Jusuf Wanandi, Jakarta
It a major challenge now to find a modus vivendi for their state to state relations. Hopefully, the environment created by East Asian regionalism could be a useful mechanism to assist them in this effort. It is totally unacceptable to the region that a Japanese prime minister visits a shrine (Yasukuni) that gives a completely revisionist interpretation about World War II and its antecedents as clearly shown in the museum annex. China on its part needs to restrain the nationalist outbursts of her young generations and educate them also on post World War Japan's peaceful and cooperative developments.
India is another big country with a potential to also become a big power, although economically she is behind that of China. For the first time she is now close to the U.S., after having been a close friend of the USSR during the Cold War, and is making efforts to be cooperative with the only superpower to finding a solution to the Kashmir problem, and to be able to balance China in the future.
The U.S. also sees India as another potential economic power and a strategic counterweight vis--vis the Chinese. One test to show whether this is real and possible is the new U.S. policies of cooperation towards India's nuclear power, despite India's earlier stance against the articles of the NPT, which India has not signed.
But economically, as long as India could overcome the domestic constraints of the nationalists and leftists, it should develop into fruitful and powerful relations. And president Bush's coming visit to India will be a culmination of the improvements of the relationship.
For the time being it is important to watch this development closely. But the bottom line has to be remembered: India is another big country and is no one's lackey. She also has signed a strategic partnership with China, and the high-tech part of her economy, complemented by China's more robust manufacturing capabilities, is potentially a real positive match for both.
In the meantime, Japan is also trying to be close to India as another democratic country with a lot of potential to complement each's economy. If the relations between these great powers could be stabilized and become positive, a lot of potential for growth and development is present in the region. This could also become a force for peace and stability.
South Korea (ROK) is still experiencing a generational change, where the younger generation has taken over national politics and foreign policy as well. Not only have they brought President Roh Moo-hyun to power and to position themselves as representing the future, but they have also brought about real challenges to U.S.-ROK relations.
Foremost is the problem of relations with North Korea, especially the problem of scaling back the nuclear development in the North. Then there is the challenge to the U.S.-ROK alliance as well, which was caused by different appreciations of the nuclear proliferation in the North and of the meaning of the alliance.
The six party talks is now the only mechanism that exists now in finding a solution to the DPRK proliferation problem. The ROK thinks that increasing bilateral relations, including economic assistance, could produce a resolution. The U.S. has been uneasy about this policy, since this could only prolong the recalcitrant policy of the North towards finding a resolution.
In the end the South straddling between China and Japan still needs the U.S., and they must work to find a modus vivendi on the resolution of the DPRK proliferation problem as well as on their alliance relationship.
ASEAN has been neglected for so long by the U.S. except on contra terror policies. Deputy Secretary Zoellick is paying greater attention to ASEAN for economic and strategic reasons. ASEAN has been expected to be the driving force in regional institution building, since the two regional powers, China and Japan, are not up to this task at this stage of developments.
In the context of the Asia Pacific, the U.S. is also expecting ASEAN to be willing to be the catalyst to reforming and revitalizing APEC and the ARF, two important processes that could guarantee U.S. presence in the Asia Pacific, including in East Asia.
ASEAN can do this only if she can get her act together. The region must be able to get back on its own feet after the 1997 crisis. Regionally, ASEAN also has to be able to move towards creating an ASEAN Community, based on three poles of cooperation: Economic, politico-security and socio-cultural.
Indonesia's consolidation and regional role is important to be able to move ASEAN again. Will this be possible in view of the divide that is so obvious between the new and old members? This is especially so with the further retrogression inside Myanmar and the political deterioration within Cambodia. This is an open question.
The need for achieving peace and stability as well as economic growth and dynamism in East Asia might be the necessary pressures for ASEAN to get her act together. ASEAN has become highly dependent on the growth and stability of East Asia to be able to survive.
The writer is Vice Chairman, Board of Trustees, and senior fellow of Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Jakarta.
