In both India and Indonesia, Japan has extensive yen currency loans, thriving training programs and a network of operatives from trading houses like Marubeni and Itochu that comprise a unique network of dealmakers.

One other point of leverage which Japan has in India is the moral high ground. Tokyo can make the point that it is the only nation to have been the target of nuclear weapons. The nonproliferation advocacy by the leading nations rings hypocritical and their protests over Indian and Pakistani nuclear quests carry dubious weight.

But not many in Asia are looking askance or with suspicion at Japan's relative ascendance, however nuanced. Rather they are lamenting the decline of the U.S. posture because of lack of creative policy. Some have said the administration of President Bill Clinton has no Asia experts.

Robert Manning, former U.S State Department adviser on Asia policy asked recently "Does the U.S. grasp Asian dynamics and have a vision and strategy beyond the bromides about a 'Pacific Community?'" He said Secretary of State Madeline Albright's recent Asia trip did little to reassure.

It is said Clinton hoped to make a visit to India later this year, becoming the first U.S. President in 20 years to do so. Whether the visit can survive Washington's version of sanctions remains to be seen.

Such visits, including the one the U.S. President will be making in June to China, have their place but they are no substitute for the careful ordering of diplomatic priorities.

The writer is a Tokyo-based analyst of Northeast Asian affairs and Media Fellow, Hoover Institution, Stanford University.