By ANDREW LEE andrewlee@thestar.com.my
Tweet
Asia Alone: The Dangerous Post-Crisis Divide from America
Author: Simon S.C. Tay
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons
OVER the past three years, we have seen a shocking decline in Western supremacy. The 2008 financial crisis brought about the collapse of Lehman Brothers, once a symbol of Wall Street arrogance. The eurozone is having trouble raising funds due to a lack of confidence in its stability. America is having trouble convincing its own people that they are able to rebound from this decline, let alone the rest of the world. Lest we forget, many Western powers are still involved in the war in Afghanistan that looks no closer to an end than in 2001.
It seems that there has been a shift in the global balance of power towards the east, with countries like China and India fast gaining influence in political and, more importantly, economical issues worldwide. However, despite bringing wealth and success to parts of the world that have long been neglected by the West in the past (Africa, South America and Asean for instance), their rise has brought about a new problem it could lead to a siege mentality, a method of thought motivated similarly by the ridiculous “with us or against us” phrase coined by George Bush during the War on Terror.
In fact, it is not difficult to see how Asian countries might come to such a conclusion. In Simon S.C. Tay's latest book, Asia Alone: The Dangerous Post-Crisis Divide from America, he argues that some of America's policies just before and immediately after September 11 have served to alienate many countries in the East, who now look to China and India for inspiration and growth instead of their long-time partner.
In addition to the negligence of America, Tay also states a growing togetherness among Asian countries (notably the Asean countries) in the final decade of the 20th century chiefly to create more opportunities and to combat Western arrogance and economic control. For instance, Dr Mahathir Mohamad is often remembered for his controversial policies, good and bad, the effects of which are still felt in Malaysia today.
However, at times, it is easy to forget that he often waged a one-man war against Western post-imperialism first by insisting on using Japan as a model of economic growth, and more importantly, by learning to say no to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout plan in 1998.
The destruction of Indonesian and Thai societies brought about by their acceptance of the IMF bailout, and Malaysia's subsequent recovery proved that the Western way is not always the best, and that Asian countries do indeed have other options available to them economically.
Another theme of Tay's book is American arrogance he states many examples, from the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Kosovo to bloodshed in the Middle East and Afghanistan.
However, perhaps the two symbols of American arrogance most relevant to this book take place, once again, in South-East Asia.
Al Gore's snub of Malaysian hospitality in Kuala Lumpur during Anwar's imprisonment and the “sight of IMF president Michael Camdessus, standing imperiously, arms folded, while President Suharto of Indonesia bowed and signed papers to accept IMF terms” goes to show further how America believed that, politically and economically, their methods were the best.
The once popular notion of the United States being the champions of the free world was beginning to erode to be replaced by the image of that of a bully, preying on the weak. It seemed for a moment that, during the Asian Financial Crisis and the war in Iraq, Asia burned and the one country with the capability to help decided to turn a blind eye.
Numerous books have been written on the rise of China and India as superpowers, so I will not dwell on it here. What can be said is that their rise has added more belief that Asia is able to go alone. Many barriers still exist to cooperation, not least socially, as many Asian countries still hold historical grudges.
Yet, the feeling is that somehow, we are more dependent on one another than ever before. It would be wise to thread carefully though. Despite bringing about a wealth of opportunities for the East, those who champion China's cause as the new global superpower should note alarmingly that, in the past, all competition between rising powers and the undisputed leaders at the time have led to armed conflict. In reality, China's ascent to superpower status is still highly dependent on American decline than it is on its own growth.
In November 2009, a little over a year after the fall of Lehman Brothers, President Obama visited Japan. In addition to calling himself America's first Pacific President', this time it was the President of the United States who bowed in respect to an Asian leader. If America indeed lost Asia over the last decade, it has signalled its intentions to regain its trust. The question is whether or not it is a trust worth having.
Tweet
Author: Simon S.C. Tay
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons
OVER the past three years, we have seen a shocking decline in Western supremacy. The 2008 financial crisis brought about the collapse of Lehman Brothers, once a symbol of Wall Street arrogance. The eurozone is having trouble raising funds due to a lack of confidence in its stability. America is having trouble convincing its own people that they are able to rebound from this decline, let alone the rest of the world. Lest we forget, many Western powers are still involved in the war in Afghanistan that looks no closer to an end than in 2001.
It seems that there has been a shift in the global balance of power towards the east, with countries like China and India fast gaining influence in political and, more importantly, economical issues worldwide. However, despite bringing wealth and success to parts of the world that have long been neglected by the West in the past (Africa, South America and Asean for instance), their rise has brought about a new problem it could lead to a siege mentality, a method of thought motivated similarly by the ridiculous “with us or against us” phrase coined by George Bush during the War on Terror.
In fact, it is not difficult to see how Asian countries might come to such a conclusion. In Simon S.C. Tay's latest book, Asia Alone: The Dangerous Post-Crisis Divide from America, he argues that some of America's policies just before and immediately after September 11 have served to alienate many countries in the East, who now look to China and India for inspiration and growth instead of their long-time partner.
In addition to the negligence of America, Tay also states a growing togetherness among Asian countries (notably the Asean countries) in the final decade of the 20th century chiefly to create more opportunities and to combat Western arrogance and economic control. For instance, Dr Mahathir Mohamad is often remembered for his controversial policies, good and bad, the effects of which are still felt in Malaysia today.
However, at times, it is easy to forget that he often waged a one-man war against Western post-imperialism first by insisting on using Japan as a model of economic growth, and more importantly, by learning to say no to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) bailout plan in 1998.
The destruction of Indonesian and Thai societies brought about by their acceptance of the IMF bailout, and Malaysia's subsequent recovery proved that the Western way is not always the best, and that Asian countries do indeed have other options available to them economically.
Another theme of Tay's book is American arrogance he states many examples, from the bombing of the Chinese embassy in Kosovo to bloodshed in the Middle East and Afghanistan.
However, perhaps the two symbols of American arrogance most relevant to this book take place, once again, in South-East Asia.
Al Gore's snub of Malaysian hospitality in Kuala Lumpur during Anwar's imprisonment and the “sight of IMF president Michael Camdessus, standing imperiously, arms folded, while President Suharto of Indonesia bowed and signed papers to accept IMF terms” goes to show further how America believed that, politically and economically, their methods were the best.
The once popular notion of the United States being the champions of the free world was beginning to erode to be replaced by the image of that of a bully, preying on the weak. It seemed for a moment that, during the Asian Financial Crisis and the war in Iraq, Asia burned and the one country with the capability to help decided to turn a blind eye.
Numerous books have been written on the rise of China and India as superpowers, so I will not dwell on it here. What can be said is that their rise has added more belief that Asia is able to go alone. Many barriers still exist to cooperation, not least socially, as many Asian countries still hold historical grudges.
Yet, the feeling is that somehow, we are more dependent on one another than ever before. It would be wise to thread carefully though. Despite bringing about a wealth of opportunities for the East, those who champion China's cause as the new global superpower should note alarmingly that, in the past, all competition between rising powers and the undisputed leaders at the time have led to armed conflict. In reality, China's ascent to superpower status is still highly dependent on American decline than it is on its own growth.
In November 2009, a little over a year after the fall of Lehman Brothers, President Obama visited Japan. In addition to calling himself America's first Pacific President', this time it was the President of the United States who bowed in respect to an Asian leader. If America indeed lost Asia over the last decade, it has signalled its intentions to regain its trust. The question is whether or not it is a trust worth having.
