Locking Uncle Sam out of Asia (not invited to summit).

[rodeodance]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20051208/ts_csm/eastasia;_ylt=AsLS2S8RH4T7MuRWi7Sg0Bas0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3b2NibDltBHNlYwM3MTY-
Locking Uncle Sam out of Asia

The Monitor's View Thu Dec 8, 3:00 AM ET

Big-power summits have had little effect since the end of the cold war. But in Asia, where old rivalries are still tense, their potential is still huge. On Monday, 16 leaders hold the first Asia-wide summit. The results may be few, but note: The region's biggest military and economic player, the US, wasn't invited.

America's staunchest allies in the region, such as Japan and Australia, were willing to exclude their cross-Pacific partner in helping form this new club, while assuring Washington that nothing untoward was intended by it.

They could hardly pass up joining a party hosted by 10 Southeast Asian nations that includes the world's most populous countries, China and India, whose economies are booming.

From its self-interest, India sees this summit in Malaysia as the seed for an East Asian Free Trade Area, like the early
European Union. This vision is possible as many more Asian nations base their economies less on exports to America and more on business with each other. China, for instance, recently replaced the US as Japan's biggest trade partner. In 2003, Asia's share of exports within the region was 54 percent, close to that between the EU nations........

[Yavin4]

1. That Title Confused Me For A Minute

I didn't know if the actual title was "Locking..." or the DU Moderators were Locking.

I'm so confused.

[rodeodance]

2. bush preoccupied with Irag says the article.

....But the potential of these summits still poses a challenge to the US. They send a signal that America's Asian allies may no longer rely on it to be the regional broker and benign, big influence. The Bush administration, preoccupied with Iraq, has had a short attention span with Asia. It often avoids chances to boost ties, and focuses more on China's emerging military than its subtle diplomacy.

[montanacowboy]

3. How many years before we are a third world country?

China and India will be the world superpowers and we will be begging for their crumbs

[VegasWolf]

4. Who needs the second rate US? Besides, Bush would just bitch and

throw tantrums like he did at the UN and in South America. Forward moving countries don't need the US.

[MasonJar]

5. The Kyoto committee in Canada should not have asked us there

either; we have done nothing but try to undermine the process. Like father, like son. Sr. did the same thing at the original Kyoto Conference.

[xchrom]

6. lol -- the world's only superpower?

i think this summit officially makes this the post-pnac world.

wow -- that didn't last long.

[BattyDem]

7. Junior doesn't play well with others, so why invite him?

:eyes:

[elsiesummers]

8. Silly article premise: US is not Asian, not ASEAN, should not be there.

This article makes no sense to me. If this was a situation where England, France, and Germany were invited and in attendance, the article premise, that the US was snubbed or overlooked, would be logical.

But it seems clearly evident that the basis for the conference is regional and geographical, and of course we shouldn't have been invited since we aren't remotely Asian.

Would there be an ASEAN movement at all if GW were not president since 2000? Maybe it wouldn't be as strong because the US wouldn't have as out of control of a Current Account Deficit and Trade Deficit.

But the idea that the US should be there is sorta nutty, IMO. It's like suggesting that China and England be invited to a conference of the Americas, or have a table at NAFTA negotiations.

I do think the ASEAN group and this summit is interesting, as I've read a lot of economic speculation about a potential Asian region super-currency, akin to the Euro, as an eventual possible outcome of the future summits of this group. If that were to ever happen the dollar would lose it's present status as the new gold and just be another fiat currency.

Also wonder whether a Pan-Asian currency could ever come about (would be a lot of hurdles there), since (1) China would have to give up the Asian competitive devaluation game which causes disinflation and puts China in a winning position with respect to other Asian nations, (2) since the yen is considered one of the three major currencies and can't see the benefit to the Japanese in reneging that status, and (3) since NZ and Australia have a tendency toward a tight currency high interest rate policy and inflation rather than disinflation, meaning that economically they would lose monetary control if a part of a larger Asian regional currency.

Anyway, there's a lot to think about regarding the potential future ascendance of Asia as a unified regional economic power, but US not participating should not be regarded as relevant.

[BillZBubb]

9. Your points aren't very convincing.

Germany, France, and Great Britain have virtually no military power in Asia. They don't share the Pacific Ocean. They are not even very large trading partners.

The US has a large military presence in Asia and the Pacific. We are THE major trading partner.

The fact that we were not asked to participate is clearly a message that Bush has poisoned the well for any conferences where people actually want to get things done.

[Vidar]

10. We never invited the neighborhood bully to ball games. Same principle.

[leesa]

11. This is rich...the ENTIRE reason we did 9-11 and invaded Afghanistan was

to corner the Asian energy market and we are now officially LOCKED OUT!!

The whole reason for faking the OBL 9-11 attack was to establish the trans-Afghanistan pipeline and we were trumped by China and Russia....tooo funny...in a tragic sort of way , of course!