On this Asia trip, Obama could take a cue from Bush

Posted By Dan Twining Tuesday, March 16, 2010 - 5:08 PM Share

"In many ways, America has been somewhat absent from the region over the last several years and we are committed to restoring that leadership," said National Security Council communications director Ben Rhodes in a preview of President Obama's upcoming Asia trip. Absent? Like on the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement that President Bush signed and President Obama has declined to send to Congress? Like on trade more generally, where the words "Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific" haven't been uttered since President Bush left the Oval Office? Like on the U.S.-Japan alliance, which President Bush leveraged to make possible historic Japanese deployments to theaters of war in Iraq and Afghanistan before U.S.-Japan relations under Obama became embroiled in a dispute over U.S. basing rights that some believe threatens the foundations of the alliance? Like on U.S. relations with India, utterly transformed under President Bush but now characterized by U.S. neglect and Indian disappointment that President Obama doesn't treat it as the strategic partner Bush elevated it to be? Like in Southeast Asia, where every regional power improved its relations with America over the course of the Bush administration with a wary eye on China? (Burma may be the exception -- though Obama's engagement policy hasn't worked out too well.)

And speaking of relations with China, is Rhodes suggesting that Bush, who after a rough start oversaw the most stable period in U.S.-China relations since the 1970s, has an inferior record to Obama -- for whom China has become his biggest great-power headache, with Beijing daily testing the limits of American patience on matters from trade to currency to human rights to internet freedoms to Iran sanctions to Taiwan arms sales? Perhaps Rhodes is talking about North Korea, where Obama has pursued the same policy of engagement as President Bush did in his second term -- with equally little to show for it. Or maybe Rhodes is speaking of Asian public opinion; in this case he may want to have a look at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs' 2008 survey showing the surprisingly wide and deep extent of American soft power in Asia at the end of the Bush presidency.

This administration has an outstanding Assistant Secretary for East Asia in the form of the State Department's Kurt Campbell, and other talented officials at the White House, Department of Defense, and Treasury. Asia policy isn't partisan, which is why it's such a shame when non-Asia policy officials make it out to be. Nonetheless, Peter Feaver's point last week is apt: U.S. relations with every major power in the international system (with the possible and dubious distinction of Russia) have deteriorated since Obama took office. This is unquestionably true in Asia. As Jackson Diehl wrote with regard to President Obama's relationships with his foreign counterparts, "In foreign as well as domestic affairs, coolness has its cost." When it comes to Asia, perhaps serving administration officials should spend less time slamming their predecessors' record and more time studying up on it.

GUANG NIU/AFP/Getty Images

EXPLORE:EAST ASIA, BUSH ADMINISTRATION, BUSH'S LEGACY, CHINA, NORTH KOREA, OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
 
Facebook|Twitter|Reddit

ZATHRAS

11:12 PM ET

March 17, 2010

Obama and Asia

I wish the blog weren't so preoccupied with calling for Mommy every time someone says something mean about the Bush administration. There is a good faith argument to be made about the Obama administration's shortcomings with respect to foreign policy, and policy toward Asia in particular, but no one with any sense would trust the writers here to make it.

The record is clear that the damage control of Bush's second term wasn't completely successful in clearing away the rubble from the disasters of his first. North Korea is the obvious example, but success in getting the Japanese to throw some of their good money after ours in the Iraq adventure is nothing to brag about either. Nor are the opportunity costs of the Bush administration's preoccupation with and massive spending on Iraq wisely dismissed. The fact remains that President Obama has problems engaging the key governments in Asia.

Many of them were dropped on his head the day he entered office, in the form of the economic collapse inherited from his predecessor (yes, I know. There I go being mean again). This both dictated that Obama would have to spend most of his time on domestic affairs and substantially strengthened China's hand in the region -- China, with huge fiscal reserves, could afford to buy its way through the recession. Other were problems of choice; Obama was determined to find some way to do health care reform, a time-consuming exercise that further reduced the amount of attention he could give to foreign affairs.

And Obama, long used to being the center of his universe, has not allowed subordinate officials to form the foreign policy that he cannot himself. He chose a Secretary of State for her star power and personal story, not for her deep thought about foreign policy; he chose a USTR with no better than average grasp of his brief for reasons unknown (this was, incidentally, one of the very few Cabinet positions consistently filled by first-rate people in Bush's administration). His Treasury Secretary is no John Snow, but has neither the time nor the experience to set a reliable course toward managing the economic relationship with China. There are consequently lots of people in the Obama administration thinking and talking about America's role in Asia, but no one charged with steering the ship.

It's a problem, and the Obama people are not doing themselves any favors by imagining that Asian audiences were as relieved to see him replace Bush or as inspired by Obama's own personal story as audiences elsewhere were. The Chinese in particular certainly welcomed the opportunity provided by the last administration's "absence" from the day to day affairs of the region; they're not likely to enthuse over Obama wanting to "reengage" without a clear idea of what he is trying to achieve. I don't believe Obama can retrieve much lost ground by developing personal relationships with individual foreign leaders. I do believe he has to find some way of communicating what his administration wants in Asia, and if he can't think of what this is himself he needs to entrust his thinking to someone else.

 

Shadow Government is a blog about U.S. foreign policy under the Obama administration, written by experienced policy makers from the loyal opposition and curated by Peter D. Feaver and William Inboden.

Read More