October 22, 2003
APEC SUMMIT: SECURITY TRUMPS ECONOMICS IN
BANGKOK
KEY FINDINGS
** President Bush's
"obsession" with security usurped economic issues in Bangkok.
** "Politically
motivated" pressure on China to revalue the yuan was just
"posturing."
** The proposed security
agreement for the DPRK could "pave the way" for a
"breakthrough."
MAJOR THEMES
The 'shadow of Usama bin Laden' hovered over Bangkok-- Commentators judged that President Bush turned
the APEC summit into a forum on terrorism.
Critics asserted that Bush "did not give a damn" about
economic issues in Bangkok and criticized him for "doing a lot of talking
since 9/11, but...very little listening."
However, many European and moderate Asian outlets praised Bush's
anti-terror agenda. Germany's
center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine questioned those "who would
dare" ignore the link between terrorism and the global economy. A moderate Japanese broadsheet contended that
Asia cannot enjoy economic development without peace and stability.
'If the U.S. does not push for trade liberalization, nobody else
will'-- Analysts were
"underwhelmed" by the results of the APEC summit. Hong Kong financial dailies assailed the
group as a "toothless talk-shop" that advances economic debate at a
"glacial" pace. Other Asian
critics contended that, although "dysfunctional," APEC remains an
important venue for regional discussion.
Liberal European and Australian analysts criticized President Bush's
"unilateral approach" to global free trade, with Austria's Der
Standard warning that Washington's pursuit of bilateral agreements could
prove "economically disastrous."
China's refusal to revalue 'a slap in the face'-- Observers characterized President Bush's
pressure on China and Japan to revalue their currencies as an election-minded
gesture by a president "in trouble" at home. European and business-oriented Asian dailies
dismissed the currency debate as an issue of "much talk but little
action," treating it as a pro-forma effort to "appease American
entrepreneurs." Other Asian writers impugned Bush's "dangerous game
of tinkering" with foreign exchange rates and derided Washington's
"cynical" criticism of China's weak-yuan policy when America depends
on China for "high quality, cheaply made goods" and assistance in the
war on terror. By successfully fending
off U.S. pressure, observers saw China emerging as the leading power in Asia
and a "counterweight" to the U.S. in the region.
Bush's proposal 'the best possible concession' to the DPRK-- Analysts lauded President Bush's proposed
security guarantee for the DPRK as a "pragmatist triumph" that could
"define Asia-Pacific security for the next generation." By addressing North Korea's isolation and
insecurity, editorialists portrayed Bush's proposal as giving Kim Jong-il
"reason not to escalate the crisis by testing or selling" nuclear
weapons. Other Asian writers hailed
Washington's "welcome change" in policy as "the only way forward"
in the DPRK nuclear standoff.
EDITOR: Andrew Borda
EDITOR'S NOTE: The analysis is based on 76 reports from 19
countries, October 16-22, 2003.
Editorial excerpts from each country are listed from the most current
date.
BRITAIN: "Thai
Takeaways"
The conservative Times editorialized (10/18): "What makes APEC particularly
interesting now is the presence of Chinese and U.S. leaders in a regional but
relatively intimate group of countries....
Beijing does not like to say so publicly, but it shares Washington's
concerns about instability in the Middle East and the dangers of Islamic
extremism. The two countries will haggle
over the value of the yuan, but temper their anger because Chinese institutions
have become significant purchasers of U.S. government bonds and U.S. retailers
are dependent on Chinese producers for high-quality, cheaply made goods to
stock their shelves.... APEC leaders
will agree to call for further negotiations with North Korea, which has a
unique ability to destabilise the region, having forsaken economic development
for the riskier strategy of nuclear blackmail.... Beijing has belatedly become involved in the
issue, but must take the lead in the discussions and in ensuring North Korean
compliance, if a deal is eventually struck.
One symbolic role of the meeting is to highlight the dual personality of
Russia as a European and Asian nation...Mr. Putin will have to convince his
suitors that polygamy is just multilateralism by a different name."
FRANCE:
"Terrorism On The Menu At APEC"
Florence Compain observed in right-of-center Le Figaro
(10/22): “The APEC forum closed on an interesting note: APEC is no longer a
forum for economic discussion.
Washington has managed to rally Pacific Rim countries to share its
obsession with security issues.… President Bush found the South Asian nations
to be an attentive audience, and one traumatized since the Bali explosion.”
"China Upstages the U.S"
Arnaud Dubus argued in left-of-center Liberation (10/22):
“The APEC forum is normally an Asian platform for U.S. presidents, a tradition
initiated by President Clinton in 1993. But this year China, who took part in
the forum for the first time, upset the traditional role playing and acted as a
counterweight to the U.S. China’s opposition to calls from the U.S. for a
stronger Chinese currency was a slap in the face for President Bush, who has
been saying that that the weak Chinese currency is responsible for America’s
deficit with China.”
“Bush and His Asian Partners Together Against
Al-Qaida”
Florence Compain asserted in right-of-center Le Figaro
(10/20): “The shadow of bin Laden hovers over the APEC Summit.... President Bush stayed only a few hours in
Bangkok because of terrorist threats in a country where terrorists retain all
of their power.... But Thailand has
joined the select group of Washington’s ‘out-of NATO major allies’, a group
that enjoys privileged relations with Washington in matters of security.”
GERMANY: "America's
Deceptive Moves"
Jochen Buchsteiner noted in center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine
(10/22): "At this year's summit in Bangkok, the U.S. seemed to present its
superiority in an unprecedented way....
But what remains is the question of the cost of this American marching
through. The reputation, which the
United States has gained in the meantime in the region has not improved with
Bush's demonstration of power.... Unlike
Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir, the majority of Asian leaders hide their
skepticism behind the polite demand for a 'multipolar global order.'… But the
creeping loss of confidence that the United States is now experiencing could be
all the more momentous when it is offset by another country. China has turned into the leading power in
Asia. Over the past few years, the
Beijing leadership has succeeded in presenting itself as a reliable
partner. Its smooth diplomacy seeking
accommodation has been perceived in Asia as a beneficial contrast to the United
States rushing ahead.... But some time
will pass before China will be able to take over America's security policy
function in Asia. Many countries still
feel better with a power of order that does not have immediate territorial
interests. The Chinese are currently
trying to overtake the United States as economic power. In Southeast Asia they are quickly catching
up. China's self-confidence found its
expression in the relaxed reaction to President Bush's wish to revalue the
Yuan. Even though President Hu is well
aware of the fact that the Chinese exchange rate is considered a job killer in
the United States, he said that China will examine this demand but that it also
has to show consideration for its Asian neighbors."
"Not In The Same Tact"
Business-oriented Handelsblatt of Duesseldorf asserted
(10/22): "The United States made its imprint on the APEC summit. Terrorism and security got the attention
which President Bush demanded. But Bush
did not give a damn about the fact that APEC is an economic forum for the
reduction of tariffs and the removal of investment barriers. Many U.S. partners are likely to have
thoughtfully left the summit. They will
certainly wonder whether the United States has the right feeling of Asia with a
policy that concentrates only on its own interests.... Not all regions in the world feel committed
to fighting terrorism to the same degree as the United States does. In Asia, the majority of people is mainly
interested in stabilizing the economic recovery and prosperity. But what they
heard from the United States on this issue must disappoint them.... With his simple arithmetic, President Bush is
driving the Asian nations even more into China's arms.... While Beijing is trying to get the support of
new partners, the United States is threatening
protectionism. As long as the
United States does not recognize the right tact in Asia, the Chinese have an
easy job."
"Bush's Deficits"
March Hujer noted in an editorial in center-left Sueddeutsche
Zeitung of Munich (10/22):
"Especially now that President Bush is in Asia where he demands a
new currency and trade policy from the main financiers of the [U.S.] deficit
and even complains about the disadvantages of free trade, the reports of a
record U.S. budget deficit deserve special attention. What Bush is demanding is basically not
unreasonable...but what is worrying is that Bush has again succumbed to the
calls of the U.S. industry lobby, that he is uses his exchange rate argument
only to protect his textile industry from cheap Chinese imports. It is not the first time that Bush opposes
free trade. Punitive tariffs of steel
and record subsidies for U.S. farmers send clear signals. But Bush is dependent on free trade. America's economy has many deficiencies
ranging from budget deficits...to a historically low savings quota which has
not yet been detrimental only because America can rely on other countries that
have spare money like China with a savings quota of 40 percent. If it is Bush's intention to close the United
States to these countries, he must raise the question who will remain to
finance the record deficit.
"Life Lies"
Peter Sturm noted in an editorial in
center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine (10/21): "APEC is an institution that originally
deals with economic questions.... It is
true that a few of the past meetings dealt with economic matters but the main
issues were often determined by relevant events like in Vancouver in 1997 the
beginning Asian crisis. Now in Bangkok,
terrorism is the main issue. Some
Asians, among them the usual suspects, do not like this. We can certainly discuss the style, which the
United States is imposing with its agenda on the meeting. But who would dare claim that the dangers of
terrorism would not have an effect on the global economy? It does not make sense to stick to the life
lies of the past. At meetings like the ones in Bangkok, issues should not push
aside issues but search for reasonable solutions instead."
"A Great Deficiency Of Understanding"
Arne Perras commented in center-left Sueddeutsche
Zeitung of Munich (10/20): "The
danger of global terrorism will play a central role when President Bush meets
the Asian leaders at the APEC summit in Bangkok.... But otherwise, there is not much that unites
the Asian neighbors with Bush.... In
wide parts of Southeast Asia, skepticism towards the powerful neighbor on the
other side of the Pacific has sharply increased.... At issue are the roots of terror, and many
countries have doubts about whether the Philippine approach, which Bush praised
as exemplary, is the right one. Not U.S.
soldiers, but quiet support of police and intelligence forces are decisive to
eliminate radical organizations like Jemaah Islamiya. In addition, the Americans simply do not want
to accept that they made the Asian terror front more dangerous than it was
anyway with its own policy in the Middle East and the campaign in Iraq in
particular.... The Iraq war was not
perceived as a fight against terrorism but as a blow to the Islamic world. The United States forfeited decisive
confidence by hushing up its reason to go to war...and if Bush is now asking
the countries for understanding of his Iraq policy, he only makes the situation
worse.... The Iraq war has made the U.S.
president an extremely unpopular president in the region. But this is something he is pushing aside by
pinning his hopes on gestures that are well-meant, but destroy more than they
heal."
"Pacific"
Sophie Muehlmann argued in right-of-center Die
Welt of Berlin (10/20): "President Bush urgently needs good press and
for the people at home the brilliant pictures of man who guides the world. With great gestures, the U.S. president
thanked the Asian governments that sided with the United States in Afghanistan
and Iraq...but Bush's visit to the region is also a future investment. For many experts, the Pacific millennium is
surfacing. What can be more desirable
for a U.S. president than partners who fight terrorism together with the United
States and who feel committed to implementing the dream of growth and
capitalism? In Singapore or...in
Australia people live a way of life that resembles the U.S. one. And even Muslim countries like Indonesia show
an even more similar consumer attitude and everyday life than the 'old'
Europe.... The governments in Manila,
Bangkok, or Jakarta are expecting lucrative deals and military assistance
because of their good connections with Washington. The wishing lists are long--and arms wide
open for the U.S. president."
ITALY: "WTO, A Push
Toward Re-launch"
Mario Platero commented in leading business Il Sole-24 Ore
(10/22): “The 21 members of APEC instructed their ministers to re-launch the
Doha talks within the framework of WTO to liberalize world trade.… From a
practical point of view, a decision was made to constitute a fund within the
Asian Development Bank.… The document also mentions the necessity to eliminate
nuclear proliferation, but it doesn’t explicitly mention North Korea. Also, it does not acknowledge the need to let
currencies fluctuate freely on the market.
These two points were particularly important to the U.S.… The feeling
gathered among the Americans is that both Tokyo and Beijing will soon
acknowledge the request, in one way or another--maybe not as quickly or as
aggressively as Washington expects. The
two countries will probably encourage going in the direction wanted by the
U.S. APEC has also recognized that the
final objective on the farming issue is to eliminate all forms of subsidies and
tariffs on imports and that it will proceed with structural reforms of economies
to better transparencies and to attract foreign investments.... The only sour note was the confirmation
(reiterated yesterday) of the anti-Semitic positions of the Malaysian leader
Mahatir Mohammed.”
“North Korea Chills Bush On Nuclear [Issue]”
Bruno Marolo opined in pro-Democratic Left party daily L’Unitá
(10/21): “North Korea responded with a missile to George Bush’s conciliatory
signs. It is only an experiment, but the
moment was not only chosen by chance. It
coincides with the inauguration in Bangkok of the APEC Summit.... Officially, North Korea’s nuclear threat was
not on the agenda, but it immediately came up as the most urgent problem for
Bush, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese leader Hu Jintao and their
interlocutors. The new challenge
emerging from Asia jeopardizes the U.S. President’s credibility in the middle
of the electoral campaign. The White
House is ready for anything to find a way out.
Yesterday in Bangkok, after a meeting with South Korean president Roh
Moo-hyun, Bush confirmed his intentions to bury the hatchet with which he
threatened the ‘axis of evil’ countries one year ago.... Until now, the White House was against any
sort of concession, and had cut off aid agreed upon by North Korea and the
Clinton administration. Now he seems
willing to give up the sanctions and to reach an understanding.”
“Bush’s Appeal In Asia: ‘Let’s Combat Evil’”
Ennio Caretto judged in centrist,
top-circulation Corriere della Sera (10/21): “Bush converted APEC to
anti-terrorism, even though a few of the 21 member countries and Islamic
religious leaders protested. Due to the
pressure exerted by Bush, APEC has included in today’s communiqué the
commitment ‘to the complete dismantlement, and without delays, the
transnational terrorist groups’ and to strengthen the non-proliferation of
WMD. The U.S. President has even won the
campaign on Iraq. He managed to get from
some of the leaders' military and financial support--the latter, however, will
be administered by World Bank, and not by the Anglo-American coalition.... Bush has gotten an unspecified number of
troops and funding from Japan, Philippines, Thailand, South Korea, Australia,
Singapore and others. He writes to
Persian Gulf leaders telling them to do likewise and announces that he will
continue to work on the more reluctant European allies."
“Bush Offers Pact To North Korea”
Bruno Marolo commented in pro-democratic left party daily L’Unitá
(10/20): “George Bush asks for help from whoever is available. He is clinging to the life jacket Russia and
China threw him to save himself from the crisis with North Korea, which
threatens to transform the Asia Pacific Economic summit meeting into an
international failure. He has offered a
written guarantee of non-aggression to a country that until a year ago was
considered part of the ‘axis of evil,’ so long as it stops producing nuclear
weapons. Russia and China, two powers
that George Bush treated with arrogance when he took office in 2001, have
thereby confirmed their role as crutches, which the American giant is now
holding on to after becoming lame in the Iraqi adventure.... Bush already has too much on his plate for him
to have to deal with a crisis with North Korea in the middle of the electoral
campaign. Even yesterday he had to react
the best he could to the new threats by Osama Bin Laden, while the Pentagon is
forced to make plans for a withdrawal of over half of the U.S. soldiers from
Iraq within two years, without knowing how to substitute them.”
“And On The Exchange Rate Bush Gets Another No”
Ennio Caretto noted in centrist, top-circulation
Corriere della Sera (10/20): “This is the second defeat in three days
for Bush’s policy on the dollar, following the one that Japanese Prime Minister
Koizumi inflicted upon him. The President, who is in Bangkok for the APEC
summit to convince Tokyo and Beijing to let their currencies fluctuate high and
the U.S. one low, received a negative answer.
His proposal was meant to re-launch U.S. exports and to create new jobs
at home. But the Japanese and Chinese
leaders objected that it would have rebounded on the Asian economies.... Since it is unable to affect currencies and
the impasse at the WTO talks, the U.S. is now aiming to re-launch its export
through a series of bilateral trade treaties.
The one with China is evidently far off.
But after the one with Singapore, within the APEC framework, Bush has
announced another two in the following weeks with Thailand and Australia, while
behind the scenes Zoellick is pressuring other countries. This is a
disappointment for APEC. The summit was
expecting Bush to speed things up for a free trade zone.... Instead the President has seemingly opted for
a unilateral approach on this issue as well.
This is not positive for anyone, not even for the EU.”
“Bush Asks Asia For Cooperation On Exchange Rates”
Mario Platero noted in leading business daily Il
Sole-24 Ore (10/17): “Bush left California yesterday on an Asian mission
which will take him to six different countries to discuss security, economy,
finance, trade and above all currencies.
Policy regarding exchange rates is the most burdensome and urgent
matter: the U.S. will ask Japan and China, in particular, to raise their
currency in order to alleviate the trade deficit that is becoming unsustainable
for the U.S.”
RUSSIA: "Bush
Politicizes APEC"
Yevgeniy Verlin stated in centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta
(10/22): "Based on the APEC declaration, Washington will have enough room
for maneuver if it decides to keep pressuring North Korea. In the BBC's opinion, the U.S. President
managed to get the forum to talk more about what most interests the United
States, namely, WMD non-proliferation and terrorism. The Americans succeeded in that even though a
number of countries (including China and Malaysia) wanted the APEC forum to
remain strictly economic."
"APEC Moves Away From Economics"
Yekaterina Grigoryeva in Bangkok noted in her report for reformist
Izvestiya (10/22): "The joint declaration shows that APEC has moved
away from pure economics. Much of it is
on fighting terrorism."
"Economic Cooperation Remains In Focus"
Oleg Shevtsov argued in reformist youth-oriented Komsomol'skaya
Pravda (10/22): "Under fire from anti-globalists, the U.S. President
failed to get the flak shifted to poor Myanmar where the opposition is being
kept in fear. The Asian Tigers were not
enthusiastic about the idea of politicizing the summit. Nor was Russia. The focus was still on economic cooperation."
"George Bush Bows To Kim Jong Il"
Centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta ran a
comment by Yevgeniy Verlin stating (10/21): "While flatly refusing to sign
a non-aggression pact with the DPRK, Washington speaks of some guarantees on
paper that might be offered on behalf of all participants in the six-way talks
on North Korea's nuclear program. U.S.
Secretary of State Colin Powell, speaking in Bangkok yesterday, promised to
work up ideas 'with our partners' in the days or weeks ahead and submit them to
the North Koreans. The Secretary did
not say, though, that the idea was the 'intellectual property' of the Russian
Foreign Ministry, which came up with it back in August. Of course, Bush and his entourage have not
been so peaceable and 'restrained' with regard to the DPRK because they love or
sympathize with the South, less so the North, Koreans. The chief reason is that up against North
Korea, the United States, due to various circumstances, cannot try what it did
in Iraq."
"Bush-Putin Meeting Not To Be"
Yevgeniy Verlin and Maksim Glikin commented in
centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (10/20): "Putin will not meet with
Bush in Bangkok though a week ago the Kremlin said that it had planned such a
meeting. Some in the Russian delegation
suggest that the reason is Russian participation in the ICO summit in Malaysia
where many anti-Semitic statements were made.
The White House reportedly resents the Russians having pretended that
nothing wrong happened. Others believe
that Washington did not like Moscow's latest statements on the possibility of
pre-emptive strikes and the ability of Russian missiles to overcome any ABM
system."
"Playing Games On Thin Ice"
Aleksandr Budberg mused in reformist
youth-oriented Moskovskiy Komsomolets (10/20): "As Moscow is trying
to act the part of a 'truce envoy,' it needs to be very careful and tough not
to slide smoothly into the habitual anti-Western ways that are still popular in
the world and among the military. In
that sense, the Mahathir-stirred row is useful in reminding Putin of the thin
ice he is walking on. Truce envoys are
known to have drawn fire from all sides sometimes."
AUSTRIA: “Pacific Low For World Trade”
Managing chief Eric Frey opined in liberal Der Standard
(10/20): “The failure of the most recent WTO summit in Cancun has dealt a
serious blow to free trade, and thus to the world economy at large. But George W. Bush’s Asian mission is no less
threatening: At the summit of the Asian-Pacific Economic Cooperation
organization (APEC) the U.S. President will no longer fight for a large Pacific
free-trade zone, which was supposed to be created according to somewhat dusty
plans by 2010. Just as many other
countries, the U.S. now focuses on bilateral free-trade agreements with
individual partners, and is currently wooing Thailand and Australia. Such agreements may be politically effective,
but are usually economically disastrous, as they undermine the principle of
non-discrimination. Every trade
privilege for one country automatically means that suppliers from other
countries are at a disadvantage.... Bush
will most likely return to Washington empty-handed. But his mission will have serious
consequences: It signals a further turning away from the principles of free
trade, which Bush has already betrayed with the steel tariffs and the raising of
agricultural subsidies. But if the U.S.
does not push for trade liberalization, nobody else will. These are sad times
for world trade.”
BELGIUM:
"A Summit For Appearances Sake"
Philippe Paquet judged in independent La Libre Belgique
(10/21): “The two stars of the APEC Summit that began in Bangkok yesterday are
the Chinese and the American Presidents....
But Messrs. Bush and Hu arrived in Bangkok in quite a different context.
The Chinese President is still glorified by last week’s successful space flight
and is also boosted by the figures of the Chinese economy for the third
quarter, which show an incredible growth of 9 percent and a 36 percent
progression of China’s foreign trade. On the contrary, U.S. President George W.
Bush is facing an increasingly difficult situation for his troops in Iraq, a
U.S. economy that is not really recovering, and a public opinion whose
impatience is growing. And if Mr. Hu is theoretically assured of ruling for a
long time without opposition, George W. Bush is twelve months away from a
ballot that he is not sure to win. This context explains beforehand why the
Chinese-American dialogue will not yield much.”
IRELAND: "Bush Asian Agenda"
The center-left Irish Times editorialized (10/21):
"President Bush's current 10-day visit to Asia is one of the most prolonged
and intense of a serving president to the region since the Vietnam War.... His main objectives have been to track and
influence the large-scale economic changes flowing through the region, and to
link them to his anti-terrorism agenda....
North Korea is, after all, the major potential source of such weapons;
and Asian leaders believe they have to co-operate closely with Mr Bush if they
are to encourage him to work with them on containing North Korea and giving it
security guarantees. There is some evidence
that Mr Bush has been willing to reciprocate, despite pressure from policy
hawks not to do so. The APEC meeting
underlines the importance of getting world trade talks started again.... A more immediate concern for President Bush,
going into an election year, has been the exchange rates between the dollar and
Asian currencies, especially the Japanese yen and the Chinese renminbi. There are loud complaints that Asian goods
are competing unfairly in the U.S. market, resulting in unprecedented job losses. Mr Bush wants the yen and the renminbi to
float against the dollar, relieving pressure on imports and reducing U.S.
reliance on Asian investment to finance its budget deficit. So far there are few signs the Chinese and
Japanese are willing to agree."
SWEDEN: "Support For
Bush"
Conservative Svenska Dagbladet editorialized (10/22): “APEC gave President George Bush its full
support in the fight against global terrorism.
The member countries also rallied behind the new U.S. policy on North
Korea, which implies that limited security guarantees should be offered to the
Pyongyang dictatorship in exchange for a dismantled nuclear program. This
change of course means that important principles are sacrificed in the hope of
pragmatist triumphs. But the fact that
North Korea, in conjunction with the APEC Summit, carried out a nuclear missile
test indicates that this might not be enough.”
EAST ASIA/PACIFIC
AUSTRALIA:
"China’s New Best Friend: The US"
Graham Barrett, former foreign editor, oberved
in the liberal Age (10/21): “George Bush's Asian-Australian odyssey is a
sign that a sense of perspective is starting to influence the making of
American foreign policy. It acknowledges that Islamist extremism is not the
only potent force at work on the shape of this century, and that the evolution
of Asia--particularly North-East Asia--will be critical to global growth and
security.... The two powers [China and the U.S.] are discovering that they
share many concerns and interests, not just in the war on terrorism. If this
trend continues, nothing could be better calculated to enhance the region's
security and prosperity, and Australia's future. It is a move that will be
keenly encouraged by the Howard Government as it welcomes Bush and Chinese
leader Hu Jintao to Canberra.”
"Free Trade Could Come At Too High A
Price"
Tim Colebatch, economics editor wrote in the
liberal Age (10/21): “You remember how, a month ago in Cancun, talks to
free up world trade fell over because so many countries were reluctant to open
their markets? Yet now, those countries seems to be falling over each other in
their eagerness to negotiate free trade agreements that open their markets, at
least selectively.... Between them, all
these [bilateral] agreements have the potential to reshape the world, and not
necessarily for the better. Whereas the World Trade Organization endeavors to
set rules that apply equally to all nations, bilateral negotiations are ruled
by the law of gravity...we need a free trade agreement with them more than they
need one with us. And amid the buzz of this week's visit by President Bush,
Prime Minister John Howard and Trade Minister Mark Vaile need to be on their
guard.... The bottom line is that if we want the U.S. to let us compete freely in
its sugar and dairy markets, we are going to have to pay a high price. And the
way the negotiations are moving suggests a number of areas where it is
demanding that price…. John Howard could afford to walk away from a U.S. free
trade agreement, albeit with loss of face. What he could not afford politically
is to sign a deal that surrenders the things Australians want to keep.”
“Security And Trade On The Line At APEC”
The conservative Australian read (10/20):
“The key is getting the U.S. firmly focused on the region and its
challenges. This isn't rocket
science. The world has only one
superpower left and, luckily, it is a liberal democracy with a strong and
justified confidence in its own values.
Wherever U.S. diplomacy, backed by U.S. force, is asserted, terror and
tyranny are on the back foot. At the
moment, George W. Bush ventures into APEC with plenty of constructive ideas for
the region--especially on security--but without a comprehensive vision for it. Co-operation between Thailand and the U.S.
was the outstanding factor in apprehending Jemaah Islamiah leader Hambali, just
as co-operation between Australia and Indonesia was what brought the Bali
bombers to justice. The announcement
that the U.S. will make a major contribution to the Indonesian education
system, as a counter-influence to the fundamentalist religious schools that
preach hate and intolerance, is likewise welcome, and parallels Australian
initiatives, on a larger scale."
“George Bush: A Friend Arrives Bearing Gifts”
Phil Scanlan commented in the business-oriented Australian
Financial Review (10/20): “The
significance of his [President Bush] presence this week will transcend protocol
and mutual admiration over military and defense collaboration, and give weight
to the concept of economic integration on a large scale.... Australian national interests are to cement
the alliance with the U.S., to continue to underwrite the well-being of
Australian citizens, and to build on this security foundation by fully engaging
our neighbors in the South Pacific and East Asia. Australia’s important role as stabilizer and
integrator in the South Pacific and South-East Asia...is well respected by the
US and our neighbors."
“Don’t Pin This On Australia”
The liberal Sydney Morning Herald
observed (10/20): “There is one very
good reason why Australia's interests do not lie in the slavish promotion of
American interests in the Asia-Pacific region.
It is the Australia-U.S. alliance.
Australia's importance to the U.S.--and Canberra's corresponding
leverage in Washington--is not as a blindly loyal ally, regardless of the clumsy
reference by the U.S. President, George Bush, to Australia as
"sheriff" in the region. The
United States can, and does, look after itself.... The question for Canberra has never been one
of a choice between Asia on the one hand and the United States and its Western
allies on the other. Australia's
long-term interests lie in both arenas....
Historically, both sides of Australian politics have supported the
Australia-U.S. alliance.... What has
changed is the manner in which U.S. power is projected globally. It is Mr Bush's aggressive style, and Mr
Howard's eager approval, which is the source of friction, not the rationale
underpinning the alliance. The complexities of Asia's political map mean
Australia's regional ties will continue to demand constant and sensitive
attention. Given the robust nature of
the Australia-U.S. alliance, it is to Asia that Australia's diplomatic energy
should turn.”
“Landmark Visit To A Fearful Shore”
Geoff Kitney observed in the liberal Sydney
Morning Herald (10/17): “Bush's visit to Canberra will be a landmark in
Australian political history. It is
without doubt the most significant U.S. presidential visit to Australia, both
in its symbolism and its substance. It
will add significantly to the momentum of Australia's rapidly accelerating
interconnection with the U.S., strategically, militarily and
economically.... The rhetoric of the
U.S. President's address to Parliament is certain to ring with reassurance
about the crusade the U.S. is leading to advance freedom and democracy, but the
wall of security behind which it will be spoken will show that the quest for
freedom has a price. This jarring
contradiction should surely encourage the Australian community to reflect a
little more deeply than it has so far on the Bush approach to promoting
freedom, and Australia's part in it--now elevated by Bush from deputy sheriff
to sheriff in comments which suggest he has little understanding of the
regional sensitivities that this will irritate.... It seems entirely possible that pursuit of
the goal of freedom for Iraq may come at the price of less freedom for everyone
else...it could mean that by backing the U.S. militarily in its invasion of
Iraq in the interest of strengthening the alliance and buying a stronger
security guarantee from the U.S., Australia may have contributed to feeding the
security threat it most fears: a radicalized, unstable Indonesia.... When the U.S. President comes to Australia to
thank us for being good friends, loyal allies and strong supporters of its war
on terrorism, it's an appropriate time to reflect on that for which he is
thanking us.”
“Stop’s The Go When Bush Is In The House”
Laura Tingle opined in the business-oriented Australian
Financial Review (10/17): “Australians might be ‘partners, friends and
allies’ of George Bush, but he doesn’t actually want to meet any of us. Except John Howard of course.... The specter of Australia’s parliament being
told by the U.S. Secret Service how to run its affairs--and that it must in
effect close down--is not an attractive one, no matter how often September 11
and October 12 are raised. And this is
exactly what has happened.... Perhaps
the strangest thing about these looming visits is the relative passion and
attention they are receiving. George
Bush is a politician in trouble at home over misleading people on Iraq, in
trouble in the Middle East, and presiding over a seriously troubled
economy. Hu Jintao runs an economy that
makes the Americans nervous and which is growing at a rate to dwarf and shape
the whole region in which we live. Yet
when engaging in that most Chinese of traditions, kowtowing, we still seem to
have our bottoms facing in the wrong direction.”
“The Man Behind The TV Screen”
Paul Kelly observed in the national conservative
Australian (10/16): “The contrast is striking. Across the desk George W. Bush is the same
person--yet this is a different persona from that unconvincing television
presence.... When he talks of the
terrorists he taps the table; he cuts through; he polarizes opinion. You can see it and feel it. Bush's presidency was formed by September
11--this was his defining hour. It still
governs his moods and his policies.
George W. Bush argues compassion but invokes God's wrath against
America's enemies. When he visits,
Australians should try to understand the source of his passion and the more
complex character that he embodies--but then, they might see him only on
television. “
“Standing Up For Mr Bush”
The liberal Sydney Morning Herald
asserted (10/16): “To bow or not to bow, that is the question.... To accord Mr Bush due courtesy is to
acknowledge respect for his office and through that office, to show Australian
regard for the American people. It does
not necessarily mean that Australians are applauding the incumbent, although
many would. It is about saluting the
rank, not the individual. That some
Australians, including some MPs, are disgusted at the invasion of Iraq does not
justify incivility towards Mr Bush in the very institution intended to reflect this
nation's aspirations. Australia's
elected representatives should show Mr Bush the same respect they expect for
Australian leaders visiting overseas....
Mr Bush should not be insulted if congressional reflex [of a standing
ovation] is not mirrored in his Australian welcome. But he is entitled to be heard with the
dignity and respect owed to his position.”
CHINA: "APEC Mulls Terror-Trade
Balance"
Xinhua News Agency noted in the official
English-language newspaper China Daily (10/20): “While some less
developed economies were anxious about finding that balance (between security
and efficiency), foreign ministers reached broad consensus on the need for
fresh efforts to put the derailed World Trade Organization market-opening talks
back on track. Although the call was
largely rhetorical, the 21-member APEC includes nations that clashed bitterly
last month in Cancun, Mexico, caused the collapse of negotiations deemed
crucial to completing the so-called Doha round of talks by the end of 2004.... Less developed Asian countries have dragged
their feet in implementing the steps because of the costs. More developed APEC members say failure to
fight terror will be a cost in itself....
Bush, who arrived in Bangkok late on Saturday, will use APEC to push for
co-operation against proliferation of weapons of mass destruction--with the
nuclear program of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea the main regional
issue.”
"Cooperation With Hand In Hand To Face The
Future”
Gong Zhankui commented in official Communist
Party People’s Daily (Renmin Ribao) (10/16): "Currently APEC is developing into a
critical phase, while it makes slow progress in the aspect of free trade and
investment.... Besides, the process of
APEC economic and technological cooperation has always been left behind that of
free and convenient trade and investment since some key issues, like sourcing
fund for cooperation, selecting cooperation projects and establishing
cooperation output evaluation system, have not being efficiently settled yet.”
CHINA (HONG KONG SAR): "APEC Silence Speaks Volumes"
The independent, business-oriented
English-language Standard argued (Internet version, 10/22): "The 21-member Asia-Pacific Economic
Co-operation (Apec) leader's meeting ended yesterday with a snub for U.S.
President George W. Bush and his personal campaign against Asian currency
regimes, in particular the pegged rate at which the yuan exchanges with the
U.S. dollar. Showing a calculated
disregard for heavy pre-summit lobbying on the topic by Bush in both Tokyo and
Beijing as well as a sustained war of words from U.S. Treasury Secretary John
Snow in recent weeks, the final communique from the Pacific Rim leaders in
Bangkok last night was entirely silent on the subject of reforming regional
currency and exchange rate markets. It
is tempting to be underwhelmed by what is left in yet another APEC communique
after all the careful editing is done; let alone by what is left out. As a
toothless talk-shop that advances contentious policy debate at a glacial pace,
since all communiques must reflect an orchestrated consensus, its communiques
are assured to hide more than they reveal and to lag real debate by the
proverbial mile.... How nice it would be
to believe the smart rejection of U.S. pressure on this issue might herald
widening resistance to the disturbing extra-territorial reach which is now
being smuggled into foreign policy by Bush in the name of a global fight
against terrorism.... The least that may
be said of the U.S.-led campaign against the 'weak-yuan' policy is that the
complaint is ironic, coming as it does from a country that is quite cynically
pursuing the very same 'crime' it accuses China of, namely engineering a weak
currency to help its exporters while it professes to be upholding a strong
currency of its own."
"Pact Offers Way Out Of North Korean
Impasses"
The independent English-language South China
Morning Post said in an editorial (10/21):
"Although it is already being spun by President George W. Bush's
advisers as not a shift in the existing U.S. negotiating stance, the news that
North Korea may be offered a security agreement of some kind is just what is
needed to break the current impasse in negotiations on the North's nuclear
weapons program. Whatever it is labeled,
the move will at least bring North Korean President Kim Jong-il back to the
negotiating table--and give him a reason not to escalate the crisis by testing
or even selling nuclear weapons. The
progress is made possible by an acknowledgment by the United States of the
profound sense of isolation and insecurity that Mr. Kim and his regime feel,
and that addressing these fears is the only way forward.... From what Ms. Rice had to say, details of the
plan are still sketchy and the U.S. has yet to sound out the other countries on
what form the final document will take."
"Sino-U.S. Dialogue Can Straighten Out The
Differences"
The pro-PRC Chinese-language Ta Kung Pao
remarked (10/21): "Judging from the
news coming from the Hu-Bush summit, the two leaders have obviously discussed
the issue of the renminbi exchange rate.
However, Bush did not take a strong posture toward Hu Jintao.... It is very important that both China and the
U.S. stressed that they would straighten out their differences. It is normal for countries to have
differences. However, measures such as
threats and sanctions will not only fail to put an end to differences, on the
contrary, they will exacerbate problems and harm existing relations.... The Taiwan issue always pops up because it is
the most sensitive and important issue in Sino-U.S. relations.... Apart from warning Taiwan not to create a
tense situation in the Taiwan Strait, the U.S. also emphasized that it would
follow the one-China policy....
President Bush also made his stance clear to Hu Jintao. The recent remarks from the U.S. side should
be welcomed."
"Bush's Little Trips"
The independent English-language Standard
observed (10/20): "U.S. President
George W. Bush will get absolutely nothing from his six day whistle-stop tour
of Asia. As the Washington Post put it
last week 'the emptiness of his agenda, beyond terrorism, is sadly
representative of his foreign policy two years after the attacks on September
11, 2001.' His lack of interest in Latin
America, Africa and Asia and contempt for much of Europe speaks volumes. The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq saw the
redrawing of U.S. foreign policy. It saw
40-odd years of diplomacy thrown out of the window for one based on
unilateralism.... Now the U.S. is stuck with a staggering bill and a war which
is fast shaping up to be another Vietnam.
His tour of Asia, which began in Japan last week and ends in Australia
on Wednesday, shows a president and an administration bereft of ideas. Bush is a president facing re-election next
year. All he is worried about is being
re-elected.... Bush's quick trip to Asia
will be seen by most Asian leaders as being just that...a quick trip. "
"U.S. Will Not Sit Still And Watch China
Become A Strong Power"
Independent Chinese-language Hong Kong
Economic Journal observed (10/20):
"Chinese and U.S. leaders met in Bangkok. It is surprising that the two leaders said
almost nothing about the renminbi exchange rate, over which such a hubbub has
been raised. Obviously, the renminbi
debate is one of much talk but little action.
On the surface, the U.S. is overbearing but both sides know that it is
just a 'technical issue'. The renminbi
exchange rate will not change the Sino-U.S. political and economic
situation.... The U.S. will not sit
still and watch the emergence of China as the Asian strong power. The U.S. is still the biggest trade partner
in Asia. However, China's continuous
investment in the region and its flexible foreign policies have strengthened
its influence and power.... It is just
wishful thinking to imagine that Sino-U.S. relations are in for 'smooth
sailing.'"
"President Hu And Bush Have Not Yet Shown
Their Hands"
Independent Chinese-language Hong Kong
Economic Times commented (10/20):
"For Bush, the renminbi revaluation is not as important as winning
the presidential election next year.
Therefore, the renminbi revaluation, according to Bush's calculations,
is not an economic issue but a political reelection issue. If the renminbi revalues under Bush's
pressure, Bush will be able to solicit votes from the small and medium sized
companies in the United States. In the
meantime, he may lose votes and donations from big companies that invest in
China because the renminbi revaluation will hurt their interests. China is the major buyer of U.S. bonds. Thus, if Bush pushes too hard and makes China
stop buying or even sell U.S. bonds, it may trigger a decline in the U.S. financial
market and Bush may be blamed by the voters....
China and the U.S. have shaken hands, at least for the moment. Bush promised to stop pressuring China on the
renminbi, in return, Hu Jintao also promised Bush that there was a possibility
to expand the exchange rate of the renminbi."
"Bush Is Not In A Hurry To Push The
Renminbi Revaluation"
Independent Chinese-language Sing Tao Daily
News stated (10/20): "Before
the Chinese and U.S. leaders held a summit meeting, people's focus was on the
revaluation of the renminbi. The U.S.
increased its pressure while China insisted on keeping the renminbi
stable. However, even the U.S. has
different views internally on revaluation.
Besides, President Bush needs China's cooperation in countering
terrorism. Thus, the pressure on
revaluation is just posturing.... The
renminbi revaluation is a two-edged sword for Bush's presidential
election. The U.S. cannot free itself
from Afghanistan and Iraq, thus, it needs China to cooperate in restraining
North Korean from developing nuclear weapons.
China also needs the cooperation of the U.S. to constrain Taiwan. Hence, the Bush administration's pressure on
the renminbi revaluation is just a measure to push China to open its market and
to make other political concessions. The
pressure is limited."
"Pressure On The Renminbi Revaluation Is
Relaxing"
The pro-PRC Chinese-language Hong Kong
Commercial Daily concluded (10/20):
"Whenever an election is coming up, there are more troubles. Making China the target has become a must for
U.S. presidential elections over the last ten years. The upcoming presidential election is no
exception. This time the pressure is
focused on the renminbi exchange rate.
The U.S. blames the low renminbi exchange rate for the imbalance of
Sino-U.S. trade.... Yesterday, President
Hu Jintao clearly stated in Thailand that China would keep a reasonable and
stable renminbi exchange rate.... He
stated that China would be responsible in dealing with the issue of the
renminbi exchange rate. The pressure on
China to revalue the renminbi will relax."
JAPAN: "War On Terror And The DPRK Vital To
Regional Security"
Top-circulation, moderate Yomiuri observed (10/22):
"APEC leaders in Bangkok have pledged to fight terrorism and enhance
regional security. APEC members have
strengthened their united front to fight terrorism, as Southeast Asian
countries continue to be at high risk of attacks from international terrorist
groups, mainly Islamic extremists--a factor APEC members fear will hinder
economic development in the region. Some
APEC nations expressed opposition to the forum's focus on accelerating
antiterrorism efforts, saying that the primary function of the forum is aimed
at promoting economic cooperation. But
the region will not be able to enjoy economic development without peace and
stability. APEC leaders should take
every possible measure to eliminate terrorism. It is only natural that Japan,
neighbor of North Korea, play a part in the antiterrorism fight and the effort
to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction."
"APEC Still Remains Useful As Venue For Discussion"
Liberal Asahi editorialized (10/22): "Given APEC
leaders' failure to come up with any concrete measures for resuming the new WTO
round of trade liberalization talks, we cannot help but say that the APEC forum
has become dysfunctional. U.S. policy
toward Asia has also changed greatly.
Unlike the former Clinton administration, which tried to establish a
closer cooperative relationship with Asia, the Bush White House is less
interested in the region, preferring to place the war on terrorism at the top
of its diplomatic objectives. At the
Bangkok forum, President Bush placed emphasis on dismantling international
terrorist groups and blocking the spread of WMD. Some Southeast Asian nations expressed
caution for what is called a U.S. bid to transform APEC into a forum for
discussing political and national security issues. Despite this, APEC remains an important venue
where leaders from the U.S., Russia, China and Japan can meet and discuss
issues of regional and global interest and concern."
"DPRK Must Abandon Its Nuclear Development
Program"
The top-circulation, moderate Yomiuri
editorialized (10/21): "Will the U.S. offer to give the DPRK a security
assurance lead to a breakthrough in the standoff over the DPRK's nuclear
development program? President Bush reportedly told Japanese, South Korean and
Chinese leaders during meetings in Bangkok that he is considering giving North
Korea a security assurance, possibly in writing, within the framework of the
six-way talks. This offer would be in
return for Pyongyang's scrapping of its nuclear program. The President's
proposal is the best possible concession that the U.S. could offer North Korea
with an eye to restarting the six-way talks. Should the North refuse to agree
to the resumption of the six-way talks and continue with its nuclear program,
tension will escalate further and the international community will be forced to
make a grave decision. In light of this, North Korea must make a wise
choice."
"U.S.' Dangerous Currency Game"
An editorial in the liberal Asahi observed (10/20);
"With the 2004 presidential race one year away, President Bush has become
more attentive to calls at home for a 'cheaper dollar.' In order to get
re-elected, the President needs votes from the manufacturing industry in the
Mid-West and labor unions concerned about Japanese and Chinese trade
offensives.… However close and strong the Bush-Koizumi working relationship may
be, Japan's series of massive market interventions will be politically
difficult for both nations. The Bush
administration's emerging foreign exchange policy is not only politically
motivated but can also be called a dangerous game of tinkering with foreign
exchange rates. During his meeting with PM Koizumi in Tokyo on Friday, Mr. Bush
reiterated a strong dollar policy, while indirectly criticizing Japan's heavy
yen-selling intervention. The
President's remark also indicated that the U.S. does not welcome a sudden drop
in the dollar."
"Mr. President, We Want to Welcome You
But…"
Liberal Asahi editorialized (10/17):
"Originally, we should welcome President Bush's brief visit to Tokyo in a
proper and polite manner. Somehow, we
have mixed feelings about Mr. Bush's stopover in Tokyo for talks with Prime
Minister Koizumi.... There are serious
problems the President should resolve before we welcome his visit from the
bottom of our heart. The problems are
Iraq and Middle East peace, just to name two.
We are in support of the U.S.-led war on terrorism, but are not
necessarily supportive of the unilateral U.S. start of the war in Iraq that
tore up the world community and drew criticism from EU nations.... There is no reason at all to oppose
international financial and other contributions to Iraq's reconstruction. But Prime Minister Koizumi's immediate and
positive response to the U.S. call for Japan's 'generous' assistance does not
represent national consensus. Japan's
main opposition party Minshuto (DPJ), which also attaches importance to Japan's
alliance with the U.S., is also opposed to the dispatch of SDF troops to Iraq
at the present stage.... Public opinion
is also split over Japan's planned dispatch of SDF troops to the war-torn
nation. With a rise in skepticism in
Japan over Washington's justification of the Iraq war, there are voices of
concern even within the government over the future direction of the
'Bush-Koizumi alliance.'"
INDONESIA:
"Anti-Bush Demonstrations And Offer for Dialogue”
Independent Media Indonesia held (10/21):
“Frankly speaking, we are also happy that the world community is critical of
the U.S. That is to say, there is still
a common perception among the world community about U.S. excessive hegemony. It is a very good collective solidarity. However, excessive anti-American sentiment
may also backfire. The rejection by a
Muslim leader to meet with Bush does not constitute a mature attitude because
meeting and having a dialogue with Bush would certainly bring more good than
harm. We share Minister Hassan Wirayuda’s view that the meeting between the
Muslim leaders and Bush will be a good chance to convey the position of
Indonesian Muslims toward the U.S. although there is no guarantee that the
dialogue will change the U.S. drastically.
Nonetheless, isn’t dialogue the tradition of those who put brain over
muscle?”
"Three-Hour Drama in Bali"
Business-oriented Bisnis Indonesia
commented (10/21): “It is natural for the U.S. to be overly concerned with the
security of the president.… There might
have been some assumption in the U.S. that Bush is visiting a terrorist den
[especially] because some of the terrorist leaders now detained in several
countries come from Indonesia.
Apparently, the security arrangement would be much less tight if the
cooperation reached at APEC Summit in Bangkok in fighting terrorism goes
well. In addition, the U.S. must try to
change its image as the enemy of Islam; an image that is related, for instance,
to its support for Israel versus the Palestinians, who are predominantly
Muslims.”
"Controversial, Still Bush Is Leader Of A
Big Nation"
Leading independent Kompas (10/20)
commented: “As the host we should be able to show that we are a civilized
people. Whether we like him or not, Bush is the leader of a big nation who has
taken the risk to come to a region which he himself regards as dangerous. But for the sake of getting [our] views, he
is willing to take that risk.”
"Diplomacy"
Leading independent Kompas, in a column
by cultural figure and Antara Editor in Chief Mohamad Sobary, commented
(10/19): “The leader of the greatest nation, which is purportedly the champion
of democracy, should not be ignored. We
should answer truthfully if there are any questions from him [President Bush]
about religious fanaticism, fundamentalism, radicalism or terrorism.… Without prejudice, the discussion with Bush
should be welcomed with humbleness and respect.
We must prove that Islam is a religion of nobility and peace, not with
words, but with proof of our nobility.
The period of lip service is over as it has not helped.”
"Aa Gym’s Protest Against Bush"
Islamic oriented Pelita commented
(10/18):: “Regardless of the pros and cons, we capture the stance of [preacher]
Aa Gym [to decline to meet President Bush] as representing the stance of Indonesian
Muslim with regard to U.S. arrogance. It
is a fact that President Bush has often made Muslims, both in Indonesia and
other countries, upset… We think that
meeting with President Bush has some positive aspects because the Muslim
leaders will be able to convey their criticisms and their view of the true
Islam directly. The question is whether
there will be enough time for a two-way dialogue.”
“Questioning Bush’s Conscience”
Independent Media Indonesia commented (10/17): “In addition
to meeting with President Megawati, Bush has also invited four Muslim leaders,
Hasyim Muzadi, Syafii Maarif, Abdullah Gymnastiar (Aa Gym) and Azyumardi Azra,
each will be given five minutes to talk.
The question is what could be done during the five-minute meeting. Gym has rejected the invitation and chosen to
go to Mecca [as a kind of protest for his policy on Afghanistan and
Iraq].... Five minutes is not a long
time. Bush actually only wants lip
service. Therefore, we urge that the
three leaders go straight to the point like Gym. Tell Bush that the world will
be in danger if the U.S. is led by a person like him, someone who has no
conscience.”
“Bush And Islam”
Muslim intellectual Republika noted (10/17): “The meeting will certainly be a very
important moment to improve mutual respect between the U.S. government and
Muslims in Indonesia, particularly because after the WTC there has been tension
between the Bush government and Muslims....
We should appreciate Bush’s good will to meet with the Indonesian Muslim
leaders. We also should respect his
stance of not visiting the Bali ground zero, for this could again open an ‘old
wound’ that is recovering. Therefore,
there is nothing wrong for the four leaders to use the meeting to explain the
true aspirations and stance of Indonesian Muslims. The four leaders represent the aspirations of
Indonesian Muslims. Whatever the reason behind Bush’s [invitation], it is
appropriate for us to expect that there will be a fresh understanding between
the U.S. government and Muslims in Indonesia for the sake of a more just and
friendly relations between the two sides.
And this can only happen if there is no ‘hidden agenda’ by Bush to look
for new ‘methods’ to discredit Islam.”
PHILIPPINES:
"Dubya"
Rosalinda Orosa wrote in the privately-owned,
English-language Philippine Star (10/22): "Even on television, Dubya projected a
definite presence, the quiet charm of a Texan country boy. He could have taught
those of our politicians, who strut around with bloated egos, a thing or two
because he was simple and direct in manner, betraying neither bluster nor
arrogance.... His speech at the Batasan
was that of a master psychologist, flattering and complimenting his listeners
to high heavens, although many of his historical 'facts' were far from
accurate.... Everything went with
clockwork precision; indeed, the rest of the proceedings in the
Palace--including the dinner--were as closely organized as a Central Station
daily schedule.... The general
impression is that the visit of Dubya and Laura was a huge success; no untoward
incident occurred; no terrorist reared his frightening head. The visitors took even the rallyists in
stride. In this regard, it is the
country's hope that Dubya will eventually realize the validity of the
demonstrators' protest.... There are
other gross inequities in the 'maturing friendship' between the two countries
but Dubya is not entirely to blame for them.
Apropos, Rizal observed, 'There are no tyrants where there are no
slaves.' Our leaders should always bear that truism in mind."
"Trivializing The Bush Visit"
Amando Doronila commented in influential Philippine
Daily Inquirer (Internet version, 10/22):
"When Bush singled out President Macapagal-Arroyo's support, his
words were an expression of gratitude. 'We are honored to visit America's
oldest ally in Asia, and one of America's most valued friends in the world.'
These were the words of an American president who, while winning militarily the
war in Iraq, sounded very much like a man needing friends in Asia and Europe,
and in deep political trouble at home over the mounting costs of the occupation
and economic rehabilitation of Iraq as that country is being steered to
democracy.... Visits of American presidents
and the warm receptions received by Filipino presidents visiting Washington
have traditionally left a fallout of glow on the public opinion standing of
Filipino presidents among their own people.
But this fallout is only short-lived.
Without doubt, Bush's visit will leave a patina of glow on President
Macapagal-Arroyo, but she and her overenthusiastic spin doctors are deluding
themselves if they believe U.S. approval or vote of confidence is decisive in
determining the outcome of the 2004 elections.... American aid since the end of World War II
has been lavished on us, but we did not use the aid to fuel economic growth and
development. We squandered it through
corruption. Aid did not make us
dependent on the United States. How we
used and squandered these assets led us to a dependency relation with the
United States. The new infusion of U.S.
aid following Philippine support for Bush's war on terror should by all means
be welcomed as another opportunity not only to strengthen our armed forces but
also to boost economic recovery and development which can undercut the roots of
law and order conflicts. If we are
strong economically, we can tell the United States to go to hell if it
intervenes in our political life and sovereignty. Weak nations can't say 'No.'"
"But Will Bush Deliver?”
The independent Manila Times said (10/20):
“When George W. Bush spoke, his words rang with a resoluteness that
seemed cast in stone.... He promised to help the country bring Muslim Abu
Sayyaf rebels ‘to justice’ and to work with Southeast Asian nations to destroy
the Jemaah Islamiah.... Mr. Bush pledged
to update the U.S. “defense cooperation” with the Philippines.... But to top it all, Mr. Bush called the
U.S.-Philippine military alliance ‘a rock of stability in the Pacific.’ Coming from the leader of the most powerful
nation on earth, these pronouncements come across as genuine and sincere. And
they are exactly what many Filipinos want to hear... .Mr. Bush’s state visit may be a little more
than just a layover, but its symbolism is what will remain long after the event
has receded in the national memory. Doubts will be raised about the U.S.
capability to deliver on its promises.
Washington has disappointed Manila not a few times before and there are
no iron-clad guarantees it will come up with the goods this time. We can only hope that George W. Bush would
back up his words with action.”
"Questions"
The anti-administration Malaya (10/20) said: “U.S. President George W. Bush has come and
gone. The praises for the host were fulsome. We are the U.S.' most trusted ally
in the war against terror in this corner of the world. We are Asia's first
democracy and continue to serve as a beacon to those who remain shackled by
tyranny. We in turn wildly applauded the
pat on our back. We basked in the attention and concern showered by the leader
of the world's most powerful nation, a regular mutual admiration society. Never mind that no specific promises were
made save for that planned assistance to Muslim Mindanao when peace is finally
in place.... But no matter. A promise is
better than nothing at all. As symbolic
visits go, Bush's would be hard to top. It's the spectacle that counts. Those
members of Congress who felt let down when Bush failed to announce no less than
a Marshall Plan for the islands were victims of their own unrealistic
expectations.... The fact sheet released
by the White House during Gloria's visit provided no timetable. It was
understood U.S. laws and regulations on the transfer of these equipment have to
be followed.It was Arroyo and her spin masters who boasted about the coming
goodies. Remember how the Palace initially came out with an estimate of $800
million in benefits to be derived from the visit? In the transmission from the
Arroyo party in Washington to Malacañang, the figure swelled to $1.2 billion.
When Arroyo arrived, the figure had magically ballooned to around $3
billion.Where are those promised billions? We don't know. And the White House
probably does not know either because the figures were apparently plucked by
Malacañang from thin air.”
"High Gear"
The liberal Today noted (10/20): “Indeed, besides the ritual homage to Bataan
and Corregidor, the shared sacrifice of the war, and Manuel Quezon in George W.
Bush’s address to our Congress, nothing concrete was delivered. The truth is the Bush visit was less about
the past and more about the present and the future--as it has always been when
it comes to American policy toward the Philippines. But now that Bush has come
and gone, and the administration has gotten what it desired the most--the
chance to bask in the glow of the media coverage of a U.S. presidential
visit--the country returns to the campaign at hand.... Diosdado Macapagal, for one, maintained to
the end of his days that had Lyndon Johnson pushed through with a visit
scheduled before the 1965 campaign, he would have won reelection. His daughter has done one better and gotten
her U.S. presidential visit and pulled it off neatly with the most elegant
touch. What was bruited about before the
visit, that the opposition in its many guises would do all it could to disrupt
or embarrass the government right up to the Bush visit, did not come to
pass. Had it, the opposition would have
been peeled alive by the populace. With that, an opportunity that neither
administration nor opposition thought about was passed up, yet again. The last
benefit our veterans may yet receive is death.”
"The Bush Visit"
Teodoro Benigno wrote in the independent
English-language Philippine Star (10/16): "Make no mistake about it. The U.S.
wants the Philippines to remain secure as an ally under America's new strategic
doctrine of "preemptive war."
And, corollarily, the U.S.--without saying so--wants Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo [GMA] to remain in power beyond 2004. So watch it.
Watch George W. Bush closely.
Every word, every utterance, every gesture will subliminally communicate
this desire.... Whatever the U.S. wants,
the U.S. gets, even if this means the coronation of GMA as Queen Nefertiti of America's
strategic operations in this part of the world.... Whatever it is, the U.S. president's
Philippine eight-hour sojourn, before he attends the APEC summit in Thailand,
will telescope America's unfolding strategy in a post-Iraq invasion period, where
the world's only superpower faces an Asian continent seething with change. It is this change, the Islamic world closing
ideological ranks against America, gorgon heads of terror lurking in Islamic
East and Southeast Asia, a China-led Asian continent bidding fair to emerge as
the 21st century's superpower, that faces Mr. Bush in his much ballyhooed first
foray to Asia."
SINGAPORE: "Bush Consultations Have Been Most Fruitful On
North Korea"
The pro-government Straits Times
editorialized (10/21): "Without a doubt, U.S. President George W. Bush's
consultations with Asian leaders at the APEC summit in Bangkok and on his
earlier visit to Japan have been the most fruitful on the issue of North
Korea. More so than America's eagerness
to have counter-terrorism dominate the APECagenda, more so than Asia-Pacific
trading nations' anxiety that APEC be not distracted from its economic mission,
there can be no argument that the outcome of the Pyongyang nuclear challenge
will define Asia-Pacific security for the next generation. Mr. Bush made two declarations in
Bangkok...that have brought much needed clarity to the issue. This is a welcome change from the confusing,
sometimes muddled, position statements coming out of Washington the past
year.... The appropriate setting is
important in the exercise of substantive diplomacy. Pending his meeting with Russian President
Vladimir Putin, he has secured all but complete agreement from the contracting
parties on security guarantees. This is
crucial in showing North Korea it cannot ignore the unanimity that binds its
neighbors and the U.S. to a common cause....
Security guarantees may be little different from a treaty, for all the
practical effects. Officials traveling
with the Bush party gave what appears to be a flexible timetable for
compliance.... North Korea should ponder
its response. This deal is do-able. Depending on the final language, this could
be as good as it can get."
SOUTH KOREA: "Time for ROK-U.S. Alliance to
Get Off to A New Start"
The conservative Chosun Ilbo editorialized (10/21): “The
recent ROK-U.S. summit, which took place in an amicable atmosphere apparently
created by the ROK’s decision to send additional troops to Iraq, must serve as
an opportunity for the two countries to shake off their misunderstandings and
dissatisfaction thus far.… In
particular, President Roh should convince his support base, which is leading
anti-Americanism and protests against sending Korean troops to Iraq in the ROK,
of the reason why we need the U.S. Washington, for its part, needs to show a
more prudent and far-sighted attitude in making comments and taking actions, so
as to strengthen the friendly relations between the two countries. We should no longer allow problems with the
ROK-U.S. alliance to stand in the way of the future of our country and of
managing state affairs.”
"ROK and U.S. Leaders Reconfirm Bilateral
Alliance"
The independent Joong-Ang Ilbo
editorialized (10/21): “The ROK-U.S. summit carries especially great
significance in that President Bush paved the way for a possible breakthrough
in resolving the North Korean nuclear crisis, by officially mentioning security
guarantee measures, which are expected to ease Pyongyang’s security concerns,
the core of the controversy [in dealing with the North Korean nuclear
issue.] In addition, it can be seen as a
positive development that Mr. Bush commented that he would give careful
consideration to USFK realignment....
The ROK’s decision to send troops to Iraq might have contributed to
turning the situation around to the positive side.… The essence of the alliance is to help each
other when in need. The two countries,
therefore, must apply this positive change to resolving the North Korean
nuclear problem.”
THAILAND:
"APEC Ultimate Goal-Every Group Must Receive Benefits"
The lead editorial in elite, Thai language Matichon
averred (10/21): “The most important thing is we must not forget that the
economic and social gaps among APEC members are so wide, particularly in terms
of incomes and quality of life.... Thus, we would like to see economic powers
such as the U.S., Japan and China listen to what members with less economic
potential have to say and relax their intensive trade or business negotiations. They should bear in mind that these countries
still lack major elements that would help restore their strong and sustained
economy.”
“Another Crunch Time For APEC”
The independent, English-language Nation
noted (10/20): “Ultimately, the APEC
ministers succeeded in coming out with a rather practical statement on how to
get the multilateral trade negotiations going again. They called for the 146 members of the WTO to
go back to the September 13, 2003, text of the chairman of the Cancun
conference.... So it is certain that the
leaders of APEC will take up the Doha Development Agenda and explore other
areas for closer economic integration when they meet today and tomorrow. Yet there will be a twist to history. Following the September 11 attacks in the
U.S., security has become a prominent item on the global agenda. That wind of change is blowing this way. Colin Powell, the U.S. secretary of state,
has signaled that the U.S. would be pushing for security to become another
pillar of APEC, which thus far has been based on cooperation and trade
liberalization and facilitation. He has
made it clear that trade and security are inseparable. And Bush is likely to make a major
announcement on a security package at the summit. Thailand, the host country, would like to
play a key role in regional and global economic development. Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is looking
forward most of all to displaying his regional leadership. He has made remarks about the need for ASEAN
to embrace a common market faster. He
has championed the creation of the Asia Bond.
He has the opportunity to make his mark at this summit. And the world is watching closely.”
“Seeking Success At APEC Summit”
The top-circulation, moderately conservative,
English-language Bangkok Post held (10/20): "The end goal is open trade and fiscal
cooperation. Bilateral free trade
agreements are only a start. The summit
should set realistic goals to end all trade barriers in the Asia-Pacific
region. In the same way, disputes over
currency rates exist between various nations.
The APEC leaders can, and must, address exchange rates on a regional and
world basis, and tell their citizens this week what they have concluded.”
“APEC 2003 Distorted; Terrorism Takes Precedence
Over Trade”
Sensationalist, Thai-language Thai Post
judged (10/20), “The joint statement delivered by the APEC Trade Ministers
proposing that the APEC Summit, October 20-21, discuss two major
issues-anti-terrorism cooperation and free trade-clearly reflects that APEC is
undoubtedly being regulated by superpowers such as the U.S.... The Thaksin administration, albeit it being
only one voice of the 21 APEC members...should make it position clear and call
upon other APEC leaders to ponder whether it’s appropriate to allow the U.S. to
seize the APEC forum as a tool for its hegemonic desires.”
“Non-NATO Ally…Boon Or Bust?”
Sensationalist, business-oriented Thai-language Phujatkarn
averred (10/20), “The three special rights or the so-called privileges (granted
to Thailand under the Non-NATO Ally status) are so attractive and
convincing...but the fact is, we will be forced to buy monopolized products or
weaponry at exorbitant prices.... And in
times of crisis, we will have to see if we will get assistance. Thais probably have not forgotten what
happened after the Vietnam War when the U.S. disdainfully walked away from Asia
while the Vietnamese mighty army was closing in at the Thai border.... Therefore, the Thai government and the public
should think carefully whether the Non-NATO Ally status which President George
Bush is granting to Thailand is really a boon or bust.”
“Thai-U.S. Ties Reach A New Benchmark”
The independent, English-language Nation
read (10/19): “The friendship between
the two nations (the U.S. and Thailand) has undergone a major transformation
from a patron-client relationship to an equal partnership.... Up until the mid-1990’s, Thailand remained a
recipient of U.S. economic and military assistance. Now, with communism defeated by capitalism,
Thai-U.S relations have risen to a new plateau.... During his visit, Bush is expected to
announce that Thailand is to be granted ‘major non-NATO ally’ status. Thailand should have been accorded that
status long ago. After all, other
traditional U.S. allies in Asia-Pacific such as Japan, South Korea, Australia
and the Philippines already enjoy this status.
Global developments since September 11, 2001 have had positive effects
on Thai-U.S. relations, because they have afforded strengths and weaknesses in
their relations. Now they are investing
in capacity-building to deal with such global issues as HIV/Aids, human
trafficking and illegal drugs. What we
are going to witness in the next three days--at the royal dinner, on the front
lawn of the Royal Thai Army Headquarters or at the APEC leaders
roundtable--will represent a new benchmark for the Thai-U.S. friendship.”
“Forum In Search Of A New Role”
Thitinan Pongsudhirak commented in the
top-circulation, moderately conservative, English-language Bangkok Post
(10/18): “A growing number of East
Asians would rather see the U.S. do more to make the necessary economic
adjustments at home than demand that China and the rest of Asia continue to
prop up Americans’ prolonged consumption boom and savings investment gap. Finally, as with security cooperation, APEC
was not set out explicitly to promote human rights and democracy. However, President Bush is unlikely to leave
Bangkok without alluding to the intractable situation in Burma. This is one facet of the APEC meetings in
which the U.S. commands moral authority.
Yet it remains to be seen how much more President Bush can do to apply
pressure on Burma, since the concrete instruments at his disposal seem to have
run out with the U.S. recent trade embargo on Rangoon. If he criticizes Burma, President Bush would
run the risk of being accused as hypocritical for the U.S.’extrajudicial and
extraterritorial methods in its war on terror.
Security cooperation is important, but it should not wholly dictate
APEC’s outcomes. Human rights and
democracy also should be kept alive on the APEC agenda, especially vis-à-vis
the odious junta in Rangoon.”
“Bush’s Hidden Agenda”
Elite, business-oriented Krungthep Turakij
read (10/16), “In the eyes of the world community, the significance of this
APEC round seems to suddenly increase when the U.S. who has attached terrorism
interest to its economic policy wants to play a greater role as the
‘anti-terrorism leader’....
Nevertheless, we believe the U.S. President will not only include
security issues in his bilateral trade negotiations--something which the U.S.
has successfully done in the wake of the September 11 attacks--but he will also
use exchange rates as a bargaining chip with other leaders at APEC.... The two Asian giants, Japan and China, will
not be the only ones to be pressured by the U.S. on the exchange rate
issue. Other Asian nations may also be
affected because President Bush will likely request that a flexible exchange
rate regime be included in a joint communique to be delivered after the APEC
leaders’ summit-similar to what he successfully did at the G-7 Summit.... The approaching presidential election forces
President Bush to appease American entrepreneurs who are significant financial
supporters for U.S. political parties.”
"Thailand's Position On The U.S. Needs To
Be Reviewed"
Conservative Siam Rath asserted
(10/16): "Prime Minister Thaksin
Chinnawat's inordinate appeasement of the United States has obviously drawn a
lot of flak. He seems to fear hurting
the feelings of this superpower Big Brother.
Although trade benefits from the United States are the driving force,
the Prime Minister does not need to go overboard to ostentatiously show his
fawning gestures.... The closer we tie
ourselves to United States, with its myriad problems including its problematic
domestic economy, the legitimacy of its invasion of Iraq, etc., the more we
risk becoming a terrorist target and a target of invasion by transnational
funds. Taking into account the U.S.
leadership's desire to expand their economic and military imperialistic
influences over all world regions, citing as a pretext the need to crack down
on terrorism and promote free trade, it would be suicidal for the Thai
government to respond positively.
Therefore, rather than leading our nation to confront untold possible
adverse consequences, it is still not too late for the Thaksin administration
to readjust its position prior to the beginning of the APEC Leaders'
Summit."
SOUTH ASIA
INDIA: "Talking Trade
And Terrorism"
The pro-economic-reforms Financial Express wrote
(10/20): “Among all the countries that
are relevant to the security and development of the Asia-Pacific region, only
India will be absent in Bangkok today when leaders from the region gather for a
meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum to discuss
terrorism and trade. It should not
remain this way for too long. India
should seek and be offered APEC membership.... India’s absence at APEC’s
Bangkok meeting will be all the more glaring this year given the fact that the
meeting hopes to focus on trade and terrorism.... President Bush will also be visiting key APEC
capitals this week spending the longest period outside the U.S. in his
presidency. Bush has emphasized that he
will talk about terrorism and trade and the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction during this visit.... A
feeling has gained ground around the world, and more so within the U.S. itself,
that President Bush has been doing a lot of talking since 9/11, but has been
doing very little listening. His
impatience in the war against terrorism is entirely understandable and Indians
understand, being themselves victims of externally inspired terrorism. However,
the time has come for the U.S. to listen to other opinions and, in particular,
to opinions voiced in other democracies. By doing so, Bush will strengthen
himself and the democratic coalition against terrorism.... Bush’s trade negotiators have been shouting
themselves hoarse about the 'collapse of Cancun' and are looking far and wide
for suspects, unwilling to concede that the US also has played a dubious
role. Rather than pick up the pieces and
try to move forward, as India and many others have since urged, the U.S. is
busy lecturing and hectoring the developing world.... Given all these facts, it appears that Bush’s
visit to Asia would have been more helpful in securing a meaningful
appreciation of how to deal with the challenge of terrorism, proliferation and
protectionism if he had spared the time to cross the Bay of Bengal from Bangkok
and added India to his itinerary."
##