U.S. rethinking ties to Asia groups

U.S. rethinking ties to Asia groups

WASHINGTON (Reuters): The Bush administration, girding for battle for influence in Asia, is rethinking its relationship to regional organizations there, according to U.S. officials.

The brainstorming is still in the very early stages and officials told Reuters in interviews there are no plans to withdraw from the main regional groupings -- the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), its related Asian Regional Forum (ARF), a security body, and the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC).

But they said they are mulling over ways in which the United States might strengthen ASEAN as well as firm up Washington's ties to the region's democracies. It ties in with President George W. Bush's overall increased focus on Asia as the primary venue for potential security threats.

"We're having a battle for influence in Asia" with China on one side and the United States-Japan on the other side, said one senior official who spoke on condition of anonymity. "ASEAN plays the field in the middle," he added.

Another official said there is a "general sense" in the administration that ASEAN "expanded too quickly and incorporated countries that lag behind the other ASEAN states in terms of economic, political and social development."

"This has made it difficult for ASEAN to do things concretely. Productivity of ASEAN meetings has dropped," giving stimulus to administration officials "who are scratching their heads and trying to think about alternative ways to look at Asia and deal with some of the Asian countries," he said.

Plans on ASEAN

Nevertheless, he insisted: "The United States is not going to boycott or leave ASEAN in any sense."

A leading proponent of new thinking in the Asian-Pacific region has been Adm. Dennis Blair, commander in chief of U.S. forces in the Pacific.

He has been promoting the idea of developing a "hub and spokes series of bilateral relationships into a network of multilateral relationships, which have a strong bilateral basis but then go on to new forms."

ASEAN was founded in 1967 in response to a perceived threat of Communist insurgency in Asia. Its members were Singapore, the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Brunei when in the late 1990's the grouping expanded to include Vietnam, Laos, Burma and Cambodia.

ARF, established in 1994 to focus on security, combines ASEAN's 10 members in talks with the United States, China, Russia, Japan, the European Union, Canada, Australia, India, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, Mongolia and North Korea.

The hard-line view on ASEAN is represented by Republican analyst Ellen Bork, who argued recently in the Asian Wall Street Journal that the group has "outlived its usefulness."

"Hopes that ASEAN, and its corollary ARF, can promote harmony and stability in Asia are misplaced," she wrote.

"The regional group's membership, history and principles are irreconcilable with the most important element in achieving them -- democratic principles," she said, adding: "What Asia needs is an alliance of democratic nations committed to the freedom and security of its members."

Bork's analysis caught the attention of the White House, where a senior official called it a "very good piece" that correctly concluded "we have more in common with countries that are democracies."

But he rejected Bork's remedy, that ASEAN is unfixable and the United States should turn its energies towards helping to establish "a regional political and military alliance committed to strengthening the democracy and security of its members and expanding it in the region."

"I don't agree that ASEAN and ARF are a waste of time. I think they are important and it's worthwhile for the United States to participate in all of that," the official said.

ASEAN gives Asian states an organizing structure and a role in regional affairs, a place where more powerful nations come to consult and court their support. Any attempt to replace it would be opposed by ASEAN members, he said.

Nevertheless, he said "maybe there is something else ... we should look for what are those institutions that we should be putting the government's energy behind for the new century."

U.S. officials said their thinking is still very undefined and it is far too early to foreshadow with any certainty what will come out of the exercise.

"Maybe we need to do more with the Philippines than we are doing," as well as with Thailand, Singapore, Australia, South Korea, Taiwan, Japan and other "like-minded countries," one official said.

The expectation is not that the United States would throw its weight behind one new multilateral institution but that it would strengthen bilateral relations or a "network of bilateral relations" or negotiate "more aggressive free trade agreements" with various Asian countries, he said.