EDITORIAL: A new Cold
War looms in East Asia
Australian Minister for Defence Stephen Smith last week announced that Canberra
would ¡§seriously¡¨ consider the possibility of holding trilateral military
exercises with China and the US; a move that, in a perfect world, would probably
make sense.
However, the world is far from perfect, and Smith¡¦s idea, which Indonesian
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono purportedly raised with Australian Prime
Minister Julia Gillard at the ASEAN summit in Bali the week before, fails to
take current realities into account.
Live-fire exercises involving the US in the Asia-Pacific symbolize a key role
for Washington in a region that China considers its own backyard. Rather than
seek to reinforce the legitimacy of a US military role in Asia, Beijing has
worked effortlessly to undermine such a role, mostly by dealing with its
neighbors on a bilateral basis. This has been one of the principal reasons for
the failure of regional powers to resolve long-standing tensions in the South
China Sea, with Beijing refusing to participate in multilateral negotiations on
the matter.
The recent announcement that the US could deploy as many as 2,500 marines at a
base in Darwin, Australia, is likely to make Beijing even less inclined to give
its seal of approval to such a relationship, as the deployment is anathema to
China¡¦s desire for a reduced US presence in what is rapidly becoming a key
geopolitical and economic region.
Although the US has conducted search-and-rescue exercises with its counterparts
in the People¡¦s Liberation Army, live-fire exercises involve platforms and
weapons that are substantially more sensitive and which the US ¡X and China ¡X
would be loath to expose to the other¡¦s scrutiny. Other than the weapons
themselves, the communication channels that ensure inter-operation between US
and Australian forces are hardly the kind of thing either would like to share
with the Chinese.
Behind Smith¡¦s proposal was a reluctance on the part of Canberra to take sides,
which makes sense given its geographical location and trade relationship with
the world¡¦s No. 1 and No. 2 economies.
However, for a good many years to come, the game of alliance in the Asia-Pacific
is likely to become zero-sum, or, to use language from former US president
George W. Bush, one in which lesser powers are either ¡§with¡¨ or ¡§against¡¨ the
major players.
Despite efforts in the past decade or so by Beijing to strengthen a web of
alliances ¡X through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, for example ¡X that
more often than not excludes the US, anxieties in the region over China¡¦s
assertiveness in the South China Sea, among other areas, are undermining
Beijing¡¦s strategy. This is happening to such an extent that South Korea is
giving serious consideration to a request by the Philippines for arms sales, a
development that just a few years ago would have been regarded as improbable,
given Seoul¡¦s reluctance to alienate its neighbor amid growing economic ties and
the perceived need for Beijing to rein in North Korea¡¦s nuclear program.
Even more stunning is the recent rapprochement between Vietnam and the US over
the South China Sea dispute.
It is hard to tell which came first: China¡¦s assertiveness or Washington¡¦s
decision to ¡§re-engage¡¨ with the region. However, the end result will likely be
the same: Relations in the Asia-Pacific are turning zero-sum and countries will
find it increasingly difficult to have it both ways, which will force them to
choose sides.
The only way such a dangerous situation can be avoided is for Beijing to embrace
multilateralism and to do so in a way that does not allow it to dominate other
participants. In other words, multilateralism that allows for US participation.
Absent this, countries like Australia will find it very difficult to engage in
the kind of trilateral relationship envisioned by Smith and his like.
|