PAX SINICA VS PAX AMERICANA
China seems determined to edge the US, out of its own backyard; it would be wise for Asean to not take sides
WITH Asean summits and important leadup meetings such as that of foreign ministers in Singapore recently, it has become almost de rigueur to see such forums turned into avenues for the United States to spar with China.
Southeast Asia and the South China Sea have, like it or not, become the frontline again in the global contest for supremacy between an established and aspiring superpowers.
As in previous such contests, diplomatic dexterity by individual Asean countries and collectively will be key to preserving their independence of actions. Especially since the election of US President Donald Trump and his “America First” mantra, many around the world are left wondering if his shock victory is not the last stand for Pax Americana. The country is not helping itself much by sending out contradictory signals.
The US may come to eventually rue Trump’s first substantive act as president: withdrawing his country from the Trans-Pacific Partnership accord so strenuously hammered out over laborious negotiations among its dozen original members, Malaysia included.
This is particularly so given that in China, the US faces a most formidable economic competitor. The economic sphere may be what decides if Pax Sinica eventually takes hold and replaces Pax Americana.
The US is hardly helping itself with a belated and rather desultory offer of just over US$100 million (RM407.2 million) for its “Indo-Pacific” infrastructure fund when China is offering individual countries projects worth tens of billions of dollars under its Belt and Road Initiative!
Moreover, the US also appears to be fighting yesterday’s contest with a show of force in contested waters of the South China Sea. That has brought decidedly mixed reviews even from its traditional regional ally, the Philippines. President Rodrigo Duterte has pointed out that while the US has stated explicitly that it will come to Japan’s aid in defence of even the latter’s contested claims over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands with China, it has maintained that it remains neutral over the Philippines’ and other fellow regional claimant countries’ disputes with China over island outcrops in the South China Sea.
The US, thus, now runs the danger of creating a serious credibility gap for itself in this pivotal region which will force regional countries to re-calibrate their own individual policies vis-à-vis the big powers.
“America First” seems to be a little more than a cover for the US to launch a global trade war in hopes of beating China in the latter’s own game of economic mercantilism. In so doing, the US may be pursuing a self-defeatist policy of abandoning its long-standing defence of the “rules-based international order” and leaving the field wide open for China to reshape a new global architecture.
Asean countries will be smart not to be seen too openly taking sides between the US and China. With China at the grouping’s front door and now becoming virtually every member country’s largest trading partner, it is not in any country’s interests to be openly antagonising the regional superpower.
China seems determined to edge the US out of its own backyard and the US is not doing itself any favours by showing for the whole world to see its increasingly dysfunctional political system and the policy incoherence this engenders.
Given such an antagonistic relationship now between the US and China, Asean and its individual members will do well to make the conduct of their foreign and regional affairs (particularly as they related to the two major powers) not so sharply binary and potentially toxic.
To its credit, Asean forums bring in — as a matter of course — all the other important international actors such as Australia, India and Japan as well as the European Union. As the US retrench regionally and even globally, no matter whether by design or default, these other big economies may be able to fill in some of the gaps.
Asean countries have, throughout its modern history, been quite adept at adopting friendly and non-antagonistic ties with bigger powers, both near and far. Where ideological differences and rigidities precluded such pragmatism developing, military conflicts such as the Indo-china wars followed.
Even Vietnam, which enjoys the distinction of having forcibly expelled colonial-power France and later the US and repelled China in a border skirmish in 1979, has since made peace with all-comers, to its own advantage.
Malaysia has likewise always espoused a foreign policy of friendship towards all and Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s two Japan visits and upcoming China trip underscore that little has changed despite a change of government.
America First” seems to be a little more than a cover for the US to launch a global trade war in hopes of beating China in the latter’s own game of economic mercantilism.