UPI’s Martin Walker makes some interesting observations about the upcoming East Asia Summit:
The United States will not take part in next week’s East Asia summit, but, to paraphrase a former secretary of state’s phrase about the Balkan wars, the Americans most certainly have a dog in this fight.
There is a fight under way at the summit, albeit a polite and diplomatic tussle. The Japanese, with discreet but potent American backing, have already ensured that the original plan of the former Malaysian premier for a purely Asian summit was blocked. Australia and New Zealand will now be taking part in the forum, to the fury of the still-influential Mahathir Mohammed.
"We are not going to have an East Asian summit. We are going to have an East Asia-Australasia summit," Mahathir told a specially convened news conference last week to complain that the presence of Australia and New Zealand subverted his dream of a genuinely Asian forum.
"Now Australia is basically European and it has made clear to the rest of the world it is the deputy sheriff to America and therefore, Australia’s view would represent not the East but the views reflecting the stand of America," Mahathir added.
There was also some reluctance, discreetly fostered by China, to admit India to what was intended to be an East Asian club, but India (like Russia, but not the United States) was prepared to sign the Association of South-East Asian Nations’ Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia, which ASEAN nations call "the admission ticket" to the summit. A report in China’s People’s Daily noted this week that Russia’s inclusion in the club was "simply a matter of time," and Russian will hold a separate bilateral meeting with ASEAN immediately before the summit.
But it remains significant that the United States, as the region’s security guarantor for decades and as its biggest market, is not welcome. The summit is clearly emerging as an important building block in the new economic, security and political structure of Asia that is evolving, and for obvious reasons this structure is heavily influenced by China’s explosive economic growth, the new reality to which the whole of Asia is learning to adapt.
Read the rest on your own.
16 Comments
China vs. Japan coming up! Where will Korea be? Raped and killed.
Pro-, pro-, and pro-America is the only way to avoid the war and survive as a people.
“The summit is clearly emerging as an important building block in the new economic, security and political structure…”
Europe has a greater chance of real integration and resulting growth than ASEAN’s member states.
North Korea isn’t going to get along much with anybody. Japan is the economic powerhouse along side China, and they can’t erase that out of existance or make peace with it.
What else do they have? China rising? Is that going to carry the day? I don’t think so.
The difference between poverty and riches is much worse than in Europe. The cultures are also more different. Indonesia and Malaysia are different. Those two with the Philippines are island nations and poor. Thailand and Vietnam and all the rest. Then there is India. And Russia is going to be accepted into the mix? But Australia and New Zealand aren’t because they are “Western”?
This all sounds like fairy tale thinking to me.
I’m not saying ASEAN is useless or such a grouping, but if these are really the practicle goals driving the thinking of the main players, they are going to be sorely disappointed 10, 20, 30, 40 years down the road.
And the big question is how much they are going to alienate nations they really need — like Japan, Australia, New Zealand, the EU, the US, Canada and so on….
Mahathir to Australia: No dogs or white people allowed. As far as I know, he was the only Asian leader who was really vocal about creating an exclusive Asian club. It’s ironic that he has long sought to keep Australia out of Asian organizations since Australians far excel Asian nations in promoting pan-Asian cultural and language education in schools.
I will not buy anything Chinese if I can help it, because of what happened in Tiananmin Square in 1989. I refuse to buy the bullets China seeks to go to war.
Is Taiwan invited? If not, it is a farse. Taiwan is a free and democratically elected government. We will continue to back Taiwan, stand for human rights in China, and fight for peace. (Yes, I know that’s an oxymoron. lol.)
Great post. I think I am going to vote for your site in the awards.
usinkorea: The cultures are also more different. Indonesia and Malaysia are different. Those two with the Philippines are island nations and poor. Thailand and Vietnam and all the rest. Then there is India. And Russia is going to be accepted into the mix? But Australia and New Zealand aren’t because they are “Western”?
Malaysia is is richer than all the other countries named in the quote passage except for Australia and New Zealand. It’s also not an island nation.
Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines are all ethnically- and culturally-related - they were all primarily influenced by India before the Portugal and Spain came along. All of the countries in the region are culturally and ethnically related to either China or India. New Zealand, Australia and Russia are the exceptions. Of the countries on the list, China is only richer than India and Vietnam and roughly equal to the Philippines and Indonesia.
Just wanted to correct a few factual errors.
No problem. Southeast Asia has never been an area of focus for serious reading for me.
w2.byuh.edu/clubs/smv/mgallery/malaysia%20map.gif
Well, technically not an island nation, but…
Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines might be worth grouping together, but that grouping does not overlay well with NorthEast Asia - China, North & South Korea, and Japan - which are the economic powerhouses. I’m not sure how well such a group meshes with India either.
Indonesia and Malyasia are also Islamic countries which sets them apart from the economic powerhouses of the grouping - China, South Korea, Japan (and Taiwan).
And it would seem ok generally speaking to say that the level of economic advancement in South Korea and Japan and increasingly China, as well as the historical growth of Islam in some Southeast Asian nations, have taken its material social culture away from whatever roots Chinese culture planted throughout Asia and even India as well given the struggles between Muslim and non-Muslim groups in that nation and its problems with Pakistan.
On the last note, is that really true? Economic issues are my weakest. Is China’s economy roughly equal to the Philippines and Indonesia? That is suprising to me. I thought those were two of the poorest nations in Asia, and I know China still has significant areas of poverty in its large land area, but it has long been considered the economic jewel of the future and has recieved a lot of outside investment money because of that.
Overall, I still stick to the idea that it will be easier to the European Union nations to close ranks and generate future economic growth as a unit than it ever will be for Asia because Asia is much more diverse in material social culture than the Europeans.
In the “new Asian order” China should be at the back of the class, with its anti-democratic gov’t, land grabs and police that gun down protestors.
whatever happens, be scared. be very scared.
usinkorea: Is China’s economy roughly equal to the Philippines and Indonesia? That is suprising to me. I thought those were two of the poorest nations in Asia, and I know China still has significant areas of poverty in its large land area, but it has long been considered the economic jewel of the future and has recieved a lot of outside investment money because of that.
The poorest nations in Asia are in South Asia and the Near (i.e. Mid) East. The poorest nations in the Far East are Burma, followed by Vietnam and its former satellites (Cambodia and Laos). After looking at car sales, it’s become clear that China is slightly ahead of Indonesia and the Philippines, but way behind Malaysia and Thailand. China to Indonesia car sales - 10 to one; China to Indonesia population - 6 to 1. China to Malaysia car sales - 10 to 1; China to Malaysia population - 60 to 1. China to Thailand car sales - 8 to 1; China to Thailand population - 20 to 1. (For some hemispheric perspective, Mexico to Malaysia car sales - 2 to 1; Mexico to Malaysia population - 10 to 1).
China has received a lot of foreign direct investment not because it is an economic jewel, but because it is one of the poorest countries in East Asia that is also somewhat open to foreign investment (in terms of the number of hoops foreign investors have to go through) in factories that make products for re-export.* A lot of this investment comes from factories that were moved from other, more prosperous East Asian countries.
As markets** go, China is extremely tough to penetrate because of high tariff and non-tariff walls, unless you (1) are Boeing or GE or (2) have given up your pound of flesh - i.e. joint venture shares - to some local Chinese partner. And yet, China can remain pretty poor and still be an important market. If China ever liberalizes, it could become an attractive market to foreign companies because out of 1.2B people, if the top 10% is on average, as wealthy as the average Thai, you have a market that’s twice the size of Thailand. And that’s nothing to sniff at.
* Anyone who wants to make stuff for sale to the Chinese public typically has to have a 50% local joint venture partner.
** That is businesses that want to sell to Chinese instead of merely making stuff in China for re-export.
ZF: (For some hemispheric perspective, Mexico to Malaysia car sales - 2 to 1; Mexico to Malaysia population - 10 to 1).
That should have read: (For some hemispheric perspective, Mexico to Malaysia car sales - 2 to 1; Mexico to Malaysia population - 5 to 1).
Is it just me or does it seem like a significant portion of the commenters here think that the Chinese are going to invade our garages and steal our cars?
I did some quick reading on the links below, but when it comes to economic issue, I can do no analysis, because I have zero background that has prepared me for such.
One question I have about the numbers for China: how much do the numbers for per capita cover over pockets of wealth? China is huge, and it has large regions in dire poverty, but it also has regions, especially metropoles, of wealth comparable to nations with much higher per capita income……right?
I thought in general most of the talk about the rising power of China focused on those pocket of vast wealth, and they did make it sound much better than Thailand and The Phillippines, but I’ve never been either on the China economic miracle bandwagon or the one that sees it as a looming threat to the US, because they would need to spread the wealth around or perhaps repeat their cyclic history of collapse, reunifying, growth in pockets, economic and social unrest, collapse….
But, the info in the links below gives me much food for thought
There are three “great powers” in Asia: Economic (Japan, Korea, Taiwan), Moslem (Indonesia, Malasia), and China.
The inclusion of Australia and New Zealand is logical because they live there, regardless of rude, factually incorrect, and racist comments to the contrary. They provide a balance to the Muslim powers.
The inclusion of Russia balances China and enhances overall economics as they are also an emerging market with ties to the West.
The inclusion of India balances all three groups: Hindu vs. Muslim, Large population like China, growing economic power, ties to the West.
The US may not be well-received by some nations; but perhaps they might do well to remember they’d all be speaking and writing in Japanese if not for our blood and treasure…
Perhaps a more polite tone by the guy who made George Soros a billionaire (by being a greedy loser and bankrupting his country)–and then tried to blame Dubya for all his troubles–would be more in line with good table manners…
But that might be too much to ask from a former dictator…
jtb: Perhaps a more polite tone by the guy who made George Soros a billionaire (by being a greedy loser and bankrupting his country)–and then tried to blame Dubya for all his troubles–would be more in line with good table manners…
Mahathir did not bankrupt his country. And he was equally critical of Clinton during the Asian crisis. However, the guy can’t get rid of his habit of blaming the West for his incompetence.
At independence, Singapore and Malaysia had similar levels of GDP per capita. Today, Singapore’s is 5 or 6 times Malaysia’s. Malaysia is way ahead of China, but that’s not saying very much, seeing as how China remains one of the poorest countries in the Far East.
usinkorea, you might be interested in this comment coming from an ATimes article regarding one person’s view on trying to define “Asia”:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Japan/GL08Dh02.html
“Asia is not one, and it is good that it isn’t. There is neither a common religion nor a common political system, not even one common kind of rice. Thais would be very sad if they had to eat Japanese rice, and vice versa. The term “Asian” is a child of colonialism; born in Europe and adopted and abused by the Japanese, who abandoned it after World War II. “
So what’s happened to the last 5 days?