Paper
Douglas H. Paal
{
"authors": [
"Douglas H. Paal"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie China"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie China",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia",
"South Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"South Asia",
"India",
"East Asia",
"China",
"Southeast Asia",
"North Korea",
"South Korea"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Trade",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
Asia—Shaping the Future
The next U.S. administration needs a clear strategic vision for Asia befitting the region’s status as the new global “center of gravity.”
Published on Jun 26, 2008
The next U.S. administration needs a clear strategic vision for Asia befitting the region’s status as the new global “center of gravity.” In a new policy brief, Asia—Shaping The Future Carnegie China Program Director Douglas H. Paal presents key steps the United States should take to advance its interests in “rising Asia.”
Recommendations for the next U.S. president:
- Decide early on clear U.S. strategic objectives in the region, and signal to China where constructive cooperation will lead.
- Appoint a high-level advocate for Asia, a clear signal to the region of its importance.
- Prioritize the bewildering alphabet of organizations and venues to achieve those objectives. Consider inviting China and India to join the G8.
- Anticipate greater Chinese and Indian military and trade capabilities by developing new multilateral security and economic arrangements in the region.
- Avoid coalitions based on common values or democracy. Asia is too diverse and complicated for them to succeed.
- Ditch the “war on terror” rhetoric, which has proved divisive and counterproductive.
Paal concludes:
“In sum, the new American administration should prepare before taking office and in the immediate aftermath to address this discrete set of issues involving the Asia-Pacific region, some big and bold, others small but telling policy adjustments. Experience has shown that it would not be wise to repeat the Clinton and George W. Bush mistakes of supporting any policy but their predecessors’. Clinton’s “anything but Bush” approach to China and Bush’s “anything but Clinton” approach to North Korea have both been costly. Whether it wins one term or two, the life of any new administration will be short in retrospect. And the time for creativity and policy innovation is much shorter yet.”
About the Author
Douglas H. Paal is the director of the Carnegie China Program based in Washington and Beijing. He served as the director of the American Institute in Taiwan from April 2002 to January. Paal was the special assistant to President George H. W. Bush for National Security Affairs and senior director for Asian Affairs on the National Security Council, where he had also served during the Reagan administration.
About the Author
Douglas H. Paal
Distinguished Fellow, Asia Program
Paal previously served as vice chairman of JPMorgan Chase International and as unofficial U.S. representative to Taiwan as director of the American Institute in Taiwan.
- America’s Future in a Dynamic Asia
- U.S.-China Relations at the Forty-Year MarkQ&A
- +1
Douglas H. Paal, Tong Zhao, Chen Qi, …
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- The Two Logics Driving Japan’s Security PolicyArticle
Japan’s revision of its three strategic documents reflects an intention to keep the United States engaged in the region while Japan fills any vacuums of U.S. power to preserve the Indo-Pacific order.
Ryo Sahashi
- Caught in the Middle: Chinese Biotech Firms’ Divergent Responses to U.S. SanctionsCommentary
Chinese biotech companies have been on the receiving end of U.S. economic coercion. Yet their responses have differed significantly because firm and state interests are not uniformly aligned. For Washington, treating all Chinese tech firms the same, irrespective of their actual interests, risks pushing them farther into Beijing’s corner.
Xue Gong
- Inside the Global Race to Erode a Battery Manufacturing MonopolyCommentary
Over the past decade, China has moved from marginal player to major producer of all things batteries. The United States, Europe, and others are aiming to balance the market.
Milo McBride
- Why Korea’s President Skipped Washington for Silicon Valley and BrasíliaCommentary
Lee’s tour shows how Seoul is reorganizing its diplomacy away from Pyongyang and toward industrial networks and the geography of the compute economy.
Darcie Draudt-Véjares
- The Migration Wave That Embarrassed Morocco and Rattled EuropeCommentary
Most migrants may have left Ceuta, but the effects may linger.
Alejandro Martin Rodriguez, Sarah Yerkes
