In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

[ 24 ] asia policy “Washington can…play the role of a balancer and stabilizer in Asia where the interests of several rising great powers could easily clash with one another. Although the United States cannot be the predominant great power in Asia, it can work with different Asian nations to make sure that no other nation does so either.” • Maintain Stability Mark N. Katz The outgoing Bush administration made the war on terrorism the centerpiece of its foreign policy. The incoming administration, however, would do well to remember that terrorism is not the only—and perhaps not even the most important—challenge that the United States faces. Maintaining stability in Asia in an era of tremendous change there may be even more important. There are several rising great powers in Asia. The August 2008 conflict between Russia and Georgia showed that Russia has become increasingly willing to assert itself as a great power. Despite the recent worldwide economic turmoil, China and India—the world’s two most populous countries—are likely to continue developing both their economies and their militaries. Although not usually discussed as such, an increasingly populous and developing Indonesia may also be on this trajectory as well. Nor should Japan—with its enormous wealth—be counted out, especially as an economic great power. Finally, Pakistan—with both a population larger than Russia’s and a nuclear arsenal—is certainly a potential great power. The United States obviously remains a great power in Asia. However, the continued concentration of U.S. resources on Iraq, Afghanistan, and the war on terrorism—combined with the rise of Asian great powers—may reduce the ability of the United States to assert its will, not just in Asia but also in other regions where Asia’s rising great powers are active, such as Africa and even Latin America. The fact that the United States has not yet been able to pacify either Iraq or Afghanistan—countries with populations in the range of 30 million people each—suggests that the United States would find it extremely difficult to intervene successfully in more populous countries or in wars between them. mark n. katz is Professor of Government and Politics at George Mason University. He can be reached at . [ 25 ] special roundtable • advising the new u.s. president But while the United States’ post–Cold War predominance may now be over (if it ever really existed), what Washington can do is play the role of a balancer and stabilizer in Asia where the interests of several rising great powers could easily clash with one another. Although the United States cannot be the predominant great power in Asia, it can work with different Asian nations to make sure that no other nation does so either. This is important because the new administration can play a crucial role in hopefully preventing or deterring—or if that is not possible, containing and resolving—several events that could significantly alter the balance of power in Asia, including the outbreak of three possible wars: between North and South Korea, between China and Taiwan, and between India and Pakistan. These, of course, would be major wars even if they remained limited to two hostile parties. And there is always the possibility that they might draw in others. A more likely contingency is the possible breakdown of order in North Korea, Myanmar, or Pakistan. Not only would state breakdown lead to chaos and conflict within the country where it occurred but it might tempt one or more of the great powers to assert influence there, even if only to prevent rivals from doing so. Maintaining stability in Asia at a time when great powers are rising and both major interstate conflict and state breakdown are possible will pose a serious challenge for the new U.S. president. What the United States should do in the event of any of these potential crises in the region cannot be predicted or recommended since much will depend on circumstances—should they arise—that are impossible to foretell. There are, however, some general foreign policy approaches that could help avoid or mitigate these crises. First, the United States should engage in active diplomacy to prevent the outbreak...

pdf

Share