New Core Asian Realiagnment

The Bush Administration has been brilliant in building good relations with the New Core of Asia — countries like India and China. Indeed, this success is far more important over the long term than failures anywhere else in the world. We’ve become so accustmed to good news from the Asian New Core that it’s easy for it to fall between the cracks. So here are two stories with brief descriptions:

Indian government wins confidence vote
The Indo-American Nuclear Pact will not only allow nuclear technology to be shared among the two greatest democracies in the world: it also essentially recognizes India as a genuine nuclear power. The left in both countries oppose this… in India because their Left is anti-American, in America because our Left is anti-Bush. Fortunately, India’s government passed a confidence motion, which clears the way for New Dehli ratifying the agreement. Now as long as America’s Congress agrees, it is smooth sailing.

China and Russia’s Geographic Divide
Historically, Russia has been a west-Asian state with only marginal influence on European affairs. When Peter I and other Russian autocrats changed this, Europe began suffering from an infusion of Russian ideals, customs, and habits. Fortunately, the Russian state only exists as long as it has wealth to leach off of, and naturally runs itself down. Traditioanlyl Russia would reinvigorate itself through aggressive wars, though nuclear weapons appear to prevent this from happening against. Thus, Russia slowly falls back into its old role as a west-Asian state, a supplier for Chinese needs with as much freedom of movement as, say, Kazakhstan.

The Rise of India and China, along with the decline of Russia, may be the greatest story of the late 20th and early 21st century. And it’s a very happy story.

3 thoughts on “New Core Asian Realiagnment”

  1. It also means the NPT regime needs a major renegotiation, or we can just write it off as past its time. Maybe the US should promote a policy that only democracies can have nuclear weapons? It fits the “Commonwealth of Democracies” idea. There’s a lot of leeway in who you can label a democracy, so we can include whatever nuclear powers whatever nuclear powers the commonwealth chooses–sort of like letting Russia in the G-8 when it doesn’t really deserve it.

    Perhaps it’s time to accept that the nonproliferation system is pretty much damaged beyond repair. From the start it was based on a division of the world into two classes of states, with a compact between them Neither of those points are entirely valid now.

  2. It also means the NPT regime needs a major renegotiation, or we can just write it off as past its time. Maybe the US should promote a policy that only democracies can have nuclear weapons? It fits the “Commonwealth of Democracies” idea. There’s a lot of leeway in who you can label a democracy, so we can include whatever nuclear powers the commonwealth chooses–sort of like letting Russia in the G-8 when it doesn’t really deserve it.

    Perhaps it’s time to accept that the nonproliferation system is pretty much damaged beyond repair. From the start it was based on a division of the world into two classes of states, with a compact between them Neither of those points are entirely valid now.

  3. Considering the immature and disruptive Russian style of rent-seeking [1], the quicker Moscow is submitted to the market discipline of Beijing, the better!

    McCain has promoted a League of Democracies, Obama wants to go it alone on economics (renegotiating NAFTA, opposing the trade deals with Colombia and Korea, and so on). The best approach may just be to continue our incrementalism, as the globalized world we’ve been creating for a long time becomes larger… easy to get in, hard to overthrow.

    [1] http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/23/europe/letter.php

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *