Think Big with Abe

Source: Getty
Op-Ed National Interest
Summary
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's visit to Washington is a valuable opportunity to envision how to align Japanese and American interests and to achieve the best possible outcomes in their respective dealings with China.
Related Topics
Related Media and Tools
 

The “deliverable” in international diplomacy is akin to budgetary “earmarks” in Congress: not an ideal way to do business, at times even reviled, but everybody does it so they can tout their achievements back home. In my time at the Pentagon preparing for summits, trip planners derided the exchange of diplomatic “gifts” and stressed the need to address vital issues with patient diplomacy. But inevitably the next day they would complain about the lack of deliverables.

This needs to be avoided when Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe visits Washington.

Instead of deliverables, the allies need to prioritize a real strategic discussion. This meeting—the first for Obama and Abe as they begin new terms—should not be transactional or a mere exercise of ticking off scripted talking points.

This time, there is a genuine opening to develop a lasting personal relationship that will be essential for ensuring positive developments in Asia. Unlike the last six years (with six different Japanese prime ministers), Abe has a chance to build a political base to stay in office for years. This means there is time to begin working toward a farsighted vision for the region.

Japan is important for U.S. policy in Asia and there is a productive, shared history that Obama and Abe can fall back on to drive things forward.

The U.S.-Japan alliance is over fifty years strong. The two countries are the first- and third-largest economies in the world, and they are among each other’s largest trading partners, with both enjoying extensive business networks in Asia. Pick a category—overseas aid, support for international institutions, or foreign investment—and they are at or near the top. This is an alliance with tremendous potential influence.

But together, the two face many challenges in Asia.

The region is not poor anymore, yet its development has been uneven. While South Korea, Indonesia, Vietnam and others are tremendous economic success stories, many worry about widening income disparity domestically and will do whatever they can to maintain growth—even if it hurts others.

China epitomizes this kind of unbalanced growth. Its economic obsession makes Beijing reluctant to sacrifice industrial production for pollution control or adopt certain international trade practices that could undermine state-owned enterprises.

Maintaining political support from the masses in China also means stoking the fires of nationalism occasionally. Japan discovered this when it purchased small islets in the East China Sea that China claims for its own. It has now become a low-boiling crisis requiring high-level political attention and huge amounts of diplomatic skill to prevent conflict. The primacy of growth and stability for Beijing is also why it does not do more to sanction North Korea for its nuclear weapons and missile programs.

This all points to the need for Washington and Tokyo to find ways to improve relations with China and consider what it will take to ensure stability in Asia. They need to develop win-win relations with China, promote balanced growth and freer trade, mitigate environmental degradation, contain North Korea, and build a rules-based order in Asia backed by effective institutions.

Alas, much media attention on the upcoming summit is focused on short-term deliverables, primarily whether or not Abe will join multilateral negotiations over a free trade agreement championed by the United States. Japanese farmers oppose this, and with Abe preparing for one more legislative election in July, he has limited room to maneuver. The leaders will discuss the idea, of course, but Abe needs more time to act.

They will also confirm a joint response to North Korea’s recent nuclear test and address other issues of the moment. But in the end it’s the long-term solutions that matter more. The meeting is too important to waste on media-friendly sound bites.

All successful high-level meetings I witnessed had one thing in common: a personal connection. This stemmed from leaders putting aside talking points and sharing frank assessments of a policy problem. If you were lucky, they would sketch out the broad outline of a joint strategy that empowered their staffs to take effective next steps.

This is how consensus is forged and tough problems are solved (or at least mitigated). I am not looking for Obama and Abe to become great friends, but I will look for the seeds of a productive working relationship.

The visit is a valuable opportunity to envision how to align Japanese and American interests and to achieve the best possible outcomes in their respective dealings with China. The two need to finds ways to avoid conflict and promote peace, prosperity and stability in Asia. Obama and Abe should think big.

This article was originally published on National Interest.

End of document

About the Asia Program

The Carnegie Asia Program in Beijing and Washington provides clear and precise analysis to policy makers on the complex economic, security, and political developments in the Asia-Pacific region.

 

Comments

 
  • Report Abuse
Source http://carnegieendowment.org/2013/02/21/think-big-with-abe/fiqz

More from The Global Think Tank

In Fact

 

45%

of the Chinese general public

believe their country should share a global leadership role.

30%

of Indian parliamentarians

have criminal cases pending against them.

140

charter schools in the United States

are linked to Turkey’s Gülen movement.

2.5–5

thousand tons of chemical weapons

are in North Korea’s possession.

92%

of import tariffs

among Chile, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru have been eliminated.

$2.34

trillion a year

is unaccounted for in official Chinese income statistics.

37%

of GDP in oil-exporting Arab countries

comes from the mining sector.

72%

of Europeans and Turks

are opposed to intervention in Syria.

90%

of Russian exports to China

are hydrocarbons; machinery accounts for less than 1%.

13%

of undiscovered oil

is in the Arctic.

17

U.S. government shutdowns

occurred between 1976 and 1996.

40%

of Ukrainians

want an “international economic union” with the EU.

120

million electric bicycles

are used in Chinese cities.

60–70%

of the world’s energy supply

is consumed by cities.

58%

of today’s oils

require unconventional extraction techniques.

67%

of the world's population

will reside in cities by 2050.

50%

of Syria’s population

is expected to be displaced by the end of 2013.

18%

of the U.S. economy

is consumed by healthcare.

81%

of Brazilian protesters

learned about a massive rally via Facebook or Twitter.

32

million cases pending

in India’s judicial system.

1 in 3

Syrians

now needs urgent assistance.

370

political parties

contested India’s last national elections.

70%

of Egypt's labor force

works in the private sector.

70%

of oil consumed in the United States

is for the transportation sector.

20%

of Chechnya’s pre-1994 population

has fled to different parts of the world.

58%

of oil consumed in China

was from foreign sources in 2012.

$536

billion in goods and services

traded between the United States and China in 2012.

$100

billion in foreign investment and oil revenue

have been lost by Iran because of its nuclear program.

4700%

increase in China’s GDP per capita

between 1972 and today.

$11

billion have been spent

to complete the Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran.

2%

of Iran’s electricity needs

is all the Bushehr nuclear reactor provides.

78

journalists

were imprisoned in Turkey as of August 2012 according to the OSCE.

Stay in the Know

Enter your email address in the field below to receive the latest Carnegie analysis in your inbox!

Personal Information
 
 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
 
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington, DC 20036-2103 Phone: 202 483 7600 Fax: 202 483 1840
Please note...

You are leaving the website for the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center for Global Policy and entering a website for another of Carnegie's global centers.

请注意...

你将离开清华—卡内基中心网站,进入卡内基其他全球中心的网站。