Current Issue
Organiser Home
Editorial
EXPOSE
Reports
Comment
The Moving Finger Writes
Media Watch
Thinking Aloud
Bookmark
A PAGE FROM HISTORY
RETROSPECT
Kids Org.
News Round-up
Readers’ Forum:
INTERESTING PEOPLE
PERSPECTIVE
Kerala Newsletter

Previous Issues
September 04, 2011

August 28, 2011
August 21, 2011
August 14, 2011
August 07, 2011

July 31, 2011
July 24, 2011
July 17, 2011
July 10, 2011
July 03, 2011

June 26, 2011
June 19, 2011
June 12, 2011
June 05, 2011

May 29, 2011
May 22, 2011
May 15, 2011
May 08, 2011
May 01, 2011

April 24, 2011
April 17, 2011
April 10, 2011
April 03, 2011

March 27, 2011
March 20, 2011
March 13, 2011
March 06, 2011

February 27, 2011
February 20, 2011
February 13, 2011
February 06, 2011

January 30, 2011
January 23, 2011
January 16, 2011
January 09, 2011
January 02, 2011

December 26, 2010
December 19, 2010
December 12, 2010
December 05, 2010
November 28, 2010
November 21, 2010
November 14, 2010
November 7, 2010

October 31, 2010
October 24, 2010
October 17, 2010
October 10, 2010
October 03, 2010

2010 Issues
2009 Issues
2008 Issues
2007 Issues
2006 Issues

Organiser
About us
Advertisement
Circulation
Contact us

Subscribe


April 10, 2011




Page: 27/34

Home > 2011 Issues > April 10, 2011

The geopolitics of US presence in Asia
By Manju Gupta

Asia Alone: The Dangerous Post-Crisis Divide from America, Simon S.C. Tay, John Wiley & Sons, Pp 206, Price not given

WHILE framing the new realities and geopolitics that result from the global financial crisis the author explains the danger of Asia’s detachment from America. Simon Tay, a public intellectual focusing on international and public affairs, provides a lucid analysis of how the Bush administration ‘lost’ Asia and how the region is becoming self-absorbed, especially after the 2008 global economic crisis. He focuses on the events from late 2008 to the end of 2009, from the collapse of the Lehman Brothers Bank in New York and the start of the global financial crisis up to the visit by the new US President Barrack Obama to Asia.

The author fears that the trends are not conducive for bettering relations between America and Asia, especially since their economics are interdependent, but their relationship is changing and there is a possibility of the two ending up more divided than united and the poorer as a result. He further says that the United States appears to be facing a relative decline in its power and its political will to engage with Asia, as a result of which its influence seem to be waning. At the same time, he sees Asia rising and developing a stronger sense of regionalism with the result that the region can and will be more ready to take its own path. These trends are perceived to be accelerating the crisis more quickly than either the Americans or Asians recognise and are ready for.

Why does he see the danger? This is because since the end of World War II, the American engagement in Asia provided the foundation for stability in the region, a bulwark against the spread of communism during the Cold War and subsequently for the promotion of democracy and protection of human rights. The United States has also stood for freer markets and trends in investment within Asia.

Asians too seem to have benefited from the American presence and their economies have boomed in this period. If a divide occurs before America and Asia, "economic and business opportunities and synergies" will be marred; a partnership valuable and indeed critical to both will end precipitately. The author feels that this is not inevitable but is increasingly probable.

Against this background, Chapter 1 presents an overview starting with the interdependence between America and Asia that marked the relationship up to the crisis of 2008. It reviews trends that can potentially end that interdependence and create a division between Asia and America.

Discussing the size of Asian regionalism, seeing its growth from the crisis of 1997-98 and into the current crisis, the author says that Asian regionalism "is prodded in part by missteps made by the United States, especially during the Bush administration."

Chapter 3 identifies the main actors in Asian regionalism. It presents the argument that Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations have in different ways and also in concert helped to bring the region together. In comparison, "Japan and others in the region have had less influence." He seems convinced that tensions and conflicts cannot be managed by China and ASEAN acting as partners or any other combination "of Asian powers, absent America."

The concluding chapter suggests that a future together rather than apart requires that both sides recognise the changes and continuities to find a path ahead in the uncertain post-crisis future. He also feels that Asians are not yet ready for a reduced United States presence as the former have not learned to trust each sufficiently to ensure peace. He is, however, optimistic about the future with Asia recovering and continuing to rise with sustainable drives for the region’s development. Second, Asians will become more of a region and community with more understanding and acceptance of their diversities and commitment to a shared future. Third, the United States will recover from the crisis and continue to have the will and capacity to engage in the rise of Asia and be accepted by Asians as a positive and welcome partner. To avoid the dangerous divide, leaders, policy-makers, companies and citizens on both sides must help to find a new balance between the United States and Asia.

(John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pvt Ltd, 2 Clementi Loop - # 02-01, Singapore 129809; enquiry@Wiley.com)




Previous Page Previous Page (26/34) - Next Page (28/34) Next Page


copyright© 2004 Bharat Prakashan(Delhi) Ltd. All Rights Reserved
Designed and Hosted by KSHEERAJA Web Solutions Pvt Ltd