World in Motion
Archive for November 20th, 2011
From Europe to Asia
Posted by Scott Erb in Barack Obama, China, Foreign Policy, Globalization, World Affairs on November 20, 2011
Franklin Delano Roosevelt had a problem. As much as he wanted to get involved with the war that started in Europe in 1939, there was intense domestic opposition. Many Americans, especially the “isolationist” Republicans had disdain for Europe. European states were the world’s great powers, if we focused on them we’d have to play by their rules. Asia, on the other hand represented an opportunity for the US to expand our influence and in fact counter European power. Hitler may be a problem, but Tokyo stood most directly in the path of US interests, especially the American desire to develop a strategic partnership with China.
Of course it took a surprise attack from Japan to get the US into World War II, and for most of the war US efforts focused on the Asian theater, leaving it to Russia and Great Britain to try to beat back the Nazis. When the war ended, the US occupied Japan and imposed a constitution designed to assure that Japan would not be a rival for dominance in the region. President Truman and Secretary of State Acheson had to exaggerate the danger of Communism to get the Republicans to embrace NATO and the rebuilding of Europe. Their eyes were still on Asia.
Then in 1949 Mao Zedong’s Communist revolution put an end to US hopes for regional hegemony. With China “lost,” the region declined in importance, and US interests shifted back towards Europe where they’ve stayed for over sixty years. To be sure, the US fought in both Korea and Vietnam, but those conflicts were not so much about Asia, they reflected global Cold War dynamics. Our best troops, technology, and emphasis was on the NATO alliance – Europe and the US were “twin pillars” of the western alliance according to President Kennedy, a “community of common values” said West German Chancellor Adenauer.
After the Cold War ended the US started to withdraw troops from Europe. Russia was not seen as a serious security threat, especially not by the Europeans. The US wanted to enjoy what President Bush (the Elder) called ‘the peace dividend,’ and Europeans felt they didn’t need the US to defend them. NATO remained a successful alliance, but it’s necessity was in doubt. Relations hit a low ebb in 2002-03 when a combination of American refusal to participate in international ventures important to the Europeans (ICC, Kyoto Protocols, etc.) and widespread European opposition to a US war in Iraq created mutual ill will. Though they’ve patched things up again, it’s clear that relationship is not what it used to be.
With President Obama’s announcement in Australia of a growing US presence in the south Pacific, US policy has come full circle. The future is no longer in Europe, but Asia. Europe’s economic and financial mess rivals our own (the problems are, to be sure, different), while Asian countries represent the future, and perhaps a path towards economic stability.
As a Europeanist (that’s my specialty in political science) one might think I’d oppose such a move, but I don’t. Moreover, I think the EU will also shift it’s priorities from the US to Asia — Asia is the new center of economic power and perhaps the engine for the 21st Century.
From the standpoint of the United States and Australia the move makes sense in realist terms. The shift of US interests from Europe to Asia, as well as the growing importance of India and China in the region suggests that its important the US care for its alliances in the region, particularly with Australia, Japan and South Korea. A stable balance of power will prevent China from using its power to extend hegemony and work against US interests.
In neo-liberal theory, the case isn’t clear cut. China’s reaction was one of annoyance: China’s economic relationship with Australia poses no threat to the country, but its alliance with the US creates a threat to China. Australia should think about whether or not its worth it to anger a friend with whom it is engaged with a cordial, mutually beneficial relationship.
In that sense the US has far less to offer. The US economy can’t help pick up Australia’s as ours remains mired in recession. As the regional economic powerhouse, its in Australia’s interest to foster good relations with China — after all, who thinks China is going to invade Australia?
The strongest case against the agreement is based on an analysis of internal Chinese politics. For years there has been a tug of war between China’s military and civilian leaderships. The military thinks in realist terms, seeing the US as a potential threat to Chinese power and security. After all, despite China’s wildly successful economy, they still lag far behind the US in military prowess. The civilians don’t see war as likely, and recognize that conflict would mess up a very well developed strategy for economic growth and influence. Up until now they’ve placated the military by allowing them to use a chunk of China’s economic growth to develop their capacity. Yet the rift is real. Will this tip the balance of power within China towards the military and yield a more confrontational China?
It shouldn’t. As much as China protests (and the civilian leadership has to protest loudly or else face a more assertive military leadership), they know that this isn’t really a threat to China. At best it’s a hedge against China exercising undue influence in regional disputes, it provides the US and its allies a slightly stronger voice in regional politics. China may not like that, but they can live with it, as long economic and diplomatic efforts are made that take Chinese interests into account.
Ultimately the pro-Asia lobby before WWII may end up having been prophetic. The US has a future in Asia, not as the dominant power but in partnership with China. China’s problems of political transformation, corruption, environmental degradation and adapting to its position in a global economy are more easily solved by working with rather than against the US. US economic ills are real and structural; China could damage our economy severely without a shot being fired. Yet they don’t want that because they would be hurt by the resulting economic instability. They would rather see the US restructure its economy. They can help a weakened yet still relevant US adapt to new international realities.
In that sense the shift of emphasis to Asia is part of a global dance. China and the US are still rivals and the US is dealing with a relative loss of global power while China is on the rise. There is concern amongst US allies about growing Chinese clout. The US worries that without the capacity for quick intervention in the region China could fill the power vacuum. Yet this rivalry can and should turn to partnership over time. The world is still “realist” enough that the US presence in Australia is needed to remind China of the relevance of American military power. But globalization is rendering military power ever less important, and over time the Chinese and Americans will see that their destinies are better linked in partnership than broken in conflict.
-
You are currently browsing the archives for Sunday, November 20th, 2011
- Join 1,494 other subscribers
Blogroll
- Bartcop
- Brain Cooties
- Brave Smart Bold
- Bruce the Economist
- Bucket List Productions
- Chic Press (poetry)
- Dissertation Gal
- Families are Built with Love
- Girrlearth
- Inner Simplicity with Empathic Guidance
- Jeff\’s Blog
- Juan Cole
- Knocked Over by a Feater
- Left hook the blog
- Life as I know it Photography
- List of X
- Lora Parisien begin
- Marge in Italy
- Mookie is Mike
- Norbrook's Blog
- Notes Along the Path
- Pamanner
- Pleasecutthecrap
- Power of Positive Thought
- Pressing Pause
- Reflections of a Rational Republican
- Tarheel Red
- The Cezzar Joint
- The Fruitioncoalition
- the havens
- The oil drum
- The Third Eve
- Windows Toward the World
- Woodgate's view
- WordPress.com
Archives
- July 2020 (2)
- June 2020 (1)
- February 2020 (2)
- March 2019 (4)
- February 2019 (1)
- January 2019 (3)
- December 2018 (1)
- November 2018 (4)
- September 2018 (2)
- June 2018 (1)
- April 2018 (3)
- February 2018 (1)
- November 2017 (4)
- August 2017 (1)
- July 2017 (1)
- June 2017 (1)
- April 2017 (3)
- March 2017 (1)
- February 2017 (4)
- January 2017 (5)
- November 2016 (3)
- October 2016 (3)
- September 2016 (4)
- August 2016 (2)
- July 2016 (2)
- June 2016 (5)
- May 2016 (3)
- April 2016 (2)
- March 2016 (9)
- February 2016 (2)
- January 2016 (3)
- December 2015 (4)
- November 2015 (6)
- October 2015 (3)
- September 2015 (3)
- August 2015 (6)
- July 2015 (3)
- June 2015 (1)
- May 2015 (3)
- April 2015 (1)
- March 2015 (3)
- February 2015 (3)
- January 2015 (2)
- December 2014 (2)
- November 2014 (7)
- October 2014 (5)
- September 2014 (7)
- August 2014 (8)
- July 2014 (5)
- June 2014 (6)
- May 2014 (8)
- April 2014 (5)
- March 2014 (7)
- February 2014 (2)
- January 2014 (4)
- December 2013 (4)
- November 2013 (2)
- October 2013 (6)
- September 2013 (6)
- August 2013 (3)
- July 2013 (3)
- May 2013 (4)
- April 2013 (4)
- March 2013 (2)
- February 2013 (2)
- January 2013 (9)
- December 2012 (11)
- November 2012 (14)
- October 2012 (18)
- September 2012 (20)
- August 2012 (15)
- July 2012 (13)
- June 2012 (14)
- May 2012 (11)
- April 2012 (9)
- March 2012 (11)
- February 2012 (13)
- January 2012 (13)
- December 2011 (18)
- November 2011 (17)
- October 2011 (19)
- September 2011 (16)
- August 2011 (25)
- July 2011 (18)
- June 2011 (21)
- May 2011 (23)
- April 2011 (11)
- March 2011 (14)
- February 2011 (12)
- January 2011 (16)
- December 2010 (16)
- November 2010 (12)
- October 2010 (16)
- September 2010 (13)
- August 2010 (14)
- July 2010 (14)
- June 2010 (12)
- May 2010 (13)
- April 2010 (14)
- March 2010 (14)
- February 2010 (13)
- January 2010 (10)
- December 2009 (16)
- November 2009 (15)
- October 2009 (12)
- September 2009 (19)
- August 2009 (17)
- July 2009 (15)
- June 2009 (18)
- May 2009 (16)
- April 2009 (19)
- March 2009 (25)
- February 2009 (24)
- January 2009 (16)
- December 2008 (16)
- November 2008 (23)
- October 2008 (30)
- September 2008 (25)
- August 2008 (27)
- July 2008 (20)
- June 2008 (33)
- May 2008 (23)
Recent Comments