Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) CEO Summit 2018: Good reason for China's rising popularity in South Pacific

https://youtu.be/urgAwPOumko https://youtu.be/RIGRKgEdf3Q https://youtu.be/gsGpOuRCvvM https://youtu.be/a9AWsvRXf_I https://youtu.be/WMokFrZ6MLg https://youtu.be/FB94vcJwJLE

Pence's APEC speech offers nothing new

 

Good reason for China's rising popularity in South Pacific

Chinese President Xi Jinping met with leaders of eight Pacific island countries and officials in the Papua New Guinea (PNG) capital on Friday and all agreed to elevate their relations to a comprehensive strategic partnership based on mutual respect and common development.

On Friday, Xi also attended the hand-over ceremony of the China-assisted Independence Boulevard, as well as an opening ceremony for the Butuka Academy, a public service project funded by China. This is seen as evidence of the enhanced cooperation between China and Pacific island nations.

The US and Australia have mixed feelings about the cooperation between China and Pacific island countries. Their anxieties stem from their long-standing view of geopolitics. Australia has announced a plan to increase investment to Pacific island nations, while the US is also setting up a fund to boost aid in the region to counter China's perceived influence.

Interestingly, China has entered the Pacific island region with nothing but technology, funds and its friendly willingness to cooperate. Although the region has been regarded as being under Australia's influence, it was half-abandoned by Canberra. Western countries have become used to poverty in the islands. Now China has come to improve infrastructure, which has not only stimulated regional economies, but also caused the region to reclaim the attention of Western countries, such as Australia and the US.

Pacific Island countries certainly have every reason to welcome China because China's cooperation has revitalized the region. China's aid is pragmatic, and not subject to any political conditions. It benefits those countries, without causing harm.

Some have made the analogy that just like some member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) want to see a balance between the US and China in the region, Pacific nations also expect China to weigh in to counter the influence of Australia. However, what makes this case different is that China brings engineering equipment to the Pacific, while in contrast, the US sends warships to the South China Sea. Pacific island countries hope to see more Chinese equipment, but ASEAN is calling on the US to stop its sabre rattling. On Friday, Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad told the US that it does not wish to see warships in ASEAN waters, but that small patrol boats are fine.

Geopolitics still exist in today's international arena, but it must not be the dominant issue. It is understandable that Australia and the US have doubts about China's cooperation with Pacific Island countries. However, everyone should refrain from the "geopolitical reverie," and fully respect the growing influence of international economics.

China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has gradually formed a tie among some Pacific Island nations, and it is based on economy to economy. If we were to summarize its political significance, it has built up friendships and increased mutual trust among countries. It also highlights new relations between nations in the region.

More than ever before, there has been unprecedented competition in the South Pacific, and more and more funding has been channeled into the region. Pacific Island countries have never enjoyed so many options and for those countries, such competition is a good thing.

On the international stage, competitions introduced by the BRI are always positive. From the Pacific Ocean to the Indian Ocean, such benign competitions are indeed a phenomenon that has not seen before. Although some countries have made inappropriate comments regarding the BRI, they are using funds and technology to participate in the competitive process.

China has been implementing the principle of achieving shared growth through discussion and collaboration under the BRI. The "zero sum" struggle has recurred throughout Western history, which shows that China's firm pursuit of mutual benefit and win-win requires time.

China is confident and patient about reaching more consensus, but what is important is that Western society must also emancipate their minds of the 21st century international relations and break free from the shackles of the "zero sum" struggle and various historical memories.

There are six countries in the Pacific that have so-called "diplomatic" relations with Taiwan. Economic cooperation between Beijing and Pacific island nations that have established diplomatic relations with Beijing may change the mindset of Taiwan's allies in the region. Taiwan shall find nobody to blame for the change of the political landscape. As a proverb says, it is common that "man struggles upwards, and water flows downwards."

Australia and New Zealand are China's largest partners in the South Pacific region. There is no reason for China and the two countries to get into a duel in the region. Instead, the South Pacific should become a platform where new types of international relations are forged and tested.- Global Times

Related:

APEC leaders divided after after US, China spat

https://youtu.be/p43xYL79soU
https://youtu.be/0EaJWY8ERPg

  

Related posts

 

‘America First’ undermines multilateralism, Pence's APEC speech offers nothing new

 

APEC should lead a more open world economy & play a bigger role; Reform and innovation are new drivers: President Xi said

In "civil liberties"

Import expo to improve trade balance: Xi addresses opening ceremony of the CIIE; When realities hit the ‘Road’

In "China"

Malaysia's PM Dr Mahathir visits China to push forward bilateral ties and witness signing of 3 MoUs

In "Business and economy"

Asean needs to rise to its own loftier level

After nearly 45 years, issues remain for Asean to sort out, ponder over and resolve satisfactorily.

SOME developments have lately resulted in multiple challenges confronting Asean. Chief among these is the lack of understanding of Asean, its origins and its purposes, notably within Asean member countries themselves.

Since its inception in 1967, Asean has tended to avoid calling a spade a spade for reasons of national sensitivities or avoiding controversy. The founding meeting in Bangkok that year was even described as an effort to improve economic relations, even though more serious geopolitical issues such as Indonesia’s relations with Malaysia and Singapore were at stake.

Another reason for the lack of an Asean awareness among Asean peoples is that official proceedings have been dominated and even monopolised by national elites. Even with economic development as a key issue from the beginning, the Asean Business Council took three decades to be established.

Security drill: Cambodian riot police during an exercise to prepare for the upcoming Asean summit in Phnom Penh. Cambodia hosts the 20th Asean Summit next month. — EPA

 

Social and cultural issues would have to take even longer. Everything had to undergo a laborious process of initial proposal, official consideration, outsourced study (such as an Eminent Persons Group), considered refinement, likely revisions, possible horse trading, formal approval and final adoption.
Even if the entire process is necessary, it could also be expedited. More important yet, parallel processes could occur to dovetail the sequential stages.

That would mean involving more people and agencies than just the heads of government, key ministers and secretariat staff. And that would imply educating, engaging and empowering more people in Asean countries about Asean and its work.

Thus the third reason for the lack of awareness is that little or nothing has been done to inform and involve more people in the region. It might be said that an inherent danger lies in a new generation of Asean citizens growing up under-informed about regional imperatives, except that even the older generation is equally unaware.

Some critics have blamed the custom of consensus-reaching for the plodding pace, but other regional organisations like the EU have not experienced consensualism as a nagging problem. The respective agendas of individual governments, which change quicker and less predictably in some Asean countries than in others, could be a factor.

Nonetheless, Asean’s challenges of economic productivity and competitiveness, geopolitical confidence-building and comfort levels, and socio-cultural peace and stability remain. If anything, developments such as a rising China and India, a resurgent Russia and a revitalised US foreign policy focus on East Asia only make Asean cohesiveness more urgent yet also more fraught.

Asean itself has responded by scheduling an Asean Community by 2015 comprising three pillars: an Economic Community, a Security Community and a Socio-cultural Community. Could this goal be too ambitious, since it had taken 21 years just to convene the third Asean summit?

To help the process along, Malaysia’s Foreign Policy Study Group recently held a roundtable conference on Malaysia-Indonesia/Thailand/Vietnam relations in strengthening Asean Regionalism.

The non-official occasion was intended to complement, not compete with, formal Asean processes and proceedings. Still, a fundamental question asked by some delegates was why the event had to be limited to just four of the 10 Asean countries.

The answer should be obvious: limits on resources including time, and a limited effort such as this had to start somewhere. More Asean countries would participate in future roundtables, and Asean itself provides for small initial efforts in its “10 - x” formula.

There were reasons for the four Asean countries that participated through their retired officials and student representatives: Malaysia and Indonesia as the key founding members of Asean, Thailand as Asean’s origin in the 1967 Bangkok Declaration, and Vietnam in generally being regarded as the main country among the newer (CLMV) members.

Another question concerned more frequent use of currency swaps among Asean countries, and the prospect of greater reciprocal use of national currencies in bilateral trade. This would avoid exchange rate costs with the use of a third-country currency such as the dollar or euro.

Some participants thought the membership of 10 countries was sizeable and a likely source of problems in discouraging common agreement. If that is an issue now, it could grow since Timor Leste is poised to be the 11th member, with Papua New Guinea conceivably waiting in the wings.

Some foreign participants credited Malaysia with having achieved considerable success in economic and educational development. The disparities within Asean also mean that each country could excel in a particular area, so it would help all members if a panel of best practices for a variety of sectors could be established, with contributions from each country based on its experiences and achievements.

A reference was made to Asean’s policy of non-intervention in the internal affairs of member nations by way of a criticism of its seeming inaction. However, that policy as derived from Bandung is a universal principle common to all regional groupings, without which unwelcome and hostile unilateral actions would be rife.

More to the point, Asean appears to have adopted non-intervention to the extent of not even remarking on the travails of a member country even when problems spill over into a neighbouring country. In practice, concepts like “non-intervention” are largely defined by Asean to begin with, so Asean can act without seeing itself as acting.

An underlying but unspoken issue was that Asean countries are fully capable of handling the problems within and between them. There is no basis for major power intervention, since that would unduly complicate and compound the original problem.

Cross-border issues are routinely managed, while rival maritime claims linger. The only enduring problem is an inability to form an all-Asean military force, even if that is desirable.

To help boost Asean awareness, Asean scholarships, student exchanges, an Asean Day in August, a Visit Asean Year promoting the region as a tour package, and a popular talent-entertainment programme appealing to young people are possibilities. But until today, even an Asean lane at airport immigration counters as proposed by a former Malaysian foreign minister more than 20 years ago has still not taken off.

In reshaping an Asean for the times, its basic ingredients of peace, freedom, neutrality, amity and cooperation need to be maintained while addressing current needs and challenges. But whether there is any Asean leader today with the requisite regional vision is still very much an open question.
  
Behind The Headlines By Bunn Nagara 

Related posts:
Western Imperial powers overreach, yet again!

Singapore 'warns' US on China bashing