Webb on Asia: the extended-play version

Mon, 09/21/2009 - 11:48am

Last week, we brought you Sen. Jim Webb's response to critics of his drive to influence U.S. Burma policy as the new head of the Senate Foreign Relations Asia subcommittee. Well, Webb isn't just interested in Burma. He plans to use his perch to examine U.S. policy regarding each and every Asian country, and his thirst for diplomatic activism is far from quenched.

Here are some additional excerpts from Webb's exclusive interview with The Cable, covering his views on several countries in the region:

On the U.S. approach to China:

"Our relationship with China is obviously the most complex relationship that we have, because on one hand we are strategically vulnerable to a mishandling of that relationship and on the other hand, China is a huge trading partner and also in many ways our bankers. So the more dialogue, including healthy confrontation we have with China, the better off we're all going to be, and the better off that region's going to be too, by the way."

On countering China's expanding influence in Asia:

"I don't think we've been clear enough with China or with the other countries in the region about the balance that needs to be maintained. ... It's healthy for us to maintain a vigorous dialogue with the Chinese in areas where we've been silent for a long time, particularly sovereignty issues such as us operating in the South China Sea.

China is sitting on trillions of dollars and cash right now and since the economic crisis began about a year ago they have been aggressively spending that cash, particularly on resources, in the region and also in South America and Africa, etc. ... They're putting their cash out in ways that are designed to continue their future growth at a very rapid pace. And we need to stay vigorously involved in these countries... we are such an important part of the balance in the region, that's the bottom line.

In a lot of these countries, they all want to prosper, they all want investment, but you reach a certain point where you become vulnerable if you don't also have a counter balance. That's one thing that I'm seeing very clearly in the region right now. ... The countries in the region want to see a counterbalance, they want to see us stay and we need to stay.

We need to be engaged in more than a military sense. They tend to look at us in terms of a military guarantor, but we need to get our economic investment in an upswing in that part of the world."

On Japan's new government:

"The U.S.-Japanese relationship has in some ways been diminished in the public eye because of the expansion of China. ... It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out, whether this just a period where the Japanese people just reflect and try to figure out what the next stage is going to be or whether they are ready for some sort of dramatic change.

Even though this party [the DPJ] has never been in control, some of the personalities are people who have been involved in responsible politics for a very long time. So the next four or five months are going to be very interesting."

On the U.S. approach to Taiwan:

"The Taiwanese themselves are pretty dramatically split on their political future. Their economic involvement with China has obviously increased significantly, but there's still a large percentage of the people of Taiwan who believe they should not politically be unified with China.

One of the issues I have tried to put on the table in a larger context are the sovereignty issues in the South China Sea, which include the Senkaku Islands, which have multiple sovereignty claims. And those kinds of issues are not going to go away, even if, or when Taiwan joins politically with China. In fact, if we don't have the right counterbalance, they are actually going to accentuate over the next few years.

The United States has an obligation to ensure that Taiwan is not forcibly united with China."

On his role as subcommittee chair:

"I need to do what I can to help reinvigorate the relationship between the United States and particularly East and Southeast Asia, and to bring that region more clearly up on the radar screen of the average American.

There are two phenomena occurring right now, almost by default. One is the constant tendency to think of Asia in terms of China in the United States. And the second is a focus on the island countries around the rim of East and Southeast Asia, as opposed to the countries on the Southeast Asian mainland.

I have a strong feeling that we [the United States] are an Asian nation in every sense of the word, culturally, historically. ... Our presence there has oscillated over the generations, but it's a very important place to be and we are neglecting it.

We're not showing up in this region, and we need to. It's a very vital place in the world in terms of U.S. interests and they need to know we want to continue to be there."

Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Josh Rogin | Permalink | | Comments? Login or register
( filed under: )


Advertisement

 

Re-engaging in East and Southeast Asia

by MekhongKurt on Sat, 10/03/2009 - 6:46pm

I'm glad to learn of Senator Webb's interest in this part of the world, where I've lived since 1985 except for a two-year break back to the U.S. 1988-90.

It's understandable that our focus has blurred somewhat regarding Southeast Asia (I've lived in Bangkok the past 15+ years), as concerns such as North Korea have kept us looking substantially further north. Of course, China, SOuth Korea, and Japan routinely consume much of our attention (and rightly so).

I believe -- though I'm no geopolitical expert -- that we're essentially okay regarding the Phillipines, Brunei, Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia. Burma remains a basket case and will, I fear, remain so for years to come, as the Goons of Rangoon aren't about to come around anytime soon. If ever.

We do tend to pay less attention to Laos, Cambodia, and Thailand, and in the case of Vietnam, it seems to fluctuate, watching from afar. Cambodia is a concern because of the authoritarian Prime Minister, who has been rather vocally belligerent in a long-running border dispute with Thailand, a potential flashpoint (though full-scale war is highly unlikely). Thailand's political situation combined with its importance as a rice exporter, together with the fact it's fairly influential within ASEAN, means it merits getting a chair a bit closer to the table than it currently occupies. Vietnam requires no explanation; there are many reasons we should be more steadily engaged there (which is not to detract from our diplomatic corps on the ground there), especially considering it;'s successfully benefitting from China's increasing labor prices. Besides, the Vietnamese work force is motivated, young, intelligent, often well-trained and English-speaking (the latter to a lesser extent outside Hanoi,l Ho Chih Minh City, etc.).

And Senator Webb is particularly correct regarding the South China Sea, a vital but very complicated place indeed. If Beijing had its way, that body of water would have its name changed from "Zhong Nan Hai" -- "South China Sea" -- to "Zhong Nan Hu" -- "South China Lake." My estimate is that it beefs up its naval forces on islands in the area and as work progresses on the country's fourth space center on Hainan Island, itself in the orthern part of the South China Sea, Beijing will become even more assertive.

Let me giving an instructive example. Sometime back when I lived in tianjin and Beijing, 1985-88, the China Dailoy, the official English-language newspaper, had a story about some worthless and small group of rocks in the South China Sea, but very far from China proper -- much closer to places such as -- well, every *other* country ringed around the sea. The rocks aren't even above water all the time. However, a tombstone with Chinese characters was discovered on on of these tiny atolls -- and China staked it's claim to sovereignty on that." (I questioned at the time if that meant that San Francisco fell under Beijing's rule.)

Many Americans still don't understand Chinese people's self-image and the image they have of the country. In Chinese, the country;s name is "Zhong Guo," or, literally, "Middle Country" -- hence, "the Middle Kingdom."

Ah, but does "shong" mean "middle" in the sense an English speaker takes the English word? No, not to a Chinese. Something along the lines of "Center of the Universe" comes far closer, a notion further reinforced by the view of the Emperor during imperial times: the Son of Heaven. (But most decidely not like Christ.) And there is a sense of "the best in every way" included as well. By extension, that means the Chinese people are superior to all other people, so, by golly, if they something is theirs, it's theirs, end of discussion.

And these days, there's *plenty* of intense nationalism around the country, as one can see in chat rooms and blogs on the Internet.

All this implies I fear China, and, to a lesser extenet, the rest of East, Southeast (and South, which I haven't entioned previously) Asia. I do not.

China is obviously the 800-pound gorilla in the room, but in some important ways, she remains a *regional* power, most obviously militarily. It's likely to be many years before China has anything remotely resembling even a "starter kit" for a true blue-water navy, for instance. Further, as red hot as the economy is, there is still extreme poverty in large swaths of the country, and enormous income disparities. Therefore, domestic issues will continue to consume much of the attention and energy of Beijing.

I wish Senator Webb every success in his efforts.