Is Asia Really Rising? Beyond viewpoints, ability, and interest, will another

vision of the future surface instead?

Introduction While sitting in our “Foundations of the World Order” class the other day, discussion

turned to this paper, which was to answer the question: What will Asia’s rise mean for

the U.S. position in the world? One of the students asked if he could focus his paper on

just certain countries in Asia, a good question because we had just finished reading a

book called How Asia Works: Success and Failure in the World’s Most Dynamic

Region. In it, the author takes us, like a swift and agile rickshaw runner who knows his

way through crowded streets, from soil to steel to strategies. And in so doing, he

carries us down a road that unravels the reasons why some Asian countries succeeded

while others failed. Clearly, I could see why this student was interested in just focusing

on those countries who truly have risen.

What is interesting is that the student who asked the question also happens to be of

Asian descent and, in fact, grew up in South Korea, one of Asia’s economic success

stories. Though this had not been my first thought, in light of his background, it made

even more sense to me that he should ask it . For someone like me, it is more natural to

see Asia as a whole rather than as a sum of its parts; for someone like him, it is more

natural to see the individual components that comprise it. I don’t know if asking him to

analyze Asia as a whole is akin to me analyzing the entire Western Hemisphere as a

whole, but if it is, I can see the difficulty. While the U.S., Canada, Mexico, and even

some countries in South America may, collectively, be seen as having achieved

economic success during its history, can the same be said of Central America? Is the

West’s Central America the East’s Southeast Asia?

In sociology, we talk about the fringes of society and how it is inevitable that society

will always have those fringes; in fact, they help us define what is considered “normal.”

Is it also then true that economies will always have its fringes? Whether it does or does

not, I suppose the saying, “A rising tide lifts all boats” lifts some boats higher than

others and Joe Studwell would say this is due, in part, to the flexibility or inflexibility

of a policy, but perhaps some are trying to eradicate the world of economic failure

through policy alone. What if we must live with the reality that some economies will

rise while others stagnate or decline, regardless of how good or flexible a policy is?

Are we wasting our time trying to fix a problem that will always be with us? Might it

be true that for some countries to succeed, others must fail?

The Parts vs. the Whole As I read Somebody Else’s Century: East and West in a Post-Western World, a socio-

psychological and humanistic treatise in three essays about how Western technology

was adopted by the East, I often thought about how others might think about Patrick

Smith’s conclusions on various groups covered in the book. I did so particularly after

reading “In our time, to see Asia as one is considered something uncomprehending

Westerners do” (p. 42). I found this comment ironic because, in the introduction to this

book, Smith does exactly the same thing to the West. He writes, “The remote past is

not so remote as we Westerners assume because of the way we imagine our own past

has unrolled – momentously, discontinuously, often abruptly. ‘Its history’ cannot have

in Asia the dismissive ring it has for Americans” (p. 13). Despite his Western

background, Smith sees the West as one. And if you were to grow wings like a bird and

fly through the thoughts conveyed in this book, you would fly away with the notion that

Asia also sees the West as one.

As I came to this conclusion, I asked myself, Is that really such a bad thing to do – see

something as a whole rather than its individual parts? Do we see a bird? Or do we see

each individual feather? And are either of those visions better than the other? Is it

better to see the parts first? Or better to see the whole first? An even bigger question

is this one: Without the restrictions an authoritarian government or some similar

structure1 would impose upon its people, “Are we even capable of seeing the parts

without the backdrop of the whole?” In a free society, aren’t we always conscious and

knowing of the whole?

In fact, I would argue that, in a free society, it is human nature to see foreign entities in

a larger category before it sees its individual parts. We don’t see things as a broken up

puzzle. We see things as the complete puzzle and then, when we become more familiar

with the whole, we can see the individual parts that make it up. From the readings, it

appears that others are all too ready to categorize the West as a single entity with

singular, all-encompassing, simple descriptions. If you were to read Smith and nothing

else, you’d think that the West couldn’t possibly be as layered in its complexity as

the East.

Regardless, even if we could just see the individual parts of a whole, wouldn’t that limit

our ability to understand a bigger picture? After all, though an individual segment of

something may be representative of a whole, history can show us examples of when it

has not been representative. When we intentionally attempt to study an evenly

distributed cross-section of a whole we sometimes find that it isn’t. Even the best

attempts to do this usually include an acknowledged error margin of three percent.

To illustrate this further, have you really understood an entire book when you’ve only

read one excerpt from it? Even if you read a summary of the entire book, you really

cannot say you’ve understood the book. It’s akin to trying to understand The Art of

War from one sentence … even a good one like “Energy may be likened to the bending

of a crossbow; decision, to the releasing of the trigger,”2 or “There are not more than

1 I write “similar structure” here because certain organizations even in those countries most would consider “free societies” sometimes have

such a monopoly on information that the view from which the vast majority are perched is as limiting as having only a piece or two of a larger jigsaw puzzle. 2 Sun Tzu, The Art of War. Circa 500 B.C. Ed. James Clavell. New York: Bantam Doubleday Dell-Delta, 1983, p. 22. Retrieved November 23, 2014 from http://books.google.com/books?id=hUrYp6lon-

five primary colors, yet in combination they produce more hues than can ever be seen,”3

or even one as oft-repeated, well-known, and encompassing as “If you know the enemy

and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.”4 To truly

understand The Art of War, each word of it must be read.

In this same vein, policies must be read in full to be completely understood. Even

recent history in places other than Asia can show us what can happen when a policy is

not fully understood. When a policy reveals itself to be a vision that the stakeholders

no longer recognize or see the benefits of, backlash of unforeseen magnitude and

breadth might be the result.

Is Asia Really Rising? From the very first book we read for “Foundations,” (a book titled Why the West Rules

– for Now), and even before the reading of it, I have mentally bought into this idea that

Asia’s power is waxing while the West’s is waning. And until this morning, I never

thought to question it. Within a few minutes of waking on this dreary, rainy Sunday,

however, I saw something that did. I was watching CNN’S Fareed Zakaria on his show

GPS5, which CNN describes as a “comprehensive look at policies shaping our world .”

6

When I began watching, Zakaria was interviewing Andrew Roberts author of Napoleon,

who, after Jesus and Lincoln, is the most written about figure in history. In fact,

according to Zakaria, more books have been written about him than days since his

death.7 Napoleon is newsworthy of late because someone has discovered that he wasn’t

as short as everyone previously thought him to be and I am guessing that this new book

on Napoleon by Roberts shows us a side (or should I say, a few more inches?) none of

the other books has revealed to us … if you can believe it. During this interview with

Roberts, Zakaria mentions the following famous quote by the French general and

statesman: “China is a sleeping giant. Let her sleep, for when she wakes she will move

the world.”

Why is any of this important? Well, for starters, it has dawned on me that this notion of

China’s “awakening” has been with us for a very long time and if Napoleon is as widely

read as he is published, then quite a few people are at least familiar with his prediction

for China. However, whether or not she has fully woken from her slumber or has only

made her first yawn is debatable.

Will China, or Asia for that matter, really move the world? China’s rise to super power

status has had its challenges. Its efforts to tap into the resources of Latin America and

Africa, for example, seem to have hit some stumbling blocks along the way. As early

as 1992, China has been looking to foreign shores for ways to increase her trading

MC&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22the+art+of+war%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lTVyVOCJN8rxiAKNyYHoBQ&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22the%20art%20of%20war%22&f=false. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid., p. 18. 5 GPS, as used here, is an acronym for CNN’s flagship foreign affairs show hosted by Fareed Zakaria which airs on Sundays. The full name of the show is Global Public Square. 6 CNN Programming Schedule. Sunday, November 23, 2014. Cable News Network. Retrieved November 23, 2014 from http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/. 7 GPS. Cable News Network. November 23, 2014. Television.

capacity. While Latin America seems to be saying to China, “Whoa, not so fast ,”

Africa seems to be saying, “We’ll take your money.” You won’t have to look very hard

to see articles that reveal how some Latin Americans feel about China’s newfound

interest in their region. In a word, I suppose it could be summed up as “exploitation.”

As for Africa, I didn’t see as many articles expressing a general African disapproval of

Chinese investment, but there are other issues to consider. In a New York Times article

a contributing op-ed author wrote this:

Africans are often reminded that Malaysia and Singapore had roughly the same

G.D.P. 40 years ago as Kenya and Ghana have today. What is less often noted

is that the Asian economic miracle was achieved by market-savvy rulers who

were nonetheless authoritarian in every sense. The counterargument is that

Africans will secure equitable economic growth only by replacing kleptocratic,

power-hungry rulers with the checks and balances that democratic

systems provide.8

Without the resources of either of those countries, China, and the rest of Asia may be

subject to global economic downturns as much as the rest of the world.

Furthermore, does China really want to be the world’s superpower? Does China and the

rest of the Asian countries realize what a thankless job it is? It seems to be a common

theme, worldwide, that those who have not been economically successful begin to b uild

hatred and resentment for those who have. But that isn’t all. For years the U.S. has

been the world’s police, even with a conglomerate of nations such as NATO, the world

looks to the U.S. when turmoil strikes in this world. If China assumes the pos ition of

the world’s superpower, will it also then take on the role of super protector? Or will it

be expected that the U.S. continue to do so? What global policies might weaken the

U.S. to the point that it can no longer serve as the world’s police force? And is China

prepared to assume that responsibility?

All of that may provide some food for thought, but I still haven’t explained why

Zakaria’s Sunday show made me rethink this notion of Asia’s rise to power. It was

what he showcased at the end of his book segment that caused me to suspend my

spoonful of cereal mid-air. Instead of showing us yet another book about the rise of

China, he presented one called The Accidental Superpower: The Next Generation of

American Preeminence and the Coming Global Disorder. I have yet to read the book

and, as I’ve addressed in this paper, you can’t know the contents of a book from a title,

a sentence, or even a summary, but I have to admit it was refreshing to see a book that

wasn’t about the rise of Asia.

Coincidentally, The Accidental Superpower, at least based off of the cursory glance of a

summary I read of it, seems to suggest that, like Ian Morris in Why the West Rules for

Now, geography has a large part to play in what might turn out to be, in reality, the

“new world order” and one where China is not the global hegemon so many others are

predicting it will be.

8 Murithi Mutiga, “Africa and the Chinese Way,” December 15, 2013. Retrieved November 25, 2014 from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/16/opinion/mutiga-africa-and-the-chinese-way.html?pagewanted=2

Conclusion Earlier I contemplated various aspects of how we view those things that are foreign to

us – do we see the parts or the whole and how important is it to see something in its

entirety? For example, when we sit down to a jigsaw puzzle, does it help if we know

what the full picture looks like? It most certainly does. Unlike a jigsaw puzzle,

however, we may not always know what the individual puzzle pieces of a society will

turn out to be, but few, if any, try to move the pieces without having some plan, some

vision of what it will look like in the end.

The thing is, if our vision begins to disintegrate, will the plans that were created for it

pigeonhole us into disaster and despair? Or are the plans created flexible enough to

morph into something that will either restore our vision or create something even better

than we had imagined? When we think about future policies we might craft, whether

they be for the East or the West, China or the U.S., we might want to think about not

just our final vision, but our exit plan, in the form of a flexible policy, that will allow us

to bail out of it if needed. That way, whether or not the status quo remains or Asia

takes the helm, we can ensure that we ride the tide to a successful destination for all.