Former Wilson Center Fellows David Shambaugh and Michael Yahuda discussed some of the key themes of their new book, International Relations of Asia, at an October 14 book launch hosted by the Asia Program. Shambaugh, a professor of political science and international affairs and director of the China Policy Program at George Washington University, described the changes in post-Cold War Asia as "dramatic" and noted that the academic literature had not managed to keep pace with these changes. This volume, Shambaugh declared, represents an effort to remedy that deficiency.

According to Shambaugh, the book attempts to analyze two levels of interaction among Asian countries: traditional state-to-state interactions, or "foreign policy," but also the increasingly important society-to-society interactions that he called "foreign relations." Current trends in Asia, Shambaugh said, flow from the growing interdependence on both levels within and among the five Asian sub-regions: East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia, Central Asia, and Australasia. These growing linkages mean that significant new characteristics must be added to the classic features of Asian politics such as the U.S. security alliance system and the rise of China. Shambaugh pointed in particular to a rising India and a rebalancing of power among the major state actors, as well as the increasingly important role of international organizations connecting Asian nations with each other and with the rest of the world. Asian states also now confront a range of new nontraditional security challenges, from terrorism to humanitarian relief, which have contributed to increased military spending. In fact, Shambaugh noted, Asia's defense expenditures now equal those of NATO's European members.

Shambaugh did not, however, foresee conflict as the inevitable outcome of these trends. The triangular relationship linking the United States, Japan, and China, which he called the most important in Asia, is characterized by strategic competition, but also by an offsetting economic interdependence. The rest of Asia, said Shambaugh, understands that the prospect of conflict between the U.S. and China is a "nightmare scenario," and works hard to avoid this eventuality.

Shambaugh concluded by offering several policy prescriptions for the new American administration next year. He noted that it would inherit a "very dynamic" Asia, but one in which existing policy was fundamentally sound; the Bush administration's Asia policy, he said, received "high marks," and key flashpoints such as the China-Taiwan and China-Japan relationships were stable and look to remain so. He urged the new administration to move beyond the traditional pillars of U.S. Asian policy – alliances, free trade, and democracy. Shambaugh suggested that the new administration would have to pay more attention to Asia, beginning by appointing a special representative for the Six-Party talks and freeing its Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia to focus on the entire region. Equally important, he called for the U.S. to recognize the "emerging multilateral architecture" in Asia, and to participate fully in Asian international organizations rather than "opting out" of them.

Michael Yahuda, an emeritus professor at the London School of Economics and a visiting scholar at the Sigur Center for Asian Studies, George Washington University, followed Shambaugh and spoke on the future of international relations in Asia. Yahuda described the predominant feature of Asian politics as uncertainty, both within states and between them. Asia's polities, he noted, remain relatively young; although many societies and cultures are ancient, their governments were largely formed after the Second World War. Combined with rapid economic development and accompanying dramatic social change, Yahuda predicted that domestic politics in many Asian states would "look very different" in five years. The other source of uncertainty, he said, was in Asia's power relationships. Though the U.S. remains the sole superpower, a number of "great powers" such as Russia, China, and India are now emerging in Asia. Their international politics will remain a source of uncertainty; they have declined to bandwagon against the United States, but they will similarly refuse to bandwagon against China or any other Asian state.

Yahuda also concluded his talk with a number of policy suggestions for the future. First and foremost, he stressed that the U.S. will remain an indispensable stabilizing force in Asia, if only because it is the only actor that has no territorial stake in the region. Because of China and Japan's myriad territorial disputes with their neighbors, Yahuda said, Asian nations would not welcome either supplanting U.S. leadership. He called, however, for increased American "sensitivity" to Asian concerns, from pollution and energy security to human trafficking. American leadership in Asia, according to Yahuda, will require a "more consultative approach" on economic as well as political issues, where working through multilateral forums will be crucial to success. The alternative, a future in which the U.S. fails to assert its leadership in Asia, would resemble 19th-century Europe – a shifting and unstable multipolarity among a very disparate group of great powers. That would be a future, he suggested, that would be in no country's best interest.

Drafted by Andrew S. Lim, Wilson Center intern
Robert M. Hathaway, Director, Asia Program, Ph: (202) 691-4020