Senior Policy Seminar

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/10125/3186

The East-West Center ScholarSpace community contains digital versions of just some of the several thousand books, periodicals, and unpublished papers generated by the Center over the past 50 years. Find a complete list of recent East-West Center publications and learn how to obtain them at EastWestCenter.org/publications . Search for recent and older works from 1960 - present using the Center's library catalog at EastWestCenter.org/riscatalog.

Browse

Now showing 1 - 9 of 9

Key issues in Asia Pacific security : Senior Policy Seminar 2001

(Honolulu: East-West Center, 2001) Glosserman (rapporteur), Brad

Participants considered a wide variety of issues affecting a region that possesses a diversity of cultural, political, and economic traditions, that is being battered by an array of forces, and that is struggling with fundamental transitions. Geographically, the discussion spanned the entire region, from the seeming stalemate in dialogue between North and South Korea to the hope that there may at last be some solution to Indonesia's woes. There were debates over the guiding principles of international order as well as scrutiny of the problem of localized conflicts and the role of multilateral institutions. Major themes that emerged from the discussions include: U.S. power is preponderant in both the Asia Pacific region and the world and is likely to continue to be so in the short- and medium-term. There are questions about how the United States will exercise this power and to what ends. Paradoxically, despite the overwhelming disparity between its power and that of any other nation, the United States' ability to influence outcomes appears to be diminishing. Washington's willingness to accept the limits of its influence will be a key factor in its relations with Asia Pacific governments. Globalization continues to erode the power of governments within the region as external forces play an increasing role in national decision making. The future success of regional governments will depend on their ability to take advantage of the opportunities created by globalization rather than be exploited by it. Similarly, governments need to be prepared to accommodate the new political pressures from below that are created by globalization. China's emergence as a regional power poses a daunting challenge for the Asia Pacific order. Chinese participants maintained that their country is often misunderstood. Playing up a Chinese military threat is mistaken, they argued, because China's focus over the short- and medium-term will continue to be its own development and modernization. Nonetheless, China's rise will continue to strain the existing structure of relations within the region. While the odds of military conflict between states are low, conflict within states is rising. The region faces a wide spectrum of threats. Security planning must adjust accordingly. There is no alternative to international cooperation and coordination. Many of the new security challenges are transnational in origin and nature, and no nation can combat them alone. The Asia Pacific region's diversity requires that it develop its own security architecture; it cannot import solutions, such as an Asia Pacific NATO. Any successful mechanism will respect that diversity and the distinctively Asian way of resolving disputes that has emerged. A geographic survey revealed little immediate prospect of an outbreak of hostilities in the region, but there are still grounds for concern over time. A substantial portion of the Seminar discussions was devoted to the gap between hopes for institutions in the region and their performance. The consensus view was that expectations should be scaled back. It is still early in the regime-creation process in the Asia Pacific region. Pacific Islands issues were raised at several points during the discussions, both because some of the islands share many of the problems of political fragmentation and instability as in Southeast Asia and because they appear to be uniquely vulnerable to a variety of global challenges ranging from global warming to money laundering. The islands' problems are compounded by the fact that the island countries have little voice in regional, much less global, affairs. Another issue that has dogged the region is the question of the balance between sovereignty and humanitarian intervention. For ASEAN, the dilemma is especially acute due to the importance attached to the doctrine of noninterference in the affairs of member states that has guided the organization since it was formed. Seminar discussions noted movement away from absolute sovereignty and the principle of complete noninterference, but here, too, practitioners stressed the need for patience. Regional governments must be allowed to move forward at a pace with which they are comfortable. Participants stressed the importance of a multilayered security architecture for the region, compensating for the failure of regional institutions to meet the high expectations invested in them. The network of bilateral security alliances centered on the United States still undergirds regional security, and a continued U.S. presence is generally considered to be an essential element of Asia Pacific security and stability. Several participants pointed out that one of the real changes over the past decade has been the elimination of doubts about the U.S. commitment to the Asia Pacific region, although somewhat paradoxically some questions are now being raised about the continuing need for a forward-deployed U.S. military presence.
Global economic crisis and implications for the Asia Pacific region : Senior Policy Seminar 2009

(Honolulu, HI: East-West Center, 2009)

The Senior Policy Seminar is a keystone event in the East-West Center's annual calendar. The 2009 seminar, tenth in the series, brought together senior foreign policy officials, private sector leaders, and analysts from countries around the region for nonofficial, frank, and non-attribution discussions of security issues in the Asia Pacific region. The 2009 Senior Policy Seminar focused on "The Global Economic Crisis and Implications for the Asia Pacific Region." Participants discussed the recovery underway throughout the region and the possibility of some countries adopting new growth strategies. There was considerable discussion about how the economic crisis has affected relations among the major powers. One session was devoted to climate change and energy issues. The seminar also examined the Obama Administration's approach to Asia and looked ahead to raise questions and make some projections about U.S.-Asian relations. This report presents the rapporteur's summary of the group discussions and the theme sessions. As in past years, the report adheres to the "Chatham House Rule" under which observations referred to in the report are not attributed to any individual participant. All views expressed in these documents are those of the participants and do not necessarily represent either a consensus of all views expressed or the views of the East-West Center. The principal value of the seminar is always found in the insights and contributions of the participants, both those who made opening presentations at the various sessions and those who participated in the frequently lively discussions. It is their observations that provide the analyses and judgments recorded in this report.
Shifting currents of U.S. and Asia Pacific economics, resources and security

(Honolulu, HI: East-West Center, 2008)

The Senior Policy Seminar is a keystone event in the East-West Center's annual calendar. The 2008 seminar, ninth in the series, brought together senior foreign policy officials, private sector leaders, and analysts from countries around the region for nonofficial, frank, and non-attribution discussions of security issues in the Asia Pacific region. Although the 2008 Senior Policy Seminar took place in July, before the economic crisis that led to unprecedented steps by the U.S. government to restore confidence, the overarching theme of the meeting was the turmoil in the global economy--including financial markets, resources, and trade--and the related challenges to sustaining economic growth and to the regional order. With the U.S. presidential election campaign entering its final phase, the seminar also considered how these issues will impact, and be impacted by, the next president, and the likely views of the next president on foreign policy issues, particularly in the Asia Pacific region. This report presents the rapporteur's summary of the group discussions and the theme sessions. As in past years, the report adheres to the "Chatham House Rule" under which observations referred to in the report are not attributed to any individual participant. All views expressed in these documents are those of the participants and do not necessarily represent either a consensus of all views expressed or the views of the East-West Center. The principal value of the seminar is always found in the insights and contributions of the participants, both those who made opening presentations at the various sessions and those who participated in the frequently lively discussions. It is their observations that provide the analyses and judgments recorded in this report.
Regional dynamics and future U.S. policy.

(Honolulu: East-West Center, 2000)

The East-West Center Senior Policy Seminars bring together senior security officials and analysts from countries around the region for nonofficial, frank, and non-attribution discussions of the differing perspectives on security issues in the Asia Pacific region. The hope and intention of this Seminar series is, through such exchanges, both to promote mutual understanding among the participants and to explore possibilities for improving the problem-solving capabilities and mechanisms in the region. The uncertain nature of the post-Cold War era in the Asia Pacific region and the lack of a clear framework for regional problem solving were recurrent themes in the discussions at the 1999 Senior Seminar. The major objective of the Seminar was to assess the U.S. role in the region and the challenges of formulating U.S. policies in the twenty-first century. The Seminar first reviewed the changing economic, sociopolitical, and strategic dynamics of the Asia Pacific region. This was followed by a consideration of the major elements of the current U.S. role, as well as selected problem areas in U.S.-Asia Pacific policy the U.S. forward military presence, economic issues, and the role of democracy and human rights in U.S. relations. These discussions provided the background for the assessment of U.S. policymaking for the coming period.
The Asia Pacific security order and implications for U.S. policy

(Honolulu: East-West Center, 2000)

The many uncertainties in the outlook for the Asia Pacific regional order dominated the discussions at the 2000 Senior Policy Seminar. A number of positive and welcome events over the preceding year were noted the unexpectedly swift recovery of most of the region from the economic-financial crisis of 1997-98, the dramatic (though still not considered definitive) prospects for change on the Korean peninsula opened up by the summit meeting between the South and North Korean leaders in June, and the multinational operation in late 1999 to restore order in East Timor was also considered to have been a basically successful case of international cooperation in dealing with a security and humanitarian crisis although the longer-term nation building lies ahead. However, many if not most other aspects of the regional outlook were considered far more problematic. Problem areas discussed included: The basic lack of consensus over the nature, evolution, and possibilities of the regional security order; Uncertainties regarding the policies and relations of the major powers involved in the region (critically including U.S.-China relations); Continuing flash points and other sources of conflict between the states of the region, as well as serious internal problems in several cases, most particularly Indonesia; Inexorable forces of globalization that are weakening every government's ability to control its own destiny; and An ominous combination of the spread of weapons of mass destruction and associated delivery systems and of new and potentially destabilizing technological developments most visibly exemplified by the issue of missile defense systems. All of these factors were seen as sources of continuing debate, differences, and even of possible conflict in the region. Another major theme at the Seminar was the absence or weakness of international and regional institutions capable of dealing with the many issue areas identified. An increasing level of peacekeeping and peace-restoring activities by the international community was noted, particularly under the auspices of the United Nations. A major new area of interest is the rising emphasis on the "right" of the international community to conduct "humanitarian interventions" where fundamental human rights are being endangered even as a result of internal conflicts within states. Nevertheless, the general assessment of the Seminar was that international institutions, procedures, and norms for dealing with conflict still face serious obstacles and lag far behind the challenges posed in today's world, challenges that seem bound to become even more complex in the future. In the absence of an effective international framework to deal with issues of global order, the lack of strong regional institutions in the Asia Pacific has even more serious potential consequences.
Challenges for U.S.-Asia Pacific policy in the second Bush administration

(Honolulu: East-West Center, 2006)

Asians continue to regard the United States as the key contributor to regional peace and prosperity. However, they express concern that U.S. policy toward the region is characterized by a relative lack of attention, insufficient appreciation of underlying strategic changes, and ideological polarization. The tone as much as the substance of recent U.S. policy was blamed for low regard for the United States in Asia. Despite efforts at Asian regionalism in terms of both institutions and identity, a U.S.-led regional management system is not expected to wither any time soon. In fact, U.S. bilateral relationships are strengthening, and regional multilateral efforts face formidable obstacles. The emergence of China as an economic, political, and military power was seen as the most important factor in shaping the new strategic environment. Longstanding strategic challenges in such regions as the Taiwan Strait, the Korean peninsula, and the India-Pakistan border were seen as relatively quiescent but far from final resolutions. Despite China's rise, India's activism, and Japan's incremental normalization, the balance of power in the Asia Pacific region is still based on American preeminence. In an environment of relatively benign great-power relations, Sino-Japanese relations stand out as an important exception. This has significant implications for the United States. The management of globalization, and specifically the distribution of its benefits, remains the key economic challenge for Asian states. The economies of major Asian states are generally sound, but frictions between states over the effects of the diversion of foreign investment, oil prices, and trade and currency valuations create frictions. Despite the growth of intra-regional trade, Asia remains dependent on the world economy. Domestic changes in many Asian countries have contributed to increased interstate tensions. Asian countries are also grappling with the demands of the international community for democracy and human rights, on the one hand, and counterterrorism requirements, on the other. Transnational challenges such as human and drug trafficking, terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction are ongoing and pressing. Coordinated action, however, is impeded by the constraints of sovereignty and capacity.
Mapping change in the Asia Pacific region : geopolitics, economics, and diplomacy

(Honolulu: East-West Center, 2008)

The Senior Policy Seminar brings together senior foreign policy officials, private sector leaders, and analysts from countries around the region for nonofficial, frank, and non-attribution discussions of security issues in the Asia Pacific region. The 2007 Senior Policy Seminar at the East-West Center was the eighth in an annual series. In view of the profound changes that have been occurring in the Asia Pacific region over recent years and in anticipation of a 2008 presidential election in the United States that will shape the nature of the next U.S. administration if not its specific policies, this year’s seminar focused on a retrospective on the ongoing “tectonic shifts” in various dimensions of power within the region. The three subareas were strategic/geopolitical power, economic power, and the more recently articulated concept of “soft power.” In addition, the opening and concluding sessions considered a somewhat broader and more topical range of regional issues including implications and challenges for U.S. policy. The principal value of the seminar is always found in the insights and contributions of the participants both those who made opening presentations at the various sessions and those who participated in the frequently lively discussions. It is their observations that provide the analysis and judgments recorded in this report. All views expressed in this report are those of the participants and do not necessarily represent either a consensus of all views expressed or the views of the East-West Center.
Asia Pacific security : dilemmas of dominance, challenges to community.

(Honolulu: East-West Center, 2004)

Participants in the East-West Center's fifth annual Senior Policy Seminar agreed that the overall strategic environment of the Asia Pacific region in 2003 is positive. Nevertheless, a number of continuing issues are cause for concern. The threat of terrorism and the potential for the Korean peninsula to lurch into deeper crisis remain the paramount concerns of the United States in the region. On the other hand, non-American participants expressed concern, and in some cases alarm, over the overwhelming power of the United States in international affairs. The multilateral world that many had expected to emerge after the end of the Cold War has not eventuated, and America's position as the sole superpower has strengthened. Much of the Seminar was devoted to discussions of what this means for the countries of Asia as they seek to deal with the United States. Key points that stood out in the Seminar discussions were: The United States remains predominant in the Asia Pacific region, as throughout the world. U.S. power, rather than giving way to multipolarity, has arguably grown and will continue at least into the medium term. Current international institutional structures, however, are incongruent with the reality of American military and economic dominance. U.S. relationships in the region are being influenced directly by the war on terrorism. The violent attacks of September 11, 2001, caused both an outpouring of sympathy for the United States and recognition by many countries in the Asia Pacific region that terrorism represents a shared threat. However, the war in Iraq has generally worked to lower public esteem for the United States, and not just in Muslim majority countries—although sentiment against U.S. foreign policy is strongest in the latter group of countries. There is a strong perception in the region that the United States, under the Bush administration, is a unilateralist power. Although there are many situations where the United States has chosen to work through multilateral architecture (for example, on North Korea), the war in Iraq has dramatically overshadowed these other cases in the public perception. The contention within the United States, however, may be less between multilateralism and unilateralism than between institutionalized and "a la carte" multilateralism. The United States will maintain its guarantee of Asia Pacific security, a situation welcomed by all. A rearrangement of U.S. forces in South Korea will not alter the U.S. commitment to that country, or diminish defense capacity in the event of hostilities with North Korea. The Bush administration will continue the Clinton era policy of seeking "places, not bases," but, where it has bases (Korea and Japan), it is seeking to use them more flexibly and efficiently. The U.S. current account and budget deficits may impose limits on U.S. geopolitical power. Much of this deficit is financed by foreign exchange reserves in East Asian banks. There is little danger that East Asian governments will work in concert to undermine the U.S. currency, but there may be limits to their willingness to hold dollars. Relations between the larger powers in the Asia Pacific region are far more benign today than at the end of the Cold War. Reasons include the absence of the Soviet Union/Russia as a strategic player in the Pacific Ocean, China's emergence as a market economy and constructive player in global affairs, and moves toward democratization in the region. The war on terrorism has given Southeast Asia a level of prominence for Washington not seen since the Vietnam War. The United States is encouraging the countries of maritime Southeast Asia, particularly the Philippines and Indonesia, to improve their security capabilities, including their capabilities in the field of counterterrorism. However, in collaborating on antiterrorism there is a danger that the United States will become entangled in local conflicts such as in Mindanao, which have their origins (and solutions) in local problems rather than in their links with al Qaeda. The war on terrorism has also given an impetus to increased regional security cooperation. However, the threat of terrorism in itself will not likely provide a long-term basis for organizing security arrangements in the region. Nuclear proliferation is a major security problem for the region. Most immediately, North Korea's nuclear program has the potential to cause neighboring nations to reconsider their own nonnuclear status. The U.S. government sees North Korean nuclear material as a direct threat to its own security, not just a threat to its allies. North Korea's assertive pursuit of nuclear weapons has created a renewed, grave crisis in Northeast Asia. Its twin goals of regime survival and massive external assistance present serious challenges to U.S. policy and to regional cooperation. There is every possibility that the United States—and the regional and global community—may have to live with a nuclear North Korea.
The United States and Asia : assessing problems and prospects.

(Honolulu: East-West Center, 2006)

The world is undergoing a profound transformation as Asia emerges as the center of the global economy. China's dazzling economic growth is at the heart of this process, but there is more to Asia's emergence than "the rise of China." Nevertheless, the region's economic influence has not to date been matched by corresponding political leverage. The primary vehicle for U.S. engagement with Asia remains its bilateral military alliances. For the most part, those alliances are strong and adapting to changes in the threat environment and to new military capabilities and doctrines. However, the U.S.-ROK alliance is currently under considerable stress. Seoul and Washington are trying to reshape and broaden their bilateral relationship, but the success of that effort is not guaranteed. Relations among the nations of Northeast Asia are fraught with tension. There are many sources of these tensions: structural changes in international relations, the personalities of political leaders, genuine conflicts of national interest, and transformations in these societies. Given their roots, these tensions will be present for some time. The key question is whether they can be controlled or whether they will lead to crises. Traditional regional flashpoints—the Korean Peninsula and, although currently relatively quiescent, the Taiwan Strait—add to the worries. Asian nations are debating the role of Islam in their societies. This is primarily a religious debate about the fundamentals of Islam and the role of Islam in lives and individual communities, but it has political repercussions. There are common forces at work, but Asia's diversity and the unique circumstances of each country require governments to fashion particular responses to the challenge posed by radical Islam. While there is no single template, every government needs both to counter immediate terrorist threats and to take long-term action to reduce the inequities and grievances that make it easier to recruit terrorists. There is broad agreement that robust growth rates in Asia will continue, at least in the medium term. Adjustments are inevitable, however. The region's high dependency on U.S. and Chinese growth, coupled with the large imbalances between the U.S. and Chinese economies is a significant danger. High energy prices, a possible slowdown in the U.S. economy, global imbalances, and structural weaknesses in China's economy are other important concerns. Many of the changes in Asia further U.S. interests, and Washington should support this evolution. The United States should play a positive and active role in the region, but it must also recognize the limits of its power. U.S. power and influence are greatly magnified when Washington works with other countries to accomplish objectives. The United States should not oppose the Asian community-building effort, but should insist that any Asian community be open and inclusive. The United States should support the creation of multilateral institutions that reinforce global norms and standards. Given the centrality of U.S. bilateral military alliances to its regional strategy, and their contribution to the "public good"' of regional security and stability, the United States should think carefully about the impact of its global realignments on the region. Ultimately, the United States needs to better understand the changes that Asia is experiencing. The region still values the U.S. engagement and role, and, while the current relative inattention in Washington to developments in Asia does some harm to U.S. interests, the damage is still manageable. However, that cushion may be eroding; Asia is not waiting for the United States, and Washington must actively re-engage if it is to maintain its influence.

Browse

Recent Submissions