Remarks by Vice President Joe Biden on Asia-Pacific policy
George Washington University
Washington, D.C. July 18, 2013
Today I want to talk to you about
why and how we are pursuing our announced policy of elevated engagement in the
Asia-Pacific, and where I believe -- we believe -- that policy is headed.
When President Obama and I came
to office, to state the obvious, we inherited two wars. And it was costing us in blood and treasure
and time. And we knew we had to end both
those wars responsibly. We’ve done that
in Iraq, and we’re doing that as I speak in Afghanistan. We’ll obviously continue to be engaged in
both places. And of course we’ll
continue to take the fight to Al Qaeda and its affiliates there or wherever
they are. But winding down those wars
has allowed us to turn to the opportunities that reflect the realities of a
fast-changing world.
We ask ourselves two things in
the review of how to proceed: Where
should we focus additional attention and resources that would enable us to
create greater opportunity at home and generate greater growth -- economic
growth -- around the world? And where
must we make strategic investments that are required to enhance not only our
security but global stability?
Both -- I say to the ambassadors
-- both pointed to the Asia-Pacific.
In terms of economics, the
Asia-Pacific region —- stretching from India to the Pacific nations of the
Americas -— is home to a middle class of about a billion people. Some of the fastest growing growth rates in
the world are within that region.
Emerging markets whose choices will shape the character of the entire
global economy are within that purview.
So we reached out. We reached out to deepen economic ties and
promote open markets and a rule-based competition for the 21st century.
We finished a free-trade
agreement with South Korea, as well as deals with Panama and Colombia. We launched negotiations on a new
Trans-Pacific Partnership that will connect diverse -- economies as diverse as
Singapore and Peru. We’ve worked toward
a more constructive economic relationship with China, including through the
Strategic and Economic Dialogue. And I
opened the fifth round of that dialogue just last week.
In terms of security, we
undertook a major strategic review at the Defense Department and with our
security personnel on how to assess how our global posture and where do we need
to evolve to match the moment.
In the Asia-Pacific, we saw a region of
remarkable promise, but also genuine uncertainty and political risk. Many nations have experienced rapid economic
transformation that has fundamentally created a new dynamic: rising ambitions and rising tensions. But the rules and norms that could provide
predictability to deal with both those changes, the order needed remained
incomplete.
We are focused on the risks of
disruptions of commerce, proliferation, human disasters, conflict between
nations and the persistent threat posed by North Korea.
So we set about doing several
things: first of all, strengthening our
alliances; deepening security partnerships and investing like never before in
regional institutions to help manage disputes peacefully.
President Obama adopted a new
Defense Strategic Guidance endorsed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff after months
of study that elevates our focus in the Asia-Pacific area.
And economically and
strategically it’s clear why the United States had to rebalance -- to direct
more resources and attention toward the Asia-Pacific region.
Because imagine what can happen
if growing Asia-Pacific middle classes help lift the global economy even more
than they already are; if nations reject the temptations of zero-sum thinking
and rise peacefully together; if progress toward greater rights and freedoms
proves that no country has to make a choice between democracy and development,
which is a false choice.
Let me put it slightly
differently: Just imagine what will
happen if those things don’t come to pass.
We’ll all be in a world of trouble.
So we’re all in, this administration.
Absolutely committed to this rebalance.
The President is absolutely committed, and so am I. And so is our entire national security and
economic teams.
And you don’t need to look any
further than my own recent engagement to understand the breadth and scope of
the rebalance. I’m traveling to India
next week. Twenty, even 10 years ago,
some might have suggested that India be left out of discussions about the
Asia-Pacific.
One of the reasons why President
Obama called our relationship with India “a defining partnership of the century
ahead” is that India is increasingly looking east as a force for security and
growth in Southeast Asia and beyond.
To us that's welcome news. We encourage it. We welcome India’s engagement in the region,
and we welcome its efforts to develop new trade and transportation links by
land and by sea in the area.
I’ll also visit Singapore, a
country of 5 million people that has become the 17th-largest economy in the
world, a partner in the TPP and an important player in Southeast Asia and
beyond.
The reasons President Obama has
put particular focus on Southeast Asia:
ASEAN now represents a $2 trillion economy of 600 million people. There is more American investment in
Southeast Asia than in China. Southeast
Asian nations like Singapore and Indonesia have become important partners on
everything from counter-proliferation to counter-piracy. That’s why I’m going to Singapore.
And, of course, at the core of
our strategy in the region are our alliances:
Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and Thailand.
Across the board in these
alliances, we’re at a high water mark in terms of cooperation between our
leaders -- both military and political -- and the support of our people.
Closer to home, our intensified
engagement within the Western Hemisphere is also part —- not just parallel to
-– our overall rebalancing policy.
You see that very concretely in
the Trans-Pacific Partnership which includes five countries in the Western
Hemisphere. You can also see it in the
initiatives within the Hemisphere like the Alliance for the Pacific -- a new
group of free-market-oriented countries that are integrating their economies
and looking west for trade and investment.
As I said in a speech not long
ago, for the first time, at least the first time I can remember, I believe the
first time in history, it’s possible -- it’s not Pollyannaish -- to envision an
America -- an Americas that is middle class, secure and democratic from
northern Canada to the tip of Chile and everything in between. There’s much work to be done, but that is
within reach.
That kind of Americas connected
economically, strategically and through common values can make a great
contribution to a more prosperous and secure Pacific.
That’s one of the reasons why
President Obama recently visited Mexico and Costa Rica. That’s why I was recently in Colombia,
Thailand [sic] and Brazil in May and will return to the region this fall. So what does all this add up to?
Our goal is to help tie
Asia-Pacific nations together –- from India to the Americas -— through strong
alliances, institutions and partnerships.
For the past 60 years, the
security we provided has enabled the region’s people to turn their talents and
hard work into an economic miracle. And
now, we want to hasten the emergence of an Asian-Pacific order that delivers
security and prosperity for all the nations involved.
In short, we want to help lead in
creating the 21st century rules of the road that will benefit not only the
United States, and the region, but the world as a whole. The lifeblood of the region, to state the
obvious, is economic development. But
growth has slowed in India, China and many places in Asia. And each country faces distinct and different
challenges.
But from our perspective, the way
forward is fairly clear. To spark new
growth, there has to be: fewer barriers
at and behind our borders; protections for intellectual property to reward
innovation; new commitments to make sure everyone plays by the same rules
because that’s what attracts investment and jobs; as well as greater economic
integration.
That’s what we’re pursuing right
now, today in Malaysia as our team negotiates the Trans-Pacific Partnership
with countries as diverse as Vietnam,
Chile, New Zealand, Mexico, very soon, Japan, and at which point the group will
account for 40% of the world’s GDP.
The TPP has potential to set new
standards for collective commitments to fair competition -- on state-owned
enterprises, fair competition on investments, labor, the environment, open
markets for automobiles and other industries.
And we firmly believe this will
create a strong incentive for other nations to raise their standards, as well,
so that they can join. We’ve already had
discussions with some of those very nations both in the Americas as well as in
the Pacific.
But not only is this ambitious,
this TPP effort of ours, we believe it is also doable. And we’re working hard to get this done this
year.
At the same time, we’re reaching
out to the emerging economies of Southeast Asia: partnering with Lower Mekong
countries to improve food security, connectivity, water and health; encouraging
responsible investments and reforms in Burma; and last fall, the President
launched a new initiative for Enhanced Economic Engagement with the ASEAN.
We are addressing the challenges
in our economic relationships with China as well. They are not at all inconsistent. We do not view our relationship and future
relations with China in terms of conflict or the talk of inevitable
conflict. We view it in terms of a
healthy mix of competition and cooperation.
A competition that we welcome.
It’s stamped into our DNA. We
like to compete. Competition is good for
both of us, as long as the game is fair.
It is clear that the Chinese
understand that to reverse their declining growth, there are internal reforms
they need to make -- not reforms we’re suggesting they have to make. They’ve made their own judgment -- judgments
if they follow through on them will not only help China in our view, but help
the region and the world. They’ve concluded
China needs to shift to a more consumer-driven economy. They’ve concluded they have to create a
market-based, well-regulated financial system.
And they’ve concluded they need to liberalize their exchange rates. It will be difficult. It’s difficult internally for them to do
that, but I’m convinced they believe -- and we clearly do -- that it’s
necessary.
And we are engaging directly with
India as it makes some fundamental choices that the Ambassador could speak to
more directly than I could about its own economic future.
In the last 13 years, we’ve
increased fivefold our bilateral trade, reaching nearly $100 billion. But if you look at it from a distance, an
uninformed person looked at it from a distance; there is no reason, that if our
countries make the right choices, trade cannot grow fivefold or more.
Just this week, India announced
that it will relax caps on foreign direct investment in certain sectors. We still have a lot of work to do on a wide
range of issues, including the civil nuclear cooperation, a bilateral
investment treaty, and policies protecting innovation. There’s a lot of work to do. But we believe doing -- going with an open
mind and listening, as well as making our case, we believe it can be done.
As we all strive for greater
growth, we have to recognize that the impact of climate change also has an
impact on growth as well as security.
This is a priority for the President and for me. America now has the lowest level of carbon
emission in two decades. And we’re
determined to move further, and in the process where we can, where our
technological capability is available, also help other countries do the same.
That’s why we’re working with
ASEAN to promote investment in clean energy; why we’re helping Pacific island
nations mitigate the effects of rising sea levels. They are rising. We just concluded an agreement with China to
reduce the use of pollutants called HFCs that cause climate change. And there’s no reason we cannot do more with
India as well. That’s why Secretary
Kerry agreed to an enhanced dialogue with India on climate change just last
month.
Look, economic growth may be at
the core of all we’re saying. Economic
growth critically depends on peace and stability. That’s why we have to be -- there have to be
21st century rules of the road not only in the economic sphere, but also with
regard to security.
With regard to maritime disputes,
it’s critical that all nations have a clear understanding of what constitutes
acceptable international behavior. That
means no intimidation, no coercion, no aggression, and a commitment from all
parties to reduce the risk of mistake and miscalculation.
My dad, God love him, used to
have an expression. He’d say, Joey, the
only war that’s worse than one that’s intended is one that is unintended. The prospects where they’re so close --
cheek-to-jowl -- for mistakes are real.
So it’s in everyone’s interest that there be freedom of navigation,
unimpeded lawful commerce, respect for international laws and norms, and
peaceful resolution of territorial disputes.
That’s why I encourage China and
ASEAN to work even more quickly to reach an agreement on a code of conduct in
the South China Sea. Setting clear rules
is the first step to managing these disputes.
And the U.S. has a strong interest in seeing that happen as well.
With regard to North Korea, the
one thing I think everyone now agrees on -- we agree that its nuclear and
missile programs present a clear and present danger to stability in the area,
in East Asia in particular. That’s why
we’re working closely with our allies, Japan and South Korea. But we’re also working more closely than the
40 years I’ve been engaged with China and with Russia.
In light of North Korea’s recent
provocative behavior, we welcome President Xi’s important statement: achieving a denuclearized Korean Peninsula,
as that being a Chinese priority. Not
just something they wish for, but a priority.
We welcome that firm assertion.
Now, North Korea is calling for
dialogue. As my mother would say, I’ve
seen this movie before. (Laughter.) We’ve been there before. But we are ready. We are ready, but only if North Korea is
prepared to engage in genuine negotiations.
We will not countenance North Korea’s pattern of provoking a crisis and
then insisting they be rewarded in order to cease and desist from the actions
they are taking. We’ve been there
before, only to find that once they’re gotten the space or the aid they need,
they return to the same provocative, dangerous behavior and continue their
nuclear march.
North Korea can have peace and
prosperity like the rest of the region, but only without nuclear weapons. North Korea has a clear choice: It can choose a better path for its people,
or continue down the road they’re on.
Make no mistake about it, though. We are open to engaging with any nation
that’s prepared to live up to its international obligations. That’s what we did in Burma. And I think most would say we’re already
seeing some tangible benefits from that engagement.
So we’ve got a full agenda ahead
of us in Asia. And we’re committed to
seeing it through. But as I travel
around the world, and I’m heading to India -- I’m about to cross the
700,000-mile barrier since Vice President, not counting the previous 36 years
-- but I hear questions wherever I go, questions in Asia about whether we’re
truly committed to this rebalance. I’ve
also heard questions in my recent trips to Europe, with European leaders, about
whether or not we’re going to be leaving Europe behind.
It should be clear on its face,
we’re not leaving Europe. I recently
spoke to the European nations, NATO members and EU members, in Munich. And I said that Europe remains “the
cornerstone of our engagement with the rest of the world.” That is a fact. We’re not going anywhere.
As a matter of fact, we’re
absolutely convinced that our engagement in the Pacific is in the overwhelming
self-interest of Europe. We’re convinced
the combination of new transatlantic economic agreements that we’re now
negotiating and the Trans-Pacific Partnership I’ve discussed, they reinforce
one another. They are not at odds with
one another. Together, they’re designed
to update and strengthen the global economic rules of the world in the 21st
century.
Europe, just like us, will
benefit greatly as well from stability in the Pacific, in Asia. And by the way, there is no reason why we
cannot bring greater focus to the Asia-Pacific and keep our eye on the ball in
the Middle East. Folks, that’s what big
powers do. To use the vernacular, we can
walk and chew gum at the same time.
That’s what big powers do.
And there is no evidence that we
are taking our eye off the ball -- as we should [sic] in the Middle East,
leaving Europe or not intending on following through on our rebalance in the
Asia-Pacific area.
Folks, we’re better positioned
than any time before to be able to do it all.
I know you’ll think it sounds like a campaign assertion I’ve been making
for years, but America is back. When I
was last in China, as I pointed out to the Chinese leadership, it’s never,
never, never been a good bet to bet against America. The resiliency of the American people and the
nature of our system -- America is back.
To paraphrase Mark Twain, the
reports of our demise are very premature.
Our businesses have created 7.2 million jobs since we’ve taken
office. We’ve gone from losing more than
400,000 jobs a month, over 12 months in 2009, to creating over 200,000 jobs per
month thus far this year. Manufacturing
is back -- the biggest increase in manufacturing in nearly 20 years. And an awful lot of high-tech companies are
looking to come home.
There’s a reason for it. American workers are incredibly productive --
three times as productive as Chinese workers, to give you one example. They can be assured their intellectual
property will be protected. We have a
transparent court system that will enforce contracts.
Our deficit is down more than 50
percent as a share of the economy since we took office. Household wealth -- over $17 trillion in
household wealth was lost in the Great Recession we inherited. It’s all back. We’re producing more energy from all
sources. We now have over 100 years’
supply of natural gas that would enable us to meet every single need we have in
America -- energy need for the next 100 years.
We’re the largest natural gas producer in the world -- another reason
why companies are coming back. The cost
is a third to a fifth of what it is around the world.
We are prepared to help other
countries as well. Our oil imports are
the lowest they’ve been in the last 20 years.
And I believe -- if my colleagues from abroad will forgive me, I believe
we remain the most innovative country in the world.
But I also think, folks, that the
rest of the world understands why this is happening, and it’s not just the good
fortune of having shale gas or having two oceans, et cetera. I think it’s because of the enduring strength
of our people and of our system. For all
our difficulty in education for our children, they’re still taught to challenge
orthodoxy. No one in America is
diminished or punished for challenging orthodoxy.
It’s the only way there can be a
breakthrough, is to challenge orthodoxy -- where competition is fair; where
people have a right to express their views, practice their religion, and decide
their future. These are universal
values. They’re not unique to
Americans. I believe there is no Asian
exception to the universal desire for freedom.
And the issues that young people
are seized with all across Asia and the world -- corruption, land rights,
pollution, food and product safety -- these are all fundamentally linked to
openness and transparency, to greater rights and freedom.
In my humble opinion, no nation
has to adopt the exact system we have.
That’s not what I’m suggesting at all.
But it’s awful hard to be innovative where you can’t breathe free. It’s awful hard to make significant
technological breakthroughs where orthodoxy is the norm.
In my humble opinion, the very
things that made us such a prosperous, innovative and resilient nation -- our
openness, our free exchange of ideas, free enterprise and liberty -- all of
which have their downsides, as we’ve recently seen in Boston and other places
-- they have downsides -- but we would not trade them for all the world.
Presumptuous for me to say,
because you never tell another leader what’s in their interest, never tell
another country what they should do. But
I believe these elements are the fundamental ingredients for success for any
nation in the 21st century.
There was that famous line by the
founder of Apple, when asked at Stanford, what do I have to do to be more like
you? And his response was, think
different. You can only think different
where you can think freely, where you can breathe free air.
So let me conclude by saying we
see, as Neera said, this is not a zero-sum game. It’s overwhelmingly in our interest that
India continues to grow. It’s
overwhelmingly in our interest that China grows. It’s overwhelmingly in our interest that the
world economy grow. Because we believe
Asia’s success is fundamentally linked to ours.
So the President and I are going
to continue to reach across the ocean, both east and west, particularly to the
indispensable Pacific nations, to help us shape a prosperous future, for
America, for their people, and I would argue for the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment