1.3) International System in Asia: A Balance-of-Power (BoP) Regime

There has been some serious thinking going on regarding the regional order i.e NWO at the regional level, in Asia. The 34th annual conference of London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS) held at Seoul, South Korea from 9th to 12th Sept 1992 deliberated on the theme: Asia's international role in post-Cold War Era.28 Also, some important papers relating to this theme have come up from the institute in recent years.29 There have been some visible developments on the ground as well--- for example, the Pacific Alliance becoming more important than the Atlantic one (cf.1.1.4.1 above). What seems to be fairly clear now is that the strategists of the NWO want a BoP regime to come up in Asia. It will be an international system comprising of 'five major powers and several important middle powers.'30 The five major powers proposed include besides U.S, Russia, India, China and Japan. Among the middle powers Thailand, Vietnam, Taiwan and Koreas may become the active players in the international system.31

1.3.1) BoP-- What it really means

BoP is a mechanism by which equilibrium is achieved between more than one almost equal and competing powers. As such it is basically about 'stability'.32 Western political scientists would like us to entertain very high images of the BoP concept, but they are no more than illusions. Britain is credited with being the originator of the concept and its successful practitioner in the last century. But that makes it more easy to understand that the BoP mechanism is a highly exploitative strategy cleverly employed by colonial powers for their domination. Let us note some points briefly regarding the BoP and this regime in Asia. The BoP system thrives on exploiting the mutual fears of the equal or almost equal powers. Thus, for example, in the above mentioned BoP system in Asia U.S will exploit the mutual fears of various competing powers and acting as the balancer (being strongest amongst all the players) will enjoy the ultimate power. Also it legitimizes the power ambitions of such greedy powers as for example India or Russia, by conferring on them the major power status. The BoP order takes as its basis someone's being major and someone's being minor. Therefore, any attempt by a 'minor' power, for example, Pakistan, seeking parity with a 'major' power, for example, India, is regarded as threatening the order and hence a destabilising attempt. And, since, BoP regime 'works best, when it keeps dissatisfaction below the level at which the aggrieved party will seek to overthrow the international order' 33, it seeks to deliberately block the change that could bring justice to the aggrieved party. The last point but not the least in importance is that BoP--- the concept as well as operation--- is based primarily on military power.

1.3.2) Objectives

The international system in Asia is designed with the same two objectives mentioned earlier: unbridled economic growth; securing the region from Islam, i.e regional security.

1.3.3) U.S Interest in Multi-Polar BoP System

A multipolar Asian BoP is the 'best context for the protection of U.S interests in twenty-first century Asia.'34 Among the U.S interests is, for example, 'freedom of the high seas, including the important sea routes through south-east Asia'35, but the chief interest which overrides every other is to maintain a powerful hegemonic role in the region. The five-power BoP regime is the best bet for it. Reasons:

• a) China is an obsession with Western strategic mind and is regarded as capable of throwing a challenge to U.S's role in the region. BoP system is often a way of ganging up against someone who is capable of hegemony, but has got to be deprived of it. Through five power BoP regime U.S sees a sure method of denying China any chance of becoming predominant in the region. India which has always been seen as a counterweight against china, is, however, 'unlikely in itself', ever to balance it. On the other hand, in the five-sided BoP system there are sufficient major players to ensure that a regional hegemon does not emerge.36
• b) With the nations of comparable power vying for influence with each other the security situation becomes fluid. The fluidity of security environment which necessarily develops in a BoP regime, suits best the U.S's interest in Asia-Pacific or the broader Asian region or for that matter any other region. Since, as mentioned earlier, BoP is based primarily on military power, U.S being militarily the most powerful, it 'only can ensure that dangerous power asymmetries do not emerge'37. Thus in such a situation of fluidity Henry Kissinger sees U.S attitude as a 'wild card', as according to him U.S 'has the capacity--- though not necessarily the philosophy--- to function in much the same way that Great Britain did in maintaining the European BoP until the two world wars of the twentieth century.'38

1.3.4) Indications of the Emerging Regional Order

One may argue that the five power BoP system we have been talking about, is not visible anywhere. Neither in a lose informal way nor in the form of an institution. India, China, Russia, Japan and U.S do not constitute some sort of a formal or informal concert system. So what is this regional order we are talking about? The answer to that is, that we are basically talking about the emergence of a regional order, and we talk on the basis of a logic and very definite and clear indications.

Logic: Orders emerge and take shape gradually. Also not all the dimensions of an order take equal time to emerge in a definite shape. Thus, for example, the NWO at global and regional levels is more visible in terms of new economic realities, alliances, changes but its military-strategic dimension which will be visible through a network of multilateral and bilateral security relationships, will take some relatively longer time to take shape and emerge.39 So the economic realities and socio-cultural changes that are under way at present place us in a position to say what kind of an order in military-strategic terms is going to come up in future.

Indications: As to the indications, two important points deserve mention. First, this regional order alone provides a context in which interests of the predominant powers of NWO particularly U.S remain secure. It has to be emphasised, that predominance is the last thing that U.S- the post-45 predominant power- will be ready to part with. If Japan has outstripped U.S in economic field, that does not mean a smooth transition of predominance from U.S to Japan or Asia-Pacific as a whole. U.S is in no doubt on the road to decline but upto its last breath it will continue devising newer and newer schemes to save its 'leadership'. Through the five power BoP, U.S is containing not only China (cf. 1.3.3) but virtually everyone (Japan, Russia, India) by the other or others. This is the only and the most effective mechanism through which U.S can remain engaged in Asia with a self-imposed leadership role and there should be no doubt that U.S is determined not to give up this engagement.40 So, this is an indication that an order of this pattern will be sought to be promoted because this alone is compatible with U.S interests. The other indication is that with the exception of India (to the discussion of which we will turn in the next section), all the three Asian players in the regional order under discussion i.e Russia, China and Japan are already active players in the global order and integrated into the international system at the global level. China and Russia are U.N security council members. Japan and Russia- the latter partially- are the members of G-7. Also, all of them- India included 'share' the security concerns of the NWO, and have demonstrated their will and enthusiasm to cooperate with each other in maintaining regional security and stability41 i.e in fighting Islam. Moreover, all of them i.e Russia, China, Japan and India are either already 'market democracies' or are on the way to join 'the community of market democracies'(cf.1.2.2). All the above things taken together, it becomes clear that if a regional order in Asia has got to be put in place, they i.e Russia, China, Japan and India, are the 'best' available stuff with which to proceed. And if the shape and form of this order has to be subservient to the interests of the predominant powers in the NWO, which it has got to be, than what else than a BoP regime can be the 'best' thing to come up. Also, this should be kept in mind that although a five-power BoP is not visible at the moment, yet U.S-Japanese alliance is already in place and this is going to be the 'key strategic alignment'42 around which a more broad-based regional order, as, for example, the five-power BoP regime will evolve. So a visible infrastructure is already there; there is a sound logic and there are important indications. All this makes the proposition that a multipolar BoP regime is going to emerge in Asia, a sensible one.