challenges and opportunities in the asia-pacific region

This article was downloaded by: [University of Auckland Library]On: 05 December 2014, At: 09:32Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

American Foreign Policy Interests: The Journal of theNational Committee on American Foreign PolicyPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uafp20

Challenges and Opportunities in the Asia-Pacific RegionRobert ScalapinoPublished online: 30 Nov 2010.

To cite this article: Robert Scalapino (2003) Challenges and Opportunities in the Asia-Pacific Region, American Foreign PolicyInterests: The Journal of the National Committee on American Foreign Policy, 25:4, 233-240, DOI: 10.1080/10803920301097

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803920301097

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uafp20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/10803920301097

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10803920301097

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Challenges and Opportunities in the Asia�Pacific Region 233

American Foreign Policy Interests

American Foreign Policy Interests, 25: 233�240, 2003Copyright © 2003 NCAFP1080-3920/03 $12.00 + .08DOI:10.1080/108030390236672

We live in the most revolutionary age in his-tory. Never has the pace and scope of

change been so great. Consequently, we mustlearn to live with complexity. All broad generali-zations and simple analyses have deficiencies. Inassessing current international relations in theAsia�Pacific region, therefore, one must take fullaccount of the complex balance sheet involvingchallenges and opportunities.

First, let us note the relationship betweenmultilateralism in its various forms and bilater-alism. Institutionalized multilateralism in Asiahas suffered setbacks recently. It has always beenmore precariously based than in Western Europebecause of cultural, developmental, and politicaldifferences among constituent members. Orga-nizations like the Association of South East AsianNations (ASEAN), the Asia Regional Forum(ARF) , and ASEAN Plus Three have also beendamaged by the recent fragility of some key par-ticipants. To be sure, these bodies have impor-tance. They enable national leaders to meet andengage in dialogues, both in formal sessions andon the sidelines. Further, they focus attention ona wide range of key issues. Yet thus far, they havebeen essentially �talk� not �action� bodies. Theprincipal actions to date have been in the realmof economics, but even in this respect, progressis largely tentative.

Multilateralism in a different form, however,assumed increasing importance in the recentpast: namely, coalitions of nations brought to-gether because of a common interest in a givenproblem or set of problems. These coalitions, withthe application of such labels as �Four PartyTalks,� are more informal in institutional terms,and they may be temporary. Yet on such a critical

issue as that pertaining to North Korea, they havebeen playing a highly significant role. Moreover,with the encompassment of a range of securityissues, including those of human security, theirscope is expanding.

Nevertheless, bilateral relations remain themost important aspect of Asia�Pacific interna-tional relations at this point, and those betweenthe major nations are especially critical in shap-ing the economic-strategic climate in the region.

U.S.�Chinese Relations

It can be argued that among such bilateralrelations, that between the United States andChina is the most important today, whatevermeasure is applied. Despite the recent focus onthe Middle East and South Asia, the United Statescontinues to have vital interests in East Asia. Itseconomy is intimately connected with this region,in terms of both trade and investment. Further,as the world�s only superpower, its interactionwith other major nations affects both the globaland regional climate; and in Northeast Asia, thefour major powers of today come into the closestcontact. China is now the rising power in Asia.Its reach, economically and strategically, is ex-panding. Its policies and attitudes are of majorconsequence to every Asian�Pacific state, andrelations with the United States play an impor-tant role in shaping such factors.

The atmosphere of American�Chinese rela-tions remains a mixture of clouds and brightspots. The Chinese media�with officials occa-sionally joining in�persistently charge the U.S.government with arrogance, unilateralism, and

Challenges and Opportunitiesin the Asia�Pacific Region

Robert A. Scalapino

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

09:

32 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

234 Robert A. Scalapino


interference in the internal affairs of other na-tions and of seeking to impose its own values andinstitutions on sovereign states. Naturally, thesecharges were buttressed by the Iraq War. The U.S.media�and some politicians�answer in kindwith attacks on China�s violations of humanrights, authoritarian rule, and intransigence onterritorial issues.

Yet both governments have taken care in re-cent times to moderate official stances. For ex-ample, China, although making clear its opposi-tion to the U.S. war against Iraq, was remark-ably low key in its criticisms once the conflictbegan. And the United States has been cautiousin approaching the issue of punishment for hu-man rights violations, refusing to support UNsanctions most recently.

Indeed, the past six American presidents andall top Chinese leaders commencing with DengXiaoping have sought to build a relationship thatis positive on balance. Even those presidents whocriticized ongoing China policies as candidatesmade substantial modifications in their positionsafter being elected. Chinese leaders, meanwhile,even when faced with a public manifesting wide-spread hostility toward America in the aftermathof incidents like the accidental bombing of theChinese embassy in Belgrade, have sought to keepnegativism under control.

The Economic Factor

What accounts for this situation? One mightstart with the economic factor. Trade and invest-ment now occupy a vital position in U.S.�Chinarelations. American investment in China contin-ues to accelerate at a rapid rate, and trade hasbeen increasing by double-digit figures in the re-cent past. These gains may be affected by SARS,but in the long run they seem likely to maintaina strong momentum. To be sure, there are prob-lems. The U.S. trade deficit with China reachedapproximately $95 billion in 2002. Further, al-though China represented a growing market (andone-half of its exports come from companies with

extensive foreign investment), advanced nationslike the United States are being forced to placeever greater emphasis on information technology(IT) and similar high-tech fields as well as theservice sector. While China becomes a formidablecompetitor as well as a center of great opportu-nity, economic ties between the United States andthe People�s Republic of China will continue tobe of vital importance to both societies. Marxwould have been baffled by the fact that most ofAmerica�s big �bourgeoisie� are among the mostardent supporters of a positive U.S. policy towardChina, and, on the other side, President JiangZemin recently supported the entry of Chineseentrepreneurs into the Communist party (CP),urging that the CP be a party of the nation, notmerely of the �proletariat.�

Strategic Considerations

Economic considerations meld into those of astrategic nature. China�s fourth generation ofleaders, recently come to power, are essentiallytechnocrats rather than ideologues. Most weretrained as engineers or in similar fields. More-over, many have had extensive experience as pro-vincial or city administrators. Their priority ison continued economic development, makingChina �rich and strong.� Regional instabilityand especially a relationship with the UnitedStates fraught with tension would disrupt such apriority.

To be sure, China has had increasing qualmsabout the rise of American military power andthe recent use of that power. As a result of theAfghanistan and Iraq wars, the United Statescurrently has a much greater military presencein Central and South Asia, supplementing itslong-standing position in East Asia. Indeed, Chinais now surrounded by that power�in some placesat close range. The Chinese response has includeda strenuous effort to improve relations with allof its neighbors, thereby seeking to create a bufferagainst that power and at the same time partici-pating more vigorously in various regional mul-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

09:

32 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014



tilateral bodies from ASEAN Plus Three to theShanghai Cooperation Organization.

North Korea

At the same time, however, Beijing has shownitself prepared to cooperate with Washington onissues in which mutual interests, such as Korea,coincide. In the past China has had the closest toan effective two-Koreas policy of any outsidestate. Moreover, its extensive food and energyassistance to North Korea has given it consider-able potential leverage. After some reluctance, ithas now become a dialogue participant with theUnited States and the Democratic People�s Re-public of Korea. The opening stages have proveddifficult, as the April 2003 Beijing meeting illus-trated. North Korea has only one bargaining chip:namely, threat. It has now escalated threat to thesummit, asserting that it has nuclear weaponsand has reprocessed its 8,000 spent nuclear-fuelrods. This tactic is of dubious worth for the North,as it has further angered China and aided thehard-liners in Washington in the ongoing contro-versy within the Bush administration over Ko-rea policy.

Nevertheless, assuming that the UnitedStates avoids unilateralism in dealing with thisissue and continues to work with South Koreaand Japan as well as with China and Russia inseeking a resolution that involves some accom-modation on the part of both sides, U.S.�Chinarelations should benefit. The collapse of the Northwould produce new challenges. China does notwant the Seoul government�sustaining an alli-ance with the United States�on the Yalu River.Nor does it desire the waves of refugees thatwould accompany such an event and the enor-mous economic costs involved. Collapse, however,does not seem imminent, despite the North�smassive economic problems, unless the outsideworld employs stringent sanctions.

Conflict also seems unlikely. Without allies,the North could not possibly survive such anevent, whatever initial damage it might do to the

South. For its part, the United States is unlikelyto affront every other nation in the region byundertaking a preemptive strike. Thus, althoughthe Korea problem is not likely to be resolvedeasily or quickly, it represents an issue uponwhich logic would dictate cooperation betweenthe United States and China.

Taiwan

A second issue, that of Taiwan, may be moreworrisome. In the recent past, to be sure, cau-tious optimism has been warranted. Increasinglyconvinced that time is on its side given the mas-sive economic and cultural interaction betweenTaiwan and the mainland that has occurred inrecent times, China has shifted its policy fromone of threat to one of seeking support from theTaiwanese people, urging such further steps asthe three links (direct transport, travel, and com-munications). Further, with some evidence thatthe Chen Shui-bian government, which Beijingwill never trust, is in trouble due to economic dif-ficulties, dialogues with Taiwan�s Kuomintangand People First parties have been encouraged.

Yet the political impasse that currently existsat the official level will not be easily terminated.China insists that Taiwan authorities must ac-cept one China, with both the mainland and Tai-wan being a part of that China; further, accord-ing to Beijing, the solution to reunification liesin the one-country, two-systems formula appliedto Hong Kong and Macao. Yet three-fourths ofTaiwan�s people want the status quo to continue,at least for the present, and there is little sup-port for the Beijing formula.

History has decreed that the United Stateswill continue to be deeply involved in the Taiwanissue. Some months before the Korean War, Sec-retary of State Dean Acheson proclaimed that theUnited States would no longer be involved in theChinese civil war, but the intervention of Chinain the Korean conflict caused an abrupt changeof U.S. policy. Today Washington�s position issomewhat enigmatic, perhaps deliberately so. As

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

09:

32 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014



in the past, the United States proclaims that itsupports one China (without definition), opposesany declaration of independence by Taiwan, andseeks a peaceful resolution of the issue that hasthe support of Taiwan�s people. At the same time,it has long asserted its willingness to provideTaiwan with the military equipment necessaryfor its defense.

Recently the Bush administration has indicatedits willingness to sell Taiwan its most advanced an-timissile system, a seeming shift from an earlierposition. Washington authorities cite evidence thatthe Chinese continue adding ballistic missiles totheir coastal arsenal aimed at Taiwan.

This situation could greatly increase tensionbetween China and the United States, especially ifit were accompanied by involvement of the UnitedStates in Taiwan war games. At present Taiwan isstrapped for funds and may not be able to affordthe antimissile equipment, but the Taiwan factorin Sino�American relations has darkened.

Thus the future of relations between theUnited States and China will continue to haveits complexities, and, from time to time, incidentsare likely to occur that will require skillful han-dling by the leaders on both sides. There is rea-son for hope, however, that the relationship willbe one that is, on balance, positive, with growingcooperation in various realms. One general con-sideration should not be overlooked. The leadersof all major nations are coming to realize thatconflicts between such states cannot be won. The�victor� as well as the defeated will suffer hugedamage, both domestically and internationally.The era of global conflicts, twentieth-centurystyle, is almost certainly over.

Given the unresolved disputes, continuedmilitary expansion by diverse states, and theuncertain consequences of the rise of national-ism throughout Asia�Pacific (including theUnited States), however, a balance of power willcontinue to be a hedge against a breakdown ofregional peace. Thus the foreign policy of theUnited States will rest on two foundations: a con-cert of powers, as noted earlier, and a balance ofpower.

U.S.�Japanese Relations

Just as China will be a principal actor in thefirst course, Japan will be a key participant inthe second. Although U.S.�Japanese relationshave their complexities, the strategic allianceremains intact, and indeed has been strengthenedin the recent past. Japan is still the world�s sec-ond largest economy, and its economic interac-tion with the United States remains of vital im-portance to both nations. To be sure, the UnitedStates is worried about economic trends in Ja-pan and the seeming inability of the system toundertake sustained, deeply rooted reforms.Prime Minister Koizumi, who came to office withthe strong support of the public, has faltered inthe face of pervasive opposition from the bureau-cracy and his own party, and his popularity hassuffered. Indeed, there are few promising Japa-nese politicians on the horizon, and public atti-tudes betray an increasing pessimism with re-spect to both politics and economics.

Nonetheless, Japan continues to adhere to itsstrategic alliance with the United States, and thegovernment has supported American policies inAfghanistan and Iraq, despite public doubts. In-creasingly, however, Japan has been seeking tochange the nature of the alliance from one ofpatron-client to one of partnership. Moreover,it has taken an increasing number of indepen-dent actions, from initiating free trade negotia-tions with several Asian nations to Koizumi�svarious trips to Asian neighbors, including theDemocratic People�s Republic of Korea (DPRK).Nevertheless, the prospects for continued closerelations between the United States and Japanare strong.

U.S.�Russian Relations

Perhaps the most surprising development inrecent times has been the warm relationship be-tween the United States and the Russian Fed-eration. Under President Putin, Russia turned

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

09:

32 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014



to the West and notably to the United States, con-scious of the benefits, both economic and strate-gic. Russian interaction with Asia, notably Indiaand China, however, remains important. Want-ing to restore Russia�s global status, Putin hasemphasized its Eurasian position. That aim re-mains to be achieved because of the falteringRussian economy and the deterioration of itsmilitary force. At some point Russia will becomea rapidly developing nation, but many obstaclesremain. U.S.�Russian relations were damaged bythe Iraq issue and related economic matters, butonce again the leaders of both nations have givenevidence that they want to renew the favorablerelationship, despite continuing policy differ-ences.

Sino�Japanese Relations

Bilateral relations between the other majorAsia�Pacific nations in many respects mirror thecomplexities of U.S. relations. Because of itshistorical background, the Sino�Japanese rela-tionship remains delicate, despite the advent ofmajor economic interaction and growing culturalcontacts. Chinese authorities regularly voice sus-picions that Japanese militarism may be return-ing, using the textbook issue and high officials�visits to Yasukuni Shrine as evidence. On theJapanese side, the concern about China at presentis based more on economics, the fear being thatJapan might not be able to cope with massiveChinese economic inroads involving nearly one-half of Japan�s major companies� transferring amajor portion of their operations to the People�sRepublic of China. Can a transformation of theJapanese economy be sufficiently far-reachingand in time?

Japanese�Russian Relations

Japanese�Russian relations are minimal, inpart because of economic conditions in Russia butin larger measure because nationalist tides are

blocking a solution of the South Kurils (North-ern Territories) question. At some point, however,the Russian Far East will become an integral partof a Natural Economic Territory (NET) involv-ing Northeast China, the Korean Peninsula, andJapan. Proximity and the complementarity ofassets and needs will steadily increase thestrength of this NET and aid in promoting broadcooperation in the region.

Sino�Russian Relations

China�s relations with Russia have alreadybeen marked by cooperation through the Shang-hai Cooperation Organization on terrorist issuesand a reduction of military border forces. Thisrelationship is far from an alliance and until theIraq War, China viewed Putin�s pro-Americanpolicies with wariness. At present, however, de-spite the slender economic ties and the concernsof Far Eastern Russians about the possibility ofa Chinese surge northward, the Sino�Russianrelationship is better than at any time in the pastfive decades.

Asia�PacificBilateral Relations

A survey of bilateral relations involving themajor Asia�Pacific nations indicates that despitenumerous problems and unresolved issues thatconstitute challenges for the future, the currentcourse is generally toward increased cooperationand reduced tension.

Northeast Asia

How do relations involving medium-sized andsmall Asian states affect the general scene in theregion? It is clear that in Northeast Asia, the po-sition of the Republic of Korea (ROK) is of spe-cial importance. Economically and politically open

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

09:

32 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014



and thus able to interact effectively with a greatvariety of other Asian states, it generally has beena success story.

The strategic alliance between the ROK andthe United States, like that between the UnitedStates and Japan, remains intact. New ROKPresident Roh Woo Hyun, reversing a positiontaken in the past, has strongly proclaimed theimportance of the alliance; he even sent a smallforce to Iraq to signify support. Adjustments tothe Status of Forces Agreement and some reposi-tioning of American bases and forces in Koreashould reduce tension between the populace andthe United States military, despite concern incertain quarters that by moving troops away fromthe DMZ, the United States is increasing the risksand burdens on the ROK. In the recent past, anti-Americanism has increased in South Korea, es-pecially among the younger generation. Incidentslike the accidental deaths of two schoolgirls hitby an American vehicle are partly responsible. Abroader issue has been U.S. policy toward theDPRK and the belief on the part of a certain seg-ment of the South Korean population that hard-line U.S. policies have inhibited South Koreanefforts at rapprochement. How the recent rev-elations of the North�s nuclear policies will af-fect attitudes remains to be seen. In any case,cooperation between the two governments relat-ing to policies toward the DPRK will be a crucialfactor in determining the future course of thisrelationship. Further, in the ROK as elsewhere,nationalism is rising, and the demand to haveSouth Korea�s independence and authority re-spected underlines current feelings.

Meanwhile, ROK policies toward China haveshown major improvement in the last decade.Economic relations, especially with NortheastChina, are a powerful factor in South Korea�seconomic advances, although Kim Dae Jung�seconomic reforms should be given full credit. Asemphasized, China can also play a significant rolein determining the future course of North Ko-rea. Hence ROK leaders hope to keep in closetouch with Beijing.

Russia is seeking to reenter the Korean

scene, encouraging exchanges of high-level visitsinvolving both North and South. At some pointRussian oil and gas pipelines will furnish vitalenergy to the region, greatly strengthening theRussian presence.

In the final analysis, however, Korea�dividedor united�must make a critical decision regard-ing its security. Historically three options existed:maximum isolation, the route from which theappellation �hermit kingdom� derived; efforts toachieve balanced and favorable relations with allneighbors; and alignment with a distant, non-threatening power to protect the country againstpowerful states on or near its borders. The firstoption is no longer available in this age of global-ization, as the crisis in the North illustrates. Thesecond option, culminating in the domination ofone outside power, often failed in the past. Thusthe third option has been pursued by post-1945ROK leaders; but Kim Dae Jung successfully com-bined options two and three, and that may be thefuture course of Korea�s leaders, given the geo-political challenges to be faced.

Mongolia, the remaining state in NortheastAsia, is a country vast in area and sparse in popu-lation. Nearly 40 percent of its people remainnomads, and economic development has beenslow to unfold. China is a principal outside sourceof interaction. Mongolia seeks to maintain bal-anced and favorable relations with its two giantneighbors and hopes that others, including theUnited States and Japan, will become more in-volved. There is safety in numbers.

In surveying the security issues confrontingAsia, one fact stands out: Despite recurrent dis-putes between and among states that on occa-sion have led to violence, full-scale state-to-stateconflict seems unlikely, even among small states,because of its costs. The challenges to regionalsecurity and domestic stability are principallythreefold in nature: the problems spewed out byfailing and faltering states; terrorist activities,both by nonstate and state-supported actors; andthe rising issues labeled human security. Each ofthese is having an impact on the Asia�Pacific re-gion today.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

09:

32 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014



Southeast Asia

No other East Asian nation is in the categoryof the DPRK at present, but some face seriousproblems affecting their internal unity andstrength. Among the important nations of South-east Asia, Indonesia continues to face multipleproblems. Separatism and religious strife afflictportions of the nation, and economic developmentis problematic. Indonesia�s recent weakness,along with that of several other states, has ad-versely affected ASEAN. Myanmar is anotherfaltering state, beset for decades by ethnic con-flicts and possessing leaders unable or unwillingto undertake necessary reforms. The recent ten-sions on the Myanmar�Thai border and betweenCambodia and Thailand are testimonies to thefragility of border regions in this part of the world.Laos and, to some extent, Cambodia remain frag-ile societies, beset by multiple internal problems.All of these states illustrate the impact that prob-lems labeled domestic can have on the regionaround them. Moreover, the economic and politi-cal reforms necessary to provide greater domes-tic stability and a positive outreach will not comequickly or easily. In-state upheavals have notended.

Terrorism

Terrorism employed by groups in rebellion isboth a product of and a contributor to domesticproblems. In some cases, supported or inspiredby outside forces, terrorism has grown in partsof East Asia as well as in South Asia in recentyears. To be sure, the use of the term �terrorist�is subject to debate. One person�s terrorist is an-other person�s �freedom fighter,� and state lead-ers have also been labeled terrorists in some in-stances.

Separatist issues are relatively modest inNortheast Asia, as are deep religious cleavages.China has a large number of ethnic minorities,but they form only 8 to 9 percent of the total popu-lation. In the far west, the Uighur and Kazakh

people have created disturbances on occasion, ashave the Tibetans. The current situation, how-ever, is relatively quiet.

In Southeast Asia, terrorism has been a fargreater problem. In Myanmar the issues are pri-marily ethnic, although religious colorationmarks some instances. In Indonesia ethnic andreligious cleavages have coexisted along withstrong regionalism, such as in Aceh. Althoughthe great majority of Indonesian Muslims aremoderate, extremist elements exist, and conflicthas been troublesome in certain areas. Similarly,in the southern Philippines, conflict has beenendemic.

There is every reason to believe that theseproblems will continue to create domestic insta-bility and, in turn, affect the regional atmosphere.Almost 60 years after independence was achievedfollowing long imperialist rule, few, if any, fullyintegrated states exist in Southeast Asia. Simi-larly, certain South Pacific states, newly formed,are in precarious shape.

Human Security

Looking ahead, however, the most seriousproblems affecting Asia�Pacific security are likelyto be those of human security�problems relat-ing to resources, environment, and population.A recent international conference held in Japanto explore the issue of water, although lacking inconcrete results, testifies to a growing recogni-tion of one critical issue. Thousands of acres ofland in China are becoming desert each year as aresult of water shortage, and agricultural cropsare in jeopardy in many areas. Nor is this simplya problem for China. It is emerging as a problemthroughout the region�and the world. Energyis another growing scarcity. Pollution, moreover,is affecting the health of countless Asians, as dustand smoke sweep over vast areas, including someof the most populous centers. Although such prob-lems may have domestic roots, none of them canbe defined as merely domestic. Without excep-tion, they have regional and global consequences.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

09:

32 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014



Similarly, the problem of aging has begun toexert a serious effect on such societies as Japan.In two decades one-quarter of the Japanese popu-lation will be 60 years of age or older, with agingtaking place at an accelerating rate as birth ratesdecline. A huge aged population is emerging inChina, and population-control policies, justifiablefrom an economic standpoint, are creating a gen-der imbalance, with males predominating. Migra-tion is not only from rural to urban China butalso across China�s borders, to the concern ofmany neighbors.

By the middle of the twenty-first century, is-sues related to human security are likely to bethe most serious issues confronting nations, andAsia�Pacific, given its population trends and re-source needs, may be the most critical regionwhere these issues will be faced. It is clear theycannot be resolved solely at the national level.One advantage in using multilateral approacheslies in the fact that in most cases nations have acommon interest in finding appropriate ap-proaches that can serve the region as well as theindividual country. Yet serious attention to theseproblems has barely begun to take shape in theform of international and regional commitments.

In sum, the nature of challenges to a nation�ssecurity is changing, although traditional threatshave not completely disappeared. When the evolv-ing nature of security problems is combined withthe so-called revolution in military affairs, we are

certain to witness many alterations in the for-eign policies of every Asia�Pacific nation and inthe techniques employed to achieve desired ob-jectives. Multilateralism will grow in importance,despite the difficulties in improving its results.National boundaries will be increasingly blurredwith respect to many critical issues, althoughnationalism will remain a potent force, and afierce defense of national sovereignty will con-tinue. Rapid changes in the relative power of vari-ous nations and regional groups will add to thecomplexity, requiring swift adjustments. Somenew regional bodies, such as a Northeast AsiaSecurity Organization, may emerge. In any case,many multilateral bodies�new and old�will beincreasingly devoted to new issues. Bilateralism,moreover, will remain important, as will certainsecurity alliances.

Ours is a difficult era, a complex era, but apromising era as the people and states of our globeare forced into new, more in-depth interactionswith one another.

About the Author

Robert A. Scalapino, a member of theNCAFP�s Roundtable on U.S.�China�TaiwanRelations, is Robson Research Professor of Gov-ernment Emeritus at the University of Califor-nia, Berkeley.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f A

uckl

and

Lib

rary

] at

09:

32 0

5 D

ecem

ber

2014

challenges and opportunities in the asia-pacific region

Documents