It is a “tripolar” world (US, the EU and East Asia), says Deva Ridzam
November 12, 2009
www.nst.com.my
“The emerging reality today is of a “tripolar” world,comprising the US, the EU (European Union) and East Asia“, writes Malaysia’s former Ambassador to the European Union, Belgium, Luxembourg and Cambodia, Dato Deva M. Ridzam
East Asia, APEC and Obama in Singapore
by Deva M. Ridzam
THE Association of Southeast Nations (ASEAN) and Northeast Asia will be the focus of global attention for a whole week beginning this weekend.
It will be Barack Obama’s first visit to Asia as president since his electoral victory a year ago. It is all the more significant that his Asian tour, which also includes Japan and China, begins in an ASEAN capital, Singapore.
As though to emphasise the importance of Southeast Asia, an ASEAN-US summit will be held on November 15 on the margins of the multilateral Asia Pacific Economic Conference (APEC). And Myanmar is expected to feature prominently.
Combining ASEAN, Japan and China is, perhaps, tacit recognition of the geographical region of East Asia (the 10 AASEAN countries plus China, Japan and South Korea — “ASEAN+3″ or the APT grouping) as the arena for global economics and politics in Obama’s diplomacy.
The president’s stated preference for multilateralism was explained by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at last July’s ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in Phuket, Thailand. She told Asia Pacific countries present that the Obama administration would strive for a “multipartner”, not a “multipolar”, world.
And, in the context of Obama’s current Asian tour, it is about ASEAN, Japan and China more as “multipartners” and friends, less as allies, competitors or enemies.
For Obama and most ASEAN leaders, it will be their first face-to-face interactive exchange of views, an encounter they all surely look forward to. Indeed, since his early years in Indonesia, countries of Southeast Asia have emerged as responsible and pragmatic members of the international community.
Southeast Asia has achieved remarkable transformation. It is no longer just jungles and padi fields. Besides technology and wealth, they have also been getting their home-grown politics and economics right. They want a stable and cooperative new beginning to the historical relationship they have had with the US.
As an economic grouping, APEC has been lacklustre. If trade among members has increased, it has been despite rather than because of APEC. Southeast and Northeast Asia have given APEC a new lease of life.
Most member governments, including the Obama administration, are less convinced than ever about APEC’s usefulness. Even the Australians showed a lack enthusiasm for APEC. The question now is, how will the American people rationalise their president’s attendance at APEC, and what pronouncement will he make there?
APEC has been waiting for Obama to come clear on the US policy on trade. Obama has not revealed much about his thinking on the subject, given the generally protectionist bent prevailing in America at this time.
Short of a pro-trade stance, the most APEC countries might expect from Obama is some reference to the long talked-about Free Trade Area for the Asia Pacific (FTAAP), merely underlining that his trade policy remains free and fair trade, lowered tariffs, and for the US to export more, especially to East Asia.
He is also expected to say something to the effect that APEC must refocus on its original goals and core objectives of trade and drop all extraneous non-trade issues. Obama’s decision to hold an ASEAN-US summit while in Singapore may be a clever way to distract from the real problems regarding Apec’s future and his own trade policy towards Asia and the Pacific.
It would appear, therefore, that Obama’s real interest in attending the APEC Summit is the AASEAN-US summit. (Which non-APEC members like Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar may attend.)
The Obama administration has surprised many observers by holding direct talks with the junta in Myanmar. Might a breakthrough on Myanmar be possible in Singapore? Can the world expect the launch of a three-way engagement involving the junta, the US and Aung San Suu Kyi? Will the junta make a grand gesture, such as announcing Suu Kyi’s release on the eve of the summit?
While no one is likely to suggest that APEC be wound down, Singapore nevertheless is an opportunity to review justifications, redefine purposes, and trim ambitions on APEC.
It would be best for Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to subsume his own idea of an “Asia Pacific community” (APC) under the existing 16-member East Asia Summit (EAS), a geopolitical leaders-led forum for strategic dialogue set up in Kuala Lumpur in 2005, comprising the ASEAN+3 countries, Australia, New Zealand and India.
Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s own version of an “East Asian Community” also lacks substance. There is hesitancy in Asean and elsewhere on the Australian and Japanese ideas.
The US and Russia are eligible to join the EAS as they meet the membership criteria, having acceded to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) in Southeast Asia. Indications are that the Obama administration is favourably disposed to joining the 16-member EAS forum. The emerging reality today is of a “tripolar” world, comprising the US, the EU and East Asia.
Loading...
You guys don’t think Najib Razak is bipolar??
Mr Bean - November 12, 2009 at 7:48 pm
New Yorker Bean,
We are interested in your views on Obama’s foreign policy based on multi partners, not multilateralism. I do not personally see any connection between Najib being bipolar and the new US approach post Bush2. Do you think Deva’s triad idea is fair comment?
Menyalak-er, Danildaud, come out and help Bean to answer my question.–Din Merican
dinobeano - November 12, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Dear Din Merican,
Both APEC and ASEAN have been in existence for over three decades. In that time these two organisations have basically achieved much horizontal growth at the expense of vertical growth. The US in its national interest always prefers to deal with countries on an individual basis – divide and rule is the operative phrase. It is only in our dreams that we think that East Asia will form the third leg of this so-called Tripolar World. The US interest, if any, is to keep this East Asian Group from becoming too cohesive as it would be inimical to their interest. And this has been its stand ever since this term came into being the late 80s.
We are reading too much into the importance of APEC and ASEAN. We only matter as individual countries. And as individual countries if we are not strong then the Group will also be not strong. This brings us back to square one. The developing nations in these two groups must pay attention to the creation of a strong middle class that creates wealth instead of what we have at the moment where they are basically wealth consuming middle class. As long as they remain the latter and dependent on government hand-outs for their well being we will never achieve the role played by the wealth creating middle class in the more matured democracies. If you look around us you will find that the growth of freedom is more prevalent in countries where the middle class generates wealth. In countries where the middle class consumes wealth handed out by the state the development of freedom tends to remain superficial and stunted. In the case of city-states that have achieved developed status in terms of Per capita income you will find that the development of freedom remains stunted because the government is the main engine of growth.
East Asia is a loose term and comprises a motley group of countries that are common only in one aspect and that is they are all competing against each other for markets in the more developed parts of the world. Here it is imperative for our leaders to think outside the box and focus on strengthening our own countries first. The rapid pace of economic development must be matched by gradual development of freedom which is at the core of the creative development of the individual. China is slowly finding this out.
In this regard, the Global Financial crisis is working against the interest of a creative middle class. In many countries of East Asia the role of government in the econmy is increasing instead of decreasing. The state is increasingly crowding out private investment funds by its policy of remaining the engine of growth for practical and political reasons. The man who pays the piper call the tune is a lesson not missed by our political ledeaship. As long as this happens economic development led by the government engine alone will always be susceptible to political manipulation. That brings me back to the point that we must create a middle class that has the ability to create wealth if we are to have even a part of the freedom enjoyed by the people in the developed countries.
Thumb Logic - November 12, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Thumb Logic,
Yes, we need to take care of national interest first. ASEAN which was established in 1967 is a loose regional group until the leaders thought they should make it more focused and business like. The progress has been slow but it will emerge as an entity that will facilitate and expand intra-regional trade and investment. ASEAN must not get too ambitious and take more than it can handle.
Its ambition to play an international role speaking with one voice should be tempered by a sense of realism. Get on with resolving the Myanmar situation and working towards AFTA. APEC, on the other hand, is dead in its track while EAS is a pipe dream of regional politicians and will not likely be any better than a playground for leaders of China, Japan, Korea, the US, Russia and the EU. ASEAN is a sideshow as far as these countries are concerned. It is sad but true. Triad is nice to have but it cannot work.–Din Merican
dinobeano - November 12, 2009 at 9:32 pm
I just wonder, why Datuk Deva simply ignore other countries in his analysis. Can we ignore India, and Russia? What about the powerful OPEC members like Saudi Arabia?
To state that “The emerging reality today is of a “tripolar” world, comprising the US, the EU and East Asia.” is to ignore the reality of a wired world where each and every actors must take care of his own backyard.
Singapore is shopping for the best brains in the world and we are importing Indo, Pinoy and Bangla as though we are a big rubbish bin for scavengers.
tean - November 12, 2009 at 10:24 pm
Bean, najib is ‘tripolar’ the last time i heard from P.I. Bala, whose where abouts (india) are not mentioned at all in this analysis.
I happen think this writer has a very narrow worldview. The big players are not regional at all in geographic terms, but more cohesive in terms of their socio-cultural-economic-historical conditions. China and Korea, like Japan of old (say 1970-80s), are now factories of the world. Yet, they lack the key strategic natural resources (energy, metals) to sustain their rate of development in the long term.
There is an insidious creeping of protectionism in the ‘west’ (Europe, Canada, the U.S. and even Australia), even if no one likes to admit it. They would rather trade with other Asian countries than China on a par basis. That is where our oppurtunities lie.
While ASEAN is just a ‘paper tiger’, APEC remains just an origami piece of art – good to look at – but funtionless. Nafta and Mercusor don’t work very well too, but APEC is fast approaching expiry. There are too many factors to key in than simply coming out and declaring a “tripolar world”.
Menyalak-er - November 12, 2009 at 10:53 pm
Asean is just a retailer for China, Japan and Korea. East Asia means China Japan and Korea.
APEC was expanded into a regional body that is meaningless to others except among themselves.
Frank - November 13, 2009 at 1:14 am
“ASEAN is a sideshow as far as these countries are concerned. It is sad but true. Triad is nice to have but it cannot work.–Din Merican”
dinobeano – November 12, 2009 at 9:32 pm
How true indeed ! You guys are missing the big picture.
Burma is that big piece of the pie that the powers that be or more aptly, the ” triads,” have been salivating to get their hands on but unfortunately for them and fortunately for Burma, she is in ASEAN.
Yugoslavia and the U.S.S.R has been dismantled and they are already in China and Iraq. Burma will be the next conquest.
It will be interesting to see if Burma will implode like Yugoslavia into civil wars or will stay in tact with a dual system in place like China.
It will be a win-win situation for the Burmese , to be in total control of their land and resources,if she goes on the Chinese track.
Forget about Freedom and Democracy for the Burmese – that is just a smokescreen to get into Burma !
ocho-onda - November 13, 2009 at 3:48 am
“Yugoslavia and the U.S.S.R has been dismantled and they are already in China “– Ocho onda
CHINA ??? China will make “wonton” and “barbecued meat” out of them.
It is almost impossible because the Chinese psyche is such that everybody else is a barbarian “kuailo” except the Chihese and China is THE Middle Kingdom with God in Heaven, the the “kuailos”living in Hell. And that is the reason why throughout 5,000 years of Chinese history, except for nearby borders, China NEVER sought to colonise other nations (while colonise HELL ??), despite sending ships and discoverers to all over the globe as far back as the 13th century.
The Chinese came to Melaka, left behind Hang Lipo, Hang Tuah, Hang Jebat, Hang Lekiu, to protect the Melaka sultanate. (UMNO dumb historians take note). They had even been to Australia, Africa and Spain.
It was the Chinese who first discovered America NOT Columbus:
READ HERE THIS BOOK the international bestseller by Gavin Menzies : 1421: The Year China Discovered the World
http://www.1421.tv/
No way they will take on China. Its the reverse. China has already grip US by the throat economically with trillions of treasury bonds.
Frank - November 13, 2009 at 10:35 am
“Singapore is shopping for the best brains in the world and we are importing Indo, Pinoy and Bangla as though we are a big rubbish bin for scavengers” – tean
According to one UMNO Cabinet Minister) who said in 2007 Parliament Singapore is NOT a country.
And that is why they are importing the best brains, and the UMNO-led Malaysia is a country, good at collecting rubbish.
Read here :http://www.bobjots.org/2007/06/singapore-is-not-a-real-country/
or watch this video in 2007 Parliamentary debate:Minister Nazri Abbas refusing to shoulder ministerial responsibility instead putting the onus on the AG who is not a member of Parliament:
The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz (BN – Padang Rengas) said, “Singapore is not a real country, it is a small island. Singapore’s population is just three to four million and there are no opportunities for corruption, unlike in our country ..”
Frank - November 13, 2009 at 11:04 am
Frank, China can’t even take on Rio Tinto. Aramco is certainly out of reach, because money can’t buy everything…
Yes, U.S. is seriously in debt – but that is in their interest not China’s. Simple logic says that the more you owe, the less likely the lender is gonna euthanasize you.
Remember the hype about Japan in the early eighties being a roaring tiger? Now a crouching domestic cat of tha U.S.
The point, is that China has huge problems with the environment, infrastructure deficencies, internal dissent – Xijiang and Tibet notwithstanding; and getting access to vital resources.
China in all it’s history, has more problems keeping internal dissent in check, because of it’s autocratic governance, Mandate from Heaven(or Hell) and imperial decrees – so much so, that the Middle Kingdom is literally just middling. They are technicians not innovators nor ‘inventors’. Their ‘best’ minds have surrepitiously migrated to the West.
Nazri is a new breed called Melayau Nincompooptus.
Menyalak-er - November 13, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Menyalak-er
The inside info I have about China’s bid on Rio Tinto and the US energy giants was that it is testing its strategies about taking over foreign companies. These guys are still amateurs and they are still learning the ropes. But they are not afraid to take on the big boys.
They are preparing for the energy crunch which will come and China will be one of those severely affected.
They employed foreign expertise to raid these companies, and to learn the tricks of the trade,and not too bothered if they don’t get them, after all, to the communists, money is just paper.
You notice they don’t balk if they their bid were rejected for political reasons eg the US congress rejection of one their most amibitious takeovers for US oil two years ago or so.
They have not given up on Rio Tinto. They will get Rio Tinto because a time will come they will put the chip on the table and put the other chaps with a no-choice situation. They are a patient lot, believe me and with a country and population that side, patience is what they need.
China’s strategy is to get US in a pincher. If US fails to honor the debt, that will be the ultimate downfall of US with the rest of the world. The Euro is virtually on the doorstep of replacing the greenback. Once China decides to go Euro, Mr Bean’s dollars will pnly good enough to buy sacks of bananas from the Caribbean republics.
And in fact it is the US who keeps asking China to buy their treasury bonds.
What better way to make the Yanks nervous, and by this way, keep Pentagon off the radar screen with regard to China’s military buildup and it is building up at a ferocious pace. Mr Bean will wake up one fine day in Manhattann with Chinese nuclear warheads facing his front door.
Frank - November 13, 2009 at 12:41 pm
Menyalak-er
In the late 70s and right up to the late 80s, Chinese planners were worried about trying to feed their growing population since they were importing grains. Importing food is the last thing the communists want.
I remember in several of my missions to China in the late and early 90s, their preoccupation was rural development and modernising agriculture after the devastation caused by Mao’s 1-year Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution.
Their main concern was that after Deng opened the country, they foresaw the rapid industrialisation of the country and massive urbanisation as people seek proper housing etc. I remember being referred to some policy papers which showed the leaders’ concern of urbanisation of the rural landscape with Deng’s rural reforms since 1978 Why are they worried. It is because urbanisationwill further reduce agricultural and arable land for grain production.
China’s rice bowl areas are in the eastern seaboard, rice growing in Jiangsu and wheat up north. Under communist rule, the agrarian folks were supporting the urban and industrial centres,and with further urbanisation, the stress will be on rural agriculture. There will come a breaking point and this will be social chaos. The leaders and policy strategists saw that coming. Thr 1989 Tiananmen is just a prelude which they have to nip in the bud.
In the northern and inland provinces, the climate is restrictive to grow food all year round.
China has only about 12% of arable land to feed 1.3 billion people.
And this is wonder: By the mid 90s, they were became self sufficient through their aggressive pursuit of expanding agricultural technology to their millions of farmers and their huge investment on water management for agriculture and the harnessing of the two lifelines of China, the Yellow River and the Yantze. Remember the Three Gorges Dam.
The fact they are now self-sufficient to feed 1.3 billioin in addition to managing the rapid urbanisation and industrialisation is a testimony of what they can do, if they set their minds on the targets.
The present socio-economic and political structure is the best option for China, ie socialist political framework and a capitalist economy as long as the leaders keep their ears to the ground and their eyes to the horizon.
This is where Lee Kuan Yew must be credited for convincing Deng and his team in the eighties and nineties when he was the Advisor to the Chinese government. Deng took LKY’s advice to build self-contained little Singapores all over China and integrate these at Provincial level and then nationally. The next thing you know, China has been getting GDP’s at 8-12 % for the last decade or more while the rest of the world were excited being at 5 % if they are lucky.
While we in Malaysia, a small country with small population we still import our rice, eggs, fruits from our northern neighbours, especially Thailand. And then we smartly export the best brains to our neighbour down south. That’s the brilliance of our UMNO-led Government policy planners and of those bureaucrats with datuk and Tan Sri titles in front of their names, and when they retire UMNO gives name jobs to sit in GLC Boards so they can further contribute questionable expertiese and experience.
Frank - November 13, 2009 at 1:19 pm
correction
after the devastation caused by Mao’s 10-year Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution.
Frank - November 13, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Frank, thanks for your history lesson but relak laah, bro. I only stated that they had opened up China and all those countries that I mentioned earlier.
I am more inclined to go with Menyalak-er’s view.
China is where she is today only because the key players allowed her to ,because a thriving China is to their interests ,just in terms of the sheer size of her market.
And what has China got today, is only a facade – superficial, to say the least. She still has a long way to go, in terms of real growth and development. Anything can happen to de-stabilize and disrupt her path to full recovery and growth, just to be a developed nation and not even a powerful nation.
And you may not agree on this but it is not to anyone’s advantage that either the USA or China shall go down. There is too much vested interests involved.But be rest assured that they are going to open up more markets and I stand by what I said about the freedom of Burmese people.
If a people cannot achieve their own freedom, others will help them only if they can first help themselves and that help is always attached with a price !
ocho-onda - November 13, 2009 at 1:32 pm
ocho-onda
I asked a Burmese counterpart of mine in 2007 , why don’t the people rise up after the monks came out demonstrating etc.
You know what I am told? Burmese are Buddhists. There is this karmic thinking between their ears. Their only hope they said is that they pray there will be one good general out of the fascist military government who will hear the people’s plea.
Buddhism teaches them to be non-confrontational and the say that the fascist generals will be punished in the next life. Except for the Karen minority, mostly supported by western Christian NGO groups to stand up, instead they were forced to go underground in the jungle.
If you go to Yangon, you are being told that every 10 persons you see on the road, at least one is a government spy. Not only the wall have ears, the air in Myanmar have ears.
The only way the Burmese can get their freedom is to walk away from the Buddhist philosophy of passiviity and non-confrontation and follow the Sri Lankan Buddhists. Carry arms and fight their own fascist govt. This is where Buddhism is a disservice to the Burmese people as much as Islam is bad for some of the Muslims in Malaysia.
After my visit there, I gave little hope of internal revolution to bring down the current fascist govt where it sees its people as the enemy. And if you support the people, you become the enemy. China supports these fascists because f oil. Petronas is a player in Myanmar. I met few of the Petronas chaps there in just one week.
Frank - November 13, 2009 at 1:50 pm
No, the Burmese need a massive dose of indoctrination – they need to watch more Shaolin kung fu movies !!
ocho-onda - November 13, 2009 at 2:01 pm
MISSING private investigator P. Balasubramaniam has broken his 15-month silence, claiming that Prime Minister Najib Razak’s younger brother, Nazim, met and threatened him into withdrawing his first statutory declaration.http://feeds2.feedburner.com/MagickRiver
tourman53 - November 13, 2009 at 2:23 pm
Yes Frank, i agree with you about the Chinese patience, but there will always be resistance to Chinese hegemony. I would like to reiterate that there are lot of vital strategic interests that the west will not sell at any price.
The military of PRC although massive, is still 25 yrs. or more behind in technology, accuracy and reliability. Their space, nuclear and communications technology are akin to the Soyuz era of the ‘70-80’s. What they have are human waves akin to the suicide charges of the Korean war. If woe betide, any military confrontation happens between PRC and USA, these human waves will be facing a US robotic army…
Strategically, Europe is American-centric and any attempts to deregulate the USD as the reserve trade currency, will cause enormous upheaval and will be resisted for the next decade or two. We should not forget the Latin American nations, with their untapped potential but with an Eurocentric historical link.
China fortunately has some good pragmatic leaders for the time being, but its ‘imperial’ succession has been proven to be ‘karmic’ – and there can be little doubt that the next bad apple will be catastrophic for the nation. True democracy is an ananthema and impossible in China.
Menyalak-er - November 13, 2009 at 3:13 pm