Comments on: Special Editorial – What Prime Minister Rudd’s Asia Pacific Community Conference delivered http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/12/07/special-editorial-what-prime-minister-rudds-asia-pacific-community-conference-delivered/ Economics, Politics and Public Policy in East Asia and the Pacific Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:23:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2 By: Benjamin Reillyhttp://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/12/07/special-editorial-what-prime-minister-rudds-asia-pacific-community-conference-delivered/comment-page-1/#comment-83029 Benjamin Reilly Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:11:51 +0000 http://www.eastasiaforum.org/?p=8310#comment-83029 This summary of the Sydney meeting highlights what has always been a key issue for East Asian regionalism: the position of the United States. It seems that the dynamic on this issue is pretty clear: China and other Asian powers will not allow a regional body with serious responsibilities for political/security issues with the US as a member. This seemingly puts Australia in a difficult position - or does it? Here in Washington, the debate over the past month has played out very much in Australia's favour. American commentators have highlighted the fact that there are several contending models, and underlined especially the contrast between the new Japanese/Hatayama proposal (which excludes the US) and the Australian/Rudd model (in which the US is in). This has highlighted Australia's commitment to the US at a time when the other dependent Asia-Pacific ally, Japan, seems to be heading in a new, more independent direction. I agree with Peter's observation that the end choice for Australia will probably be inclusion in an EAS-like body with no US participation, or exclusion all together. If and when this happens, Australia will of course opt to join rather than stand on the sidelines. In the meantime, however, we can have our cake and eat it ... for a while. This summary of the Sydney meeting highlights what has always been a key issue for East Asian regionalism: the position of the United States. It seems that the dynamic on this issue is pretty clear: China and other Asian powers will not allow a regional body with serious responsibilities for political/security issues with the US as a member. This seemingly puts Australia in a difficult position – or does it?

Here in Washington, the debate over the past month has played out very much in Australia’s favour. American commentators have highlighted the fact that there are several contending models, and underlined especially the contrast between the new Japanese/Hatayama proposal (which excludes the US) and the Australian/Rudd model (in which the US is in). This has highlighted Australia’s commitment to the US at a time when the other dependent Asia-Pacific ally, Japan, seems to be heading in a new, more independent direction.

I agree with Peter’s observation that the end choice for Australia will probably be inclusion in an EAS-like body with no US participation, or exclusion all together. If and when this happens, Australia will of course opt to join rather than stand on the sidelines. In the meantime, however, we can have our cake and eat it … for a while.

]]>