Renewing the Pacific partnership (1).

• Author: Morrison, Charles E.
• Position: Documentos

The rise of China, India, and other Asian nations is creating a new > of the world economy centered on the Pacific. It is essential for the United States to remain vigorously engaged in this region, yet the climate of our relations with Asian partners is cooling. The United States and Asia (2) have yet to find a way to cooperate effectively on any significant global issue. This dilemma, we argue, requires urgent attention on both sides of the Pacific, and specifically a U.S. strategy that features innovative civil diplomacy alongside official initiatives.

THE CHALLENGE

Asia already accounts for about hall of the world's people and nearly a quarter of its output and financial assets (figures 1 and 2). Over the past forty years, all of the world's fastest growing economies (those with per capita income growth of 5 percent or more) were Asian, and China, India, and Vietnam are topping global growth charts today. This unprecedented > has lifted hundreds of millions of people from poverty to middle- and even upper-income lifestyles.

And the miracle continues. The region has recovered forcefully from the financial crisis of 1997-98, and its future progress is ensured by investments in physical assets and education (figures 3 and 4) that already exceed those of the United States. Asia's share of world output doubled in the last 50 years and will probably double again in the next 50. We need to prepare for a world in which Asia will overtake the United States in many important aggregate economic measures.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Given these remarkable trends, the United States and Asia share a vital stake in Asia's peaceful rise. It is essential that Asia's major powers and the United States become, in the words of World Bank President Robert Zoellick, > in a stable, prosperous world order. The United States still has great influence in shaping this order, but time is limited. We need to make sure that strong, cooperative institutions emerge, and that the United States itself is firmly established as an attractive model and trusted partner for Asia.

Yet for now, the chemistry of the Asia-U.S. relationship is failing. While recent relations among governments have been positive, public attitudes have soured. This may be due to the anxieties of economic competition, which find voice in sensationalist press reports and the politicization of complex trade and currency issues. The results are harmful: a recent BBC poll found that America's > is viewed positively by only 28 percent of Chinese and 37 percent of other Asians, while China's influence is viewed positively by only 34 percent of Americans and 43 percent of other Asians. And the positive opinions are decreasing.

The public climate is cooling despite the fact that the United States currently enjoys its best official relations ever with China, Japan, and India. It engages these countries at many levels including the top leadership. Asian countries, in turn, have been pragmatic and collaborative in their relations with the United States--by being more willing than Europeans, for example, to set aside their reservations about U.S. Middle East policies in direct relationships.

RENEWING THE AMERICAN PARTNERSHIP WITH ASIA

What is lacking is a coherent vision for the trans-Pacific relationship, built on an equal partnership of the United States and major Asian countries, and implemented through mutually valued collaborative initiatives. This cannot be accomplished through bilateral relationships, or through regional institution building in Asia. A strong trans-Pacific framework, we believe, would strengthen not only U.S. connections with Asia but also the Asian region's ability to cooperate internally.

The United States has been and remains a key driver of economic growth in Asia. This is due in part to policies that reduced barriers to economic interaction, and in very large part to a myriad of business and personal decisions on investments in and imports from Asia. U.S. military assets and alliances in the region have been also widely regarded as stabilizing.

The post-Cold-War efforts of the United States to refashion its relations with Asia Pacific countries crystallized in 1989 in its participation in launching the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. President Clinton later helped to elevate APEC to the leaders' level, and the forum then seemed destined to become a principal element of a new global architecture. But APEC's effectiveness weakened with the over-expansion of its membership and disappointments in its economic results--both in trade liberalization and in handling the Asian financial crisis. Nevertheless, APEC remains the most logical vehicle for regionwide cooperation. As we argue below, it should remain central to America's strategy for the Asia Pacific partnership.

FALSE CHOICES

Since the financial crisis, Asian countries have shown renewed interest in narrower regional institutions of economic cooperation. Alternatives include ASEAN+3 (which China supports, since it is likely to playa leading role in it), and ASEAN+6 (which Japan supports, expecting Australia, New Zealand, and India to dilute China's influence). The United States has not opposed these groupings, as it had the East Asia Economic Group in the early 1990s, but APEC remains its preferred regional economic architecture.

These arrangements are often viewed as stark alternatives in competition with each other. But the view that integration...