NATO’s expansion stumbles as members calculate costs

 

Europe will certainly not become more secure after this round of NATO expansion

 There is a lack of mutual understanding and compromise in European culture, where countries are focused on maximizing their own security interests without regard for others. The US is certainly glad to see Europe in this state.

 

 

Editor's Note:

NATO, which is constantly looking for imaginary enemies and justifying its existence by inciting confrontation, is holding a summit from Tuesday to Thursday, and it also plans to extend its tentacles to the Asia-Pacific region. Behind its aggressive narrative, contradictions and divisions within NATO have become increasingly prominent. The Russia-Ukraine conflict is not going according to NATO's playbook. This series of articles will provide some clues regarding NATO's predicament. This is the fifth piece.

NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was established in 1949, but to this day it remains an important tool for suppressing the opponents of the West. The initiative to unite 12 countries originally belonged to the United States, which became the most powerful world leader after the end of World War II. The US was the foundation of the organization's military power, a source of economic and financial assistance to member countries. It goes without saying that not only the highest command posts belonged to the Americans, but they also defined strategic objectives at all stages of NATO's activities. The main mission of this organization from the very beginning was the unification of military and economic resources under the command of the US to prepare an all-out war against the Soviet Union. The countries of another military bloc, the Warsaw Pact Organization (ATS), led by the USSR, also became enemies. It was created only six years after NATO - in 1955.

NATO played an important role in weakening the USSR and its allies. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991, the question arose about the feasibility of continuing the existence of NATO. But the US, which really ruled the bloc, set a new task for it - to involve former ATS member countries and post-Soviet republics in its structure. This was considered necessary to expand the zone of America's strict control over Europe as the most important part of the world at that time. NATO was also used to "sweep" the European space during the war against Yugoslavia. NATO and its de facto twin in the field of economics and politics - the European Union - were used in organizing the "color revolution" in Kiev and provoking the current Ukrainian crisis. In these situations, the US uses NATO as a tool for dirty work, saving the US from the loss of "precious American lives" and the risk of retaliatory strikes on the territory of the US.

NATO's successful fulfillment of its tasks in Europe led Washington to think about using the potential and experience of the bloc in another part of the world. Having recently identified China as the most serious threat to the international order, Washington is faced with a lack of resources to contain and suppress the growing Chinese power.

In order to mobilize the existing resources, the Biden administration has developed a concept of Indo-Pacific security, strongly resembling a similar concept for the North Atlantic. The concept has already been reinforced by the creation of the Indo-Pacific Command of the US Armed Forces. Already available resources were activated - military alliances with Japan, South Korea and Australia. The AUKUS military group was created. The activity of the QUAD military-diplomatic group is stimulated. The creation of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework was recently announced. But even these actions are not enough for Washington.

Therefore, it is urgently necessary to extend the scope of NATO's responsibility to the Indo-Pacific region as well. Obviously, US efforts are aimed at uniting all Asian and European allies, their military, economic and geostrategic resources to create a new tool for the realization of American global ambitions. It can be conditionally called the Indo-Pacific Treaty Organization according to the patterns of NATO.

Of course, the arrival of NATO to the East, especially since the new military bloc of the West, will threaten the security interests of Russia as a Pacific power. But first of all, it will be directed against China. Strengthening the militarization of the region will also contradict the interests of economic stability and security of ASEAN, APEC and other groupings of the region.

Serious obstacles may arise in the way of implementing Biden's chess game. We are not talking about the fluctuations of European satellites in NATO such as "ready for anything" Poland, the "Baltic troika" or the Balkan neoplasms. It is unlikely that we will talk about England with its age-old anti-Chinese traditions and loyalty to Washington at the level of a conditioned reflex. But such large "stakeholders" as Germany, France, Spain and Italy may think hard about the consequences of entering into a military confrontation with China, taking into account their trade and economic interests.

These powers are well aware of the benefits of bilateral trade with China, which amount to tens and hundreds of billions of euros. They are also aware of the intention of the White House to lift trade sanctions against China in an attempt to bring down the threatening increase in inflation. The role of trade and economic "cannon fodder" is unlikely to entice figures claiming some level of independence even within the framework of NATO. In Madrid, the leaders of significant European powers are unlikely to voice their doubts, but then they will try to "put on the brakes" in implementation of Biden's Indo-Pacific plan.

Another important reason for avoiding the dubious honor of becoming a member of the anti-Chinese coalition may be Washington's inconsistency. Just two years ago, then US president Donald Trump reproached NATO member countries for the insufficiency of military efforts, the desire to "ride for free" and even promised to dissolve the military bloc. What will happen after the next presidential election? Will Trump come back? Won't those business and political circles that oppose the dispersion of the waning power of their power, for the concentration of resources on solving domestic economic and humanitarian problems, win?

Europeans are already suffering losses from following Biden's anti-China course. The ratification of the China-Europe Comprehensive Investment Agreement has been disrupted. Taking into account the hostile policy of Poland and the Baltic countries, Chinese logistics companies are reviewing the routes of goods delivery to Europe via the Silk Road. Beijing is studying the experience of "crippling sanctions" against Russia. After all, Washington has threatened to impose similar sanctions not only in case of the aggravation of the situation around the Taiwan island, but even if China refuses to participate in sanctions against Russia.

The US' convulsive attempts to return itself to the role of world hegemon are unlikely to succeed. But they can cause considerable harm to mutually beneficial relations between countries, which will be difficult to compensate quickly.

The author is head of the "Russian Dream-Chinese Dream" analytic center of the Izborsk Club. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn 

  Source link

 

 

Asia-Pacific countries should not stand under 'dangerous wall' of NATO: Global Times editorial

The sewage of the Cold War cannot be allowed to flow into the Pacific Ocean.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

 

NATO to set stage for extending into Asia-Pacific, faces internal difference

On the heel of the G7 summit, NATO leaders are scheduled to convene in Spain from Tuesday to Thursday for their annual summit with the main focus on Russia and toughening up its stance toward China, while analysts said including China in the US-led military bloc's new strategic concept cannot help alleviate US divergences with the EU, especially on China, and severe domestic problems will also weaken Washington's ambitious plan to maintain hegemony. 

Adventurous NATO policy of going global and confronting China unpopular: Swedish scholar

This is also a shock to the Swedish and Scandinavian population, because they think that NATO is supposed ...

‘Body’ of NATO continues, but ‘soul’ elusive

“NATO skeptics” in the US are exerting more pressure on the transatlantic relationship and weakening US leadership in ...

NATO’s strained capability not matched by strength

NATO’s failure does not only stay on the battlefield – it seems an entire US post-Cold War strategy ...

Wild ambition of NATO against public’s will

NATO is increasingly trapped in a predicament that it may feel difficult to escape.

 

Related posts:

 

G7 to raise US$600bil PGII to counter China’s initiative met with skepticism, mockery

 

Beyond the submarine feud, contains China's rise 

 

Asean nations caught in a quandary over AUKUS Pact 

 

Cold War schemer: Reminiscing in its past ‘victory,’ US brings color revolutions to 21st century to maintain its hegemony

 

That sinking feeling from Down Under: Australia, United Kingdom and United States (Aukus) pact

 

 

China free to set Asia policy’

 

 

AUKUS plans to provide nuclear submarines to Australia seriously endangers nuclear non-proliferation

‘China free to set Asia policy’

      Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, US President Joe Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi attend the summit of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) in Tokyo, Japan, on May 24, 2022. [Photo/Xinhua]

China free to set Asia policy despite US

 

China: Rise of an Asian giant Insight

China has come a long way since the establishment of the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) in 1949. From a poor agrarian society, it has now emerged as an industrial powerhouse, contributing nearly 30 percent of the world's economic growth. It has even overtaken Japan as the world’s second largest economy and lifted 800 million people out of poverty within just a single generation.

But 70 years on, the Communist Party of China under the leadership of its strongman President Xi Jinping is facing the greatest test of its leadership. The continuing social unrest in Hong Kong, a slowing economy and the escalating trade war with the United States are threatening its undermine his China dream. Can the tremendous progress that China has achieved so far simply falter from now on? Or will China continue to prevail as a force to be reckoned with in spite of all these challenges 70 years after its birth?

With 'its own destiny', Beijing's positive agenda can resist meddling, expert says

China should follow its own path and positive agenda for the Asia-Pacific region despite recent steps by the United States to enlist others to encircle it, according to a China expert.

“China is one of those few countries in the international system which is in control of its own destiny,” Sourabh Gupta, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Institute for China-America Studies, said. “If it can attain the potential it has inside, it doesn’t have to depend on or wait for any country, including the US.”

Over the past month, the US has conducted a series of moves relating to the region around China, including hosting the US-Asean Special Summit, announcing the so-called Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, or IPEF, and leading the Quad summit and issuing a joint statement with its partners.

The IPEF launch and the Quad summit were cast as highlights of Joe Biden’s first visit to Asia as the US president in late May. The Quad brings together the US, Australia, India and Japan in a security arrangement viewed by many as an effort to contain China.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken last week gave a comprehensive speech on China policy in which he defined the main theme of US-China relations as competition. He noted that the US would “shape the strategic environment around Beijing” and “win the competition for the future”.

However, Gupta characteristics the US’ recent initiatives as a “China-minus strategy”.

“At the end of the day, a ‘China-minus’ strategy amounts to a China-encirclement strategy,” he said.

“At this time, Washington knows that most countries in Asia are not ready to commit to such an encirclement strategy. As such, it has framed its strategy and policies...from the Quad to the IPEF... on the basis of a ‘China-minus’ formula.”

And he expects that formula “will fail too because China sits at the heart of most of the region’s economic, technology and developmental networks, and other countries do not have the depth of commitment or the deep pockets to challenge Beijing”.

“Biden’s expectation is that the relevant Asian nations will, at his prompting, strive to build further complementarity between their policies and the US’ policies in these selective areas of decoupling,” Gupta said.

China was not mentioned much at the US-Asean summit in Washington, during Biden’s visit to Japan and South Korea, or at the Quad summit in Tokyo and in the joint statement that followed it.

But Gupta said China was the subtext in many important discussions and in the joint statement. — 

"The goal here is to give the impression that the Quad is not an anti-China encirclement body but one that has a positive agenda of practical cooperation to furnish public goods in the Indo-Pacific region," he said.

"I think aside from the four countries, nobody else is fooled in this regard. Everyone understands that the Quad is directed against China. And frankly, even within the four countries, there are very few takers of their foreign office-policy line that the Quad is not China-obsessed."

Before Biden's trip, China's top diplomat, Yang Jiechi, warned US national security adviser Jake Sullivan on May 18 that the US was "on the wrong path" regarding Taiwan, and that its moves could lead to "dangerous situations".

Wedge issue

Gupta said: "The Biden administration has not followed through in its deeds in terms of what the president himself promised in words to President Xi Jinping.

"As such, there is understandable apprehension in Beijing that Washington is attempting to use the Taiwan issue as a wedge issue and deepen divisions between China and other East Asian countries too."

When asked, Biden said the US would defend Taiwan militarily, but afterward, the White House, the State Department and Blinken, in his speech, said that recognition of the one-China policy would not change.

Gupta said it seemed like "a two-step play".

"This happened last October, and I fully expect it to happen again in the future," he said. "I don't think this has to do with lack of policy management. The president seems determined to politically show strength, not weakness, on Taiwan policy, and leave it to his White House team thereafter to restore the equilibrium on the finer details of the policy."

The US and Taiwan launched trade talks on Wednesday, a move that was strongly condemned by Beijing.

 -- China Daily/ANN 

Source link

 

 Shenzhou-14 mission to head for China Space Station on Sunday, to complete ...

Shenzhou-14 mission to head for China Space Station on Sunday, to complete ...

The Shenzhou-14 manned mission is slated to be launched at 10:44 on Sunday morning from the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center ...

 Related posts:

Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) may just be an empty shell as US can offer nothing concrete

  llustration: Chen Xia/Global Times    What is U.S. President Joe Biden's Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) all ab...

 

World needs more than ‘beautiful words’ from the US: Global Times editorial

    US Secretary of State Antony Blinken Photo: VCG US Secretary of State Antony Blinken Photo: VCG  US Secretary of State Antony Bli...

 

By trying to pressure Bachelet, the US and West are unable to create an ‘iron curtain’ of human rights: Global Times editorial

    Michelle Bachelet Photo: Courtesy of Embassy of Chile in Beijing Western human rights groups are trying to make UN Human Rights Of...

US cannot stop China’s hi-tech rise

 

Is it arrogance or inferiority to engage in ‘critical dialogue’ with China?: Global Times editorial

 China US Illustration: Liu Rui/GT The Chinese-language website of Deutsche Welle on Tuesday published a commentary entitled "Maintain...

U.S. has responsibility to rein unruly allies for Asia-Pacific stability

WASHINGTON -- U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Sunday began his three-nation Asia-Pacific tour, during which he will pay his first visit as Pentagon chief to China to deepen military ties, a visit overshadowed by rising tensions in the region.

To prevent the tense situation from further escalation, the U.S. government should take the responsibility to rein in its unruly allies in the region including Japan and the Philippines.

Washington should discourage Japan's provocations and rectify its own wrong position of applying the U.S.-Japan security treaty to China's Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea. It also should warn Manila against making further provocations in the South China Sea, and urge it to return to the negotiating table.

When Panetta made remarks before reporters aboard ahead of his landing in Tokyo on Sunday evening, the first stop of his trip, the U.S. apparently was attempting to play a "detached" arbitrator of the territorial disputes, a role that hadn't been invited by any concerning parties.

Panetta said, "I am concerned that when these countries engage in provocations of one kind or another over these various islands, that it raises the possibility that a misjudgement on one side or the other could result in violence, and could result in conflict."

He even alarmed that provocations over the territorial disputes could blow up into a war unless governments exercised more restraint.

To be frank, the U.S. isn't qualified to behave as a judge for the disputes, because it hasn't played a constructive role in the process.

Instead, it shoulders certain historical responsibilities for the chronic disputes, and has, more or less, fanned relevant countries' provocative moves with its biased words or actions and added instability to the region.

Both Japan and the Philippines have been making reckless provocations against China this year in an attempt to obtain undeserved territorial gains in the East China Sea and South China Sea, emboldened by the U.S. "Pivot to Asia" policy, which has featured increased military deployment and involvement in the region.

In the past week, the world witnessed one of the most blatant acts of sabotaging Asian peace and stability by Japan, the staunchest ally of the U.S. in the region, with its completion of the so-called "nationalization" of the Diaoyu Islands that are inherently part of China's sovereign territory. China totally rejects Japan's act of theft, and is taking necessary steps to protect its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

On the dispute, Washington cannot shake off its responsibility for sowing the seeds of conflict. The U.S., through a backroom deal with Japan in 1971, transferred the administration of Ryukyu Islands (known as Okinawa today) and Diaoyu Islands, which were then under the U.S. trusteeship after World War II, to Japan. China has firmly opposed this deal from the very beginning.

Earlier this year, the Philippines, partially encouraged by U.S. support, also sparked a tense standoff with China in the South China Sea by sending a naval ship to harass Chinese fishermen operating legally in China's territorial waters around the Huangyan Islands.

Panetta's China visit, on the bright side, symbolizes the continuation of a good momentum in the U.S.-China relations, which feature regular high-level dialogues and exchanges of visit by senior political and military leaders.

The visit was reciprocal to the one paid by his Chinese counterpart Liang Guanglie to the Pentagon in May.

The visits have helped increase mutual understanding and advance the China-U.S. cooperation partnership and military-to-military ties.

On the other side, due to the current rising tensions in the Asia-Pacific region, the success of Panetta's visit will be judged by how he will reassure Beijing that Washington is willing to do more things conducive to regional peace and stability, which are now threatened by some of the U.S. allies.

The U.S. should understand that, if it continues to allow its allies to fish in troubled waters in the Asia Pacific and let the tensions spin out of control, no countries in the region can escape unscathed.

The U.S. must know better than other countries what it should do to benefit Asia-Pacific stability. 

By Zhi Linfei (Xinhua)

Related posts:

Who owns Diaoyu Islands?

Who owns the South China Sea islets in the eyes of the world?   

Asia's wealthy surpass North Americans for first time

The number of rich Asians surpassed North Americans for the first time last year, but their fortunes shrank slightly and still trailed total wealth on the other side of the Pacific, Capgemini and RBC Wealth Management said on Wednesday.

The Asia-Pacific region is now home to 3.37 million high net worth individuals (HNWI) - people with $1 million or more to invest - compared with 3.35 million in North America and 3.17 million in Europe, the firms said in a report.

Asia's wealthy - 54 percent of whom are concentrated in Japan, almost 17 percent in China and more than 5 percent in Australia - saw their total fortunes slip to $10.7 trillion last year from $10.8 trillion in 2010, and lag North America's $11.4 trillion.

The Asia-Pacific Wealth Report, compiled by Capgemini and RBC Wealth Management, is closely watched by wealth managers, high-end property agents, luxury goods retailers and other businesses for signs of how and where the ultra-wealthy are investing and how their fortunes are faring.

Many of Asia's rich made their millions and billions through family businesses and property.

"We don't see massive shifting in the allocations of portfolio management," Claire Sauvanaud, vice president of Capgemini Financial Services, told a news conference.

Wealth fell most significantly last year in Hong Kong (20.1 percent) and India (18 percent) and grew most strongly in Thailand (9.3 percent) and Indonesia (5.3 percent). Growth was more modest in Japan (2.3 percent) and in China (1.8 percent).

Weakness in Europe and other global trends played their part in the slight fall in total Asian wealth, the report said, but the "region grappled with its own economic challenges, including inflation, slowing growth and capital outflows."

"Nevertheless, Asia-Pacific is expected to continue showing stronger growth than other regions going forward, and its HNWI population and wealth are likely to keep expanding," it said.

As part of that, Asia's rich are looking more to offshore wealth centres close to home, such as Singapore and Hong Kong, in search of wider access to products and services, tax advantages and financial confidentiality, the report said.

Challenges for the offshore wealth management industry include a scarcity of skilled talent, lower profitability, and the costs of compliance and restrictions on services due to higher regulatory scrutiny, it said.

Diversity of the backgrounds and expectations of rich clients means there is more demand for tailored products and a greater desire to play an active role in managing their portfolios, the report added.- Reuters

No one can stop China in South China Sea but China - Former Philippines National Security Adviser

No one can stop China from claiming “indisputable sovereignty” over the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea)—except China itself or the authoritative power of world opinion.

Short of war, a war nobody wants or would wish, even the United States can only delay or impede the fulfillment of China’s inordinate ambition to gain sovereign control of 3 million square kilometers of this great inland sea that is also Southeast Asia’s maritime heartland.

This is the strategic context of China’s assertive ambiguity in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea).

Just now, Beijing can only bluster and intimidate, as it probes for weaknesses in its rival claimants.

But once China can translate its economic power into military capability credible enough to challenge that of the United States—when the “time is right” in China’s terms—then the geopolitical configuration in the Asia-Pacific region will change radically.

And time and circumstances favor China. Analysts say China is likely to become the world’s largest economy in a decade or so.

If they are right, the Philippines has only 10 short years to prepare for what is likely to become an interesting Asia-Pacific future.

Long-term security

Given the constraints under which it’s working, the administration of President Benigno Aquino has so far done all that could possibly be done, in the short term, to defend our nation’s interests in the West Philippine Sea.

But in this case it’s not enough to deal with the immediate problem. Our nation’s long-term security hangs in the balance.

And to ensure our safety, we must look at the root of our nation’s security, which lies in our people—in everyone of us and nobody else.

If our country is to prevail in any challenge, if the Philippines is to become worthy of respect as a sovereign nation, we must first of all enable our people to become effective wealth creators.

We must make our country rich enough to enable us to acquire the means to defend our nation’s interests, to protect our people’s dignity and honor.

Nationhood infrastructure

To carry out the government’s strategies, policies, plans and programs to grow and develop the nation, we must strive urgently to create the four conditions necessary for growth and development.

Let us make no mistake, without these, the nation can hardly enforce its Constitution and its laws, and no development plan can succeed:

1. We must come to terms with ourselves. We must build among us the infrastructure of nationhood. We must be able to answer the basic question of who we are.

We must live the core values our forebears fought and died for: Dignity, honor, freedom, justice, self-determination, hard work, discipline, tolerance, mutual caring and compassion.

We must become a people at peace with themselves and with the world.

There is nothing our people cannot accomplish, if our identity and the goals we seek are articulated in terms of the core values taught us by our heroes and martyrs.

These core values define what is right or wrong for our people. They guide us, like our heroes and martyrs, to live only when it is right to live, and to die only when it is right to die.

2. No matter what it takes, we must end our internal wars. Our radical insurgency is kept alive by our grievous inequality and the elemental injustice of mass poverty. And both are caused by corruption and misgovernment.

The same is true of our separatist conflict in Mindanao. There popular frustrations are worsened by rivalries over land and livelihood, and the situation is complicated by ethnic and religious enmities.

3. We must complete all the land and nonland reforms we still need to do. Not only will their completion make rebellion, separatism and mutiny irrelevant but will also accelerate our nation’s growth. And, finally, it will unite our people.

4. We must transfer the power of the few over the state to the people as citizens. In the World Bank’s view, we are a country where state policies and their implementation serve not the common good but those of special interests.

The capture of the state and its regulatory agencies by vested interest groups has made our economy the least competitive among comparable economies in East Asia.

In sum, we must put our house in order. We must level our popular playing field to grow and develop the nation—and so enable our people to surmount any challenge.

No luxury of time

As we create the four conditions necessary for growth and development, we must also carry out our development plans. Given the uncertainties building up in East Asia, we do not have the luxury of time.

It is the Chinese people’s historic sense that is driving their country’s rise. They count their recovery from generations of humiliation at the hands of the great powers as lasting 150 years starting from the initial European effort to open up China around 1800.

In 1949, Mao Zedong proclaimed China had stood up. But China began to recover economically only after Deng Xiaoping’s reforms (1978). In three and a half decades, China has become the world’s second largest economy.

We, too, must tap into our people’s sense of nationality—and do no less. By creating the four conditions necessary for growth and development that I cited above, and by simultaneously carrying out the government’s development plans, we can change our country—we can modernize it without leaving anyone behind—during the next 10 years.

By that time, we will also have nurtured the inclusive institutions that will sustain our people’s capacities for wealth creation.

No primrose paths

Let us not delude ourselves. There are no short cuts—no primrose paths—to growth and development. We must never give up even if our country’s rise takes 150 years or more.

We have no choice. The alternative is too dire to contemplate.

We must work together to prevent the situation developing that reduces our country into a tributary, a vassal, a province of a great power.

Those who sacrificed and died for us and for generations yet to come will never forgive us if we fail to summon the courage and the will to take the radical steps toward the Filipino future: To deliberately put in place the four conditions necessary for growth and development without delay.

By: Jose T. Almonte
Former National Security Adviser

U.S. intervention not conducive to Asia-Pacific stability

 Many facts have proved that major changes have taken place in regard to the South China Sea since Washington made a military and economic "pivot" toward Asia, a strategy many interpret as a bid to counteract China's influence in the region. 

Since the dispute over Huangyan Island between Beijing and Manila flared up in April, Washington not only held joint military drills with the Filipinos, but also sold two Hamilton-class warships to them. 

Washington must understand that returning to Asia by way of militarily flexing its muscle, and diplomatically intervening in bilateral disputes is wrong and short-sighted.

 
BEIJING, July 14 (Xinhua) -- Hillary Clinton's whirlwind tour of China's neighbors as part of the U.S. pivot to Asia strategy has made waves again in the South China Sea. The "strategic pressure" is not conducive to Asia's development or U.S. long-term interests.

The U.S. secretary of state's Asia trip, which took her to Afghanistan, Japan, Mongolia, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, was nothing but an apparent "diplomatic encirclement."

Though wary of overtly irking China, Clinton further meddled in the South China Sea issue by repeatedly highlighting America's interests there and openly supporting individual ASEAN members' scheme to complicate the maritime dispute.

Clinton also extended her hand to the East China Sea, clearly recognizing during the visit to Japan that the Diaoyu Islands fell within the scope of the 1960 Japan-U.S. security treaty, though Washington does not take a position on the ultimate sovereignty of the islets.

Many facts have proved that major changes have taken place in regard to the South China Sea since Washington made a military and economic "pivot" toward Asia, a strategy many interpret as a bid to counteract China's influence in the region.

In the past decades, there has been mainly a lull in the South China Sea issue, as China and other claimant states sought solutions based on bilateral friendly negotiations.

However, at the ASEAN foreign ministers' meeting two years ago, Clinton announced Washington had a "national interest" in the South China Sea and would return to Asia. Since then, tensions have been simmering below the surface.

In particular, China's maritime territorial sovereignty has been severely infringed this year, with the Philippines laying claims to Huangyan Island, Japan's farce in attempting to buy the Diaoyu Islands and Vietnam's enactment of a law asserting sovereignty over the Xisha Islands and Nansha Islands.

The United States claims it does not take a position on the one hand and intensively takes one-sided actions on the other.

Since the dispute over Huangyan Island between Beijing and Manila flared up in April, Washington not only held joint military drills with the Filipinos, but also sold two Hamilton-class warships to them.

Last month, U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced a shift of deployment of the U.S. Navy from its current 50-50 split between the Pacific and the Atlantic to 60-40 by 2020.

As the Chinese saying goes, "the tree craves calm but the wind keeps blowing." Though China always exercises restraint and insists on diplomatic solutions to the disputes, some countries keep challenging China, which certainly has something to do with U.S. re-engagement in the region.

President Barack Obama's strategy to focus U.S. foreign policy more intensely on the Asia-Pacific after a decade of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is welcome, as long as it is beneficial to the peace, stability and prosperity of the region. However, what the strategic shift has brought in the past two years is evidently contrary to regional stability.

Washington must understand that returning to Asia by way of militarily flexing its muscle, and diplomatically intervening in bilateral disputes is wrong and short-sighted. It is wrong because it is favoring confrontation instead of cooperation, which does not contribute to Asia's development and also goes against U.S. long-term interests.

Americans should do more to promote regional and win-win cooperation rather than mess up peace and development in the Asia-Pacific region.

Related:

News Analysis: Clinton's visit promotes U.S. strategic pivot towards Asia

SINGAPORE, July 13 (Xinhua) -- Regional and international economic cooperation is important, analysts said on the visit of U. S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Asia.

Clinton participated in the 19th ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) Regional Forum on Thursday in Phnom Penh, which gathers the foreign ministers of Asian countries and beyond. Clinton's visit to Asia has also taken her to countries such as Japan, Mongolia, Vietnam and Laos. She is also expected to attend an ASEAN-U.S. Business Forum on Friday. Full story 

Related articles 

SE Asia meeting in disarray over sea dispute with China - Reuters (reuters.com)

Worst credit card repayer!

Survey reveals many Malaysians do not settle their debts in full each month

PETALING JAYA: A global survey has revealed that Malaysians are among the worst credit card repayers in the Asia-Pacific region.

According to the survey, less than half of the local respondents polled online say they repay their credit card debts in full every month.

Given this, Malaysia has one of the lowest repayment rates among the developing markets that were surveyed.

About 15% repay more than the minimum requirement while 18% of Malaysians repay only the minimum amount required.

This is although two out of five Malaysians polled claimed to use credit cards for shopping, dining and entertainment.

In contrast, the highest repayment rate was in Taiwan, where 89% of respondents service their credit card bills in full followed by Japan (87%) and South Korea (85%).

Neighbours Singapore and Indonesia also fared much better with 80% and 59% respectively, while only Vietnam came off worse than Malaysia at 27%.

The Nielsen Global Survey of Investment Attitudes also showed Malaysians are generally one of the top 10 savers in the world, but 45% of the online respondents also have various loans and insurance payments.

Meanwhile, two out of five Malaysian consumers are investing their money via various channels.

“Of those investing, 67% prefer mutual fund/unit trusts, 49% prefer stocks, 27% invest in gold, silver and other precious metals, a quarter in structured investment products, 15% in foreign currencies, 10% in bonds and 8% in derivatives,” said Nielsen in a press release yesterday.

The survey also disclosed that less than 19% of respondents rely on financial planners or advisers when deciding on personal finance or wealth matters.

On the other hand, 43% of the respondents make their own choices without anyone's advice while 21% seek advice from friends, relatives and colleagues.

Just one in every 10 persons rely on investment tips from commentators, experts or spokesmen broadcast over television, radio or the Internet, and six per cent make investment decisions on impulse.

“Knowing consumers' attitudes towards wealth management while creating relevant opportunities to engage with consumers and manage their needs is still a challenging task for financial planners and investment institutions, especially when four in 10 consumers do not trust others when making financial decisions,” said Nielsen Malaysia's head of Customised Research Luca Griseri.

The Nielsen Global Survey of Investment Attitudes was conducted from Feb 10-27 this year and polled more than 28,000 online consumers in 56 countries throughout Asia Pacific, Europe, Latin America, North America, the Middle East and Africa.

By REGINA LEE regina@thestar.com.my/Asia News Network

Assets grow fast and furious!

East Asia’s wealth continues to spurt, with the hope that it will not also sputter.

BEHIND the faceless economic data of countries and regions is the wealth of individual people. But how does this relate to global conditions, and vice-versa?

One answer comes by way of the High Net Worth Individual (HNWI), as defined jointly by the French consulting firm Capgemini and the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC).

Where net worth is generally taken as total assets minus total debts, the HNWI as conceived by Capgemini, RBC and Merrill Lynch is a person with at least US$1mil (RM3.2mil) in disposable funds to invest.

In their calculation, growth of East Asia’s personal wealth last year bypassed North America’s for the first time. In their latest World Wealth Report 2011 released just four days ago, the number of HNWIs in the “Asia-Pacific” region grew 1.6% to 3.37 million.

Widening gap: China continues to develop rapidly, chalking up multiple achievements such as lifting nearly a billion people out of poverty within one generation. Yet some 100 million people in China still live in poverty. — EPA

However, the Asia-Pacific mega-region often presents a problem of definition, and does so clearly in this case. Australia is included but not New Zealand, nor is any country in North America which also lies in the “Pacific” portion of the Asia-Pacific.

India is also included even when it is not a Pacific nation, but not any other South Asian country which is similarly located and equally (in)eligible. The Philippines is also excluded along with five of the smallest or newest Asean countries.

Such concepts and their comparisons, particularly when defined by specific corporate interests, tend to be notional at best. Nonetheless, one trend is clear: individual and thus regional wealth in East Asia is growing faster than in North America.

But much of this new wealth also has shallower roots. East Asian economies are seeing fast gainers and almost as rapid losers among HNWIs.

Hong Kong and Singapore respectively lost 17.4% and 7.8% in HNWIs. The volatility is typical of rapidly growing regions: easier come, easier go.

Overall, East Asian wealth accumulation for investment is still behind North America’s – US$10.7tril (RM34tril) to US$11.4tril (RM36.4tril). The gap remains, but it is just as obvious that it is narrowing.

Without East Asian volatility, the gap would be narrower still. And if the number of HNWIs were considered on per capita terms, East Asian development would seem even more impressive.

That leaves a large question mark over China, with the world’s largest population at more than 1.3 billion. It has already produced the fastest and most sustained growth anywhere on the planet, with the prospect of much more to come.

China continues to develop rapidly, chalking up multiple achievements such as lifting nearly a billion people out of poverty within one generation. Yet some 100 million people in China still live in poverty, as Prime Minister Wen Jiabao conceded during the week.

In essence, much of China’s economic growth has yet to come. How far it still has to go may be taken as a measure of how much further it can still go.

Owing to its sheer size and the scale on which it operates, China’s progress will determine the fate of both greater China (the mainland, plus Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan) and much of the world.

That was the broad consensus reached during the week at both the Rio+20 summit in Brazil attended by Wen, and the G20 summit in Mexico attended by President Hu Jintao.

And that is where the sums and the conclusions, whether tentative or premature, become mired in obscurities. But if it is any consolation, the obscurities are also the realities.

When comparisons are made between (East) Asian and North American growth, investment or expenditure, the comparisons are essentially between China and the US.

And in economic growth in particular, much of China’s data is derived from trade with and investment from the US. The most important bilateral relationship in the Asia-Pacific, if not also in the world, is also growing steadily on multiple fronts: economic, but also diplomatic and strategic.

How the world’s two largest economies get along has always been important for the world. That becomes much more so when it encompasses other spheres of their relationship as well.

In Hu’s address in Los Cabos on Tuesday to an audience that included his US counterpart Barack Obama, he developed a model of bilateral relations he introduced at a China-US Strategic and Economic Dialogue last month in Beijing. This consisted largely of two prongs, each with three main points.

The three key principles are for both countries to maintain strategic communication between them at the highest levels, to manage any differences between them without letting anything get out of control, and to keep any prospective interference from any quarter boxed up.

The three broad areas of interest outlined by Hu in his “hopes” are that the US will act positively in opting for a pragmatic rather than an ideological approach to relations, respect China’s legitimate sovereign interests, and stop the narrower concerns of domestic politics from upsetting ties.

These points may be taken to mean China’s preference for a full, direct relationship that avoids hiccups from occasional sentiments in the US over China’s internal political affairs, currency valuation or a lingering US tendency to protectionism.

There were at least three points of immediate agreement at Los Cabos: that both countries should develop the next phase of their relationship meaningfully, that relations were so far going well, and that more should be done to build mutual trust.

This G20 summit is seen as the second meeting between Hu and Obama this year, and the 12th in three years. It is also timed just right for Hu in reminding Obama that bilateral relations should not be subordinated to domestic pressures in a US election year, as Obama begins his campaign for re-election.

These personal exchanges are crucial, despite the passing nature of the presidencies. Hu is due to be succeeded next year, and even if Obama is re-elected, he has only another four years in office.

But formal relations between major powers are made of more durable stuff. There is scant difference between the Democratic and Republican parties on ties with China, and Beijing itself is known for worldviews that endure.

Beyond these, the summits in both Los Cabos and Rio de Janeiro took due notice of the gravity of the eurozone debt crisis.

The eurozone is after all an important leg of the world economic tripod, and its economic prospects are bound to be of concern to other regions.

At both summits, China and the US tried to shore up global confidence in the eurozone by helping to talk up prospects of recovery, or at least avoided consideration of worst-case scenarios.

The next EU summit in the following days should do more to spell out specific measures that member countries can take to that end.

Europe has the greatest responsibility in putting its collective house in order. North American and East Asian economic entities can do no more than assist in the hard decisions that Europeans have to take themselves.

For East Asia and North America at least, how well China and the US work together will determine prospects for all players in both regions. For East Asia in particular, HNWIs and standards of living generally are determined by the peace and prosperity that only close ties between major powers can offer.

Behind The Headlines
By Bunn Nagara

Related articles

• Asia’s millionaires outnumber America’s (edition.cnn.com)
• World Wealth Report 2012: Asians Top List Of Millionaires (ibtimes.com)
• Asia-Pacific home to highest number of millionaires (panarmenian.net)

New Internet top-level domain name claims

Icann reveals new internet top-level domain name claims

Icann has received applications for .music, .miami, .insurance and .online among others

US-based organisations accounted for nearly half of all applications for new net address endings, according to the body in charge of the expansion.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (Icann) said it had received 884 requests for new suffixes from the US, out of a total of 1,930.

By contrast there have been 40 such applications from the UK, 303 from the Asia-Pacific region and 17 from Africa.

Details of who applied for what will be revealed in London later.

Ahead of the press conference, Icann also revealed that 166 of the claims were for what it termed "internationalised domain names" - generic top-level-domains (gTLDs) that are not in the Latin alphabet.

"That means that if you're a person living in China or in somewhere in India then you might have the opportunity to use the internet purely in your native script," Icann's president and chief executive, Rod Beckstrom, told the BBC.

"It's going to make the internet more approachable for people. Also we're seeing a trend on mobile devices to people liking short names and there will be opportunities for shorter names here, just because what was previously a second-level name now becomes first-level."

An example of this would be if the web address www.canon.com/products switched to www.products.canon.

Generic names
 
The Japanese camera maker is just one of several organisations to have confirmed it has paid the $185,000 (£118,800) fee to take part in the application process.

International breakdown

North America: 911 applications

Europe: 675 applications

Asia-Pacific: 303 applications

Latin American and the Caribbean: 24 applications

Africa: 17 applications

(116 in non-Latin alphabets)

The not-for-profit .uk domain name manager Nominet has also revealed it had applied to run .wales and .cymru while Google said it had applied for .google, .youtube and .lol.

Other less well-known bodies are also taking advantage of the move.

The firm Top Level Domain Holdings has spent more than $13.5m applying for 92 applications on itself and clients. These include claims for .hotel, .cricket, .london and .music.

Dubai-based Directi told the BBC it had also applied for 31 "mass market" gTLDs including .law, .bank and .baby.

Conflicting claims
 
Organisations face a minimum $25,000 annual renewal charge to keep their suffix, but not all applications will succeed.

"Community-based applications" - those from trade associations or other organisations representing recognised, sizeable groupings - will take precedence over "standard applications" - those from stand-alone businesses and others.

So for instance, if PepsiCo, Coca-Cola and the Grocery Manufacturers of America have all applied for .cola, the GMA should be given priority.

If two or more applicants of equal status have requested the same name a resolution process is triggered.

"We would notify them that they have been approved and who else has been approved and say they have 60 days to go figure out how they are going to resolve this," said Mr Beckstrom.

"If they don't resolve this in 60 days then we are going to put it up for auction where each of them can bid for the term. The proceeds of that auction will go to a new charitable or non-profitable entity."

The process has proved controversial. 87 companies and business associations sent a petition to the US Department of Commerce last year claiming "excessive cost and harm to brand owners" and the "likelihood of predatory cyber harm to consumers".

But it will take a while to find out if such fears prove true.

Because of the volume of requests Icann plans to divide and evaluate the applications in batches of about 500.

It says the first is expected to go live some time between April and June 2013.

Related Stories

• New domains set to shake up net
• Glitch delays net suffix deadline
• Web domains face major overhaul

Newscribe : get free news in real time   

US military still strongest in the world

Despite the impact of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the financial crisis, the U.S. military is still the most powerful military in the world, a report released Tuesday in Beijing said.

The report "U.S. Military Assessment Report 2011", published by the China Strategic Culture Promotion Association, contains six chapters, 14 sections and three appendixes, including the U.S. strategic points, the U.S. military strength and deployment of troops, the defense budget and procurement of weapons and equipment, the U.S. structural and organizational reform, the new development of the U.S. combat theory and the U.S. joint military exercises, and summarizes the development situation of the U.S. military strength between 2010 and 2011.

The report pointed out that the internal and external environment faced by the United States has undergone major changes over the past two years. At home, the impact caused by the financial crisis on real economy has not been fundamentally alleviated; the national economy continues to decline; the budget deficit hits record highs and the unemployment keeps high. Outside the country, the United States is faced with the challenge to its leadership position brought by the multi-polarization of international forces and the rise of emerging powers. 

On the occasion of withdrawing from Iraq and ending the war in Afghanistan, the United States shifted its strategic focus to the Asia-Pacific region. The Obama administration has formulated new national security strategy, defense strategy and military strategy and accelerated the global deployment of troops. It is making efforts to strengthen army building in terms of institutional establishment, weapons and equipment, combat theory and military training and enhance the ability of war and non-war military actions.

The report said that although the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the financial crisis began in 2008 had an important impact on the comprehensive strength of the United States, the impact on its military capabilities has not yet been seen. The U.S. troops are still the most powerful in the world and it still has the ability to simultaneously start two large-scale regional wars and some small-scale emergent battles. It can provide strong support for the United States to return to the Asia-Pacific region and shift the strategic focus eastward.

The report also said that on one hand, China should remain vigilant on the United States' returning to Asia-Pacific region, intervening in the territorial disputes on South China Sea and transfer of its strategic focus eastward; on the other hand, China should also see the common interests in the deep economic integration of the two countries and in maintaining the peace, stability, development, cooperation and prosperity of the world.

In line with the spirit of mutual respect and mutual trust, equality and mutual benefit, both sides should strengthen the cooperation and exchange especially that of the two militaries and jointly cope with the challenges and threats of the 21th century.

The China Strategic Culture Promotion Association is a national non-profit civil society group composed of experts, scholars and social activists who are engaged in studies of international issues, Taiwan issue and cultural issues. The association was founded in Beijing on Jan. 5 2011, aiming at promoting security and stability of the Asia-Pacific region and encouraging the peaceful development on both sides of the Taiwan Strait through the studies, dissemination and exchange of Chinese strategic culture.

Read the Chinese version: 中国智库：美国军队仍然是世界上最强大的军队，author: Yang Tiehu

Newscribe : get free news in real time 

Related Reading

1. What 'invisible expenditures' does US military have?
2. US military report on China fails to see China's defense policy peace-oriented