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.