NORTHEAST ASIA PEACE AND SECURITY NETWORK ***** SPECIAL REPORT ***** January 8 1998 The following is the complete transcript of an interview by Kurt Campbell, US deputy assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific Affairs, on the US foreign policy agenda for the Asian and Pacific region. The was published in January in the US Information Agency's electronic journal "U.S. Foreign Policy Agenda." ------------------------------------ 07 January 1998 TRANSCRIPT: KURT CAMPBELL INTERVIEW ON ASIA-PACIFIC SECURITY (USIA electronic journal "U.S. Foreign Policy Agenda") (2790) QUESTION: With the end of the Cold War, how has the U.S. relationship with Asia-Pacific nations changed? CAMPBELL: The most important thing to keep in mind is that the Cold War ended almost 10 years ago, so I think it is no longer very important, or even descriptive, to talk about this as a post-Cold War world. Particularly in East Asia, the Cold War tended to obscure critical dynamics that have always existed in the region, but perhaps now these dynamics are more clear than ever. We have the rise of another great power in our midst, China. We have the presence of one of our most critical allies in Japan. We still have a very dangerous division of the Korean Peninsula that requires determination and vigilance. We have a variety of security partners. We have powerful and dynamic economies in Southeast Asia. In fact, all throughout Asia we are experiencing uncertainty. All told, the challenges facing the United States in the region are, perhaps, more dynamic than any other place in the world. And given that fact, our economic and commercial commitment -- as well as issues such as non-proliferation and human rights -- are more profound, and growing, in Asia than in any other region of the world. Q: Why does the United States need to maintain a forward-deployed military presence in the region, and what will that deployment look like in five years, and in 10 years? CAMPBELL: It has been said that security is the oxygen of the engine of dynamic economic and commercial growth in the Asia- Pacific region. And unlike Europe, where we have intricate and sophisticated security architecture that maintains peace and stability, the most important determinant of peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region has been and continues to be the presence of large and substantial U.S. forces. We are in the Asia-Pacific region, not as a favor to Asia, but because it is in our interest. We believe that our forces in Asia allow us to maintain a strong and secure partnership with Japan. They deter aggression on the Korean Peninsula. They serve as a useful mechanism to engage China. And our military presence is a reminder to all those in the region that the United States is not an ephemeral or transitional actor in the Asia-Pacific, but we are a fundamental player and will continue to have interests there. During the Cold War we had over 150,000 troops in the region: soldiers, sailors, and marines. Currently, we have about 100,000, and in our most recent public statements, both in the East Asia Strategy Report and the Quadrennial Defense Review, which was chaired by Defense Secretary Cohen, one of the conclusions was that 100,000 continues to be about the right number. We have stated on a variety of occasions that when there are important strategic developments in the Asia-Pacific region, then we will adjust our forces accordingly. So it is difficult to predict the future, but I think one thing that we always try to make clear is that our forces are in the region because we are accepted in the region. We are not an imperial force, we are not an occupation force. We are a security partner. So we remain because we have strong support within the region. Q: What is Russia's role in the Asia-Pacific and how can the United States and Russia cooperate and work together to promote regional stability? CAMPBELL: Russia has not been a very active player in the Asia- Pacific region over the past several years, but it is a mistake to believe that Russia's interest lies exclusively in the European theater. Russia has begun to reemerge as a player in the Asia-Pacific region in the past several months, primarily in terms of its security dialogue and connections with China. But we believe that it is important for Russia to play a vital and constructive role in the region. We have welcomed its assistance in encouraging North Korea to participate in the Four Party Talks. We welcomed the recent summitry between President Boris Yeltsin and Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto which, hopefully, will lead to an improvement in Russo-Japanese relations, and, perhaps, even a peace treaty between the two. And we're hopeful that Russia will join the economic and political fora -- such as the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum -- that are so important in the region. So for all these reasons, we would like to see Russia continue to play a role in the Asia-Pacific sphere. It will probably not be as great a diplomatic role as it seeks to play in the Middle East or Europe, but it can play a positive role here. Q: What will be the effect on the Asia-Pacific region, and on U.S. policy, as China continues to grow as a major force and a major player? CAMPBELL: Again, it's not just the magnitude of China's power. It is the character of its power. So I think the United States has made very clear that we have an interest in a strong, secure, stable, and prosperous China. We welcome China's emergence in the international arena as a major, perhaps even a great power. We want that ascension to be one in which China works to preserve and promote regional stability, plays by the rules of international commerce, and understands the vital correlations between domestic vitality and international behavior. I believe, personally, that our engagement policy is designed to create incentives for China to be a useful, strong, secure and dynamic player in the international environment. No one can predict with any certainty what China's future political character will be. However, I think you can make a powerful argument that the best way to create incentives and encouragement for China to play a positive role is through a policy of engagement. Q: Do you see the Taiwan Strait situation as a possible serious threat to future stability in the region? CAMPBELL: I think we are always concerned about the cross-straits situation. Obviously, the United States adheres to the Three Communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act, and we believe that that provides a framework for a useful U.S. approach to the region as a whole. We support cross-straits dialogue. We would like to see those talks resume, and we believe that China should continue to engage with Taiwan in a peaceful nature and should renounce the use of force. And, indeed, both sides should refrain from provocative actions which needlessly inflame the other. Q: Why does the U.S. view its security relationship with Japan, as you have said, as "the most important pillar of peace and stability in the region?" CAMPBELL: Japan provides a vehicle and a strong support for the U.S. forward presence in the region. The United States and Japan, working together, play a powerful, and I think, very positive role in promoting peace and stability. And the overall implications of the security dialogue and the Defense Guidelines Review that has just been completed between the United States and Japan are to create a security and political partnership that is viable for the 21st Century. That partnership is designed to promote peace and stability and to engage China in order to create a peaceful environment in which there is a sense that the United States will be an enduring player in the Asia-Pacific region. Q: What problems does the United States face in preserving its relationship with Japan while at the same time working to develop a constructive relationship with China? CAMPBELL: I think that it is a challenge that requires a very dynamic and creative diplomacy. We have tried to make clear that the U.S.-Japan relationship is completely open. If China wants to participate and have formal dialogue among the United States and Japan and China, we would be willing to do so. I think that we have stated all along that the three great nations of the Asia-Pacific region -- the United States, Japan and China -- must have more dialogue, must have better contacts among the three, and that if the United States has good relations with China and the United States has good relations with Japan, that is not enough; it is also important that Japan and China improve their relationship as well. So we don't see the engagement policy with China and the U.S.-Japan security partnership as incompatible. In fact, we see them as reinforcing. Q: How do you see the Japan-China relationship evolving, and what is the United States doing to encourage that evolution? CAMPBELL: We encourage it by taking every opportunity to urge China and Japan to work together toward future goals that are in the interest of both, such as the promotion of peace and stability. We look for opportunities for concrete steps the three of us can take together, for more opportunities for greater dialogue, which we are taking advantage of within the "track two" arena. We also have talked intensively, both with China and Japan, about how we see our role in the future in the Asia- Pacific region, and have encouraged them to do the same bilaterally. And I think we have seen some positive steps in that direction. Q: How has Japan supported the Four Party Talks on Korea? CAMPBELL: Japan has been very supportive of the Four Party Talks. They play an extremely vital diplomatic role. We often meet with the Japanese immediately before our Four Party Talk fora. The Japanese have played a useful role in the provision of some humanitarian assistance and they have their own, now separate, line of diplomatic activity with North Korea. But I would say one of the most important secondary effects or implications of the Four Party Talks is the really rather dramatic improvement in the dialogue between South Korea and Japan. They are working much more closely together on the Korean Peninsula. Q: How has the U.S.-ROK relationship benefited other nations in the Asia-Pacific region? CAMPBELL: We recognize that the hope of our diplomacy on the Korean Peninsula rests on the reality of our deterrence, and that the United States and the Republic of Korea have a long partnership of working together on the Korean Peninsula, and that sense of constancy, I think, has been a reassuring factor to all in the region. I think we are entering a really delicate phase on the Korean Peninsula, and the U.S.-ROK partnership is, perhaps, more important than ever. Q: What are the implications of future Korean reunification for regional stability and U.S. policy? CAMPBELL: That's one of the most difficult questions to handle, and so much will be driven by the manner and means of reductions in tension on the Korean Peninsula. I will tell you that I think our overarching goals are to have a relationship with the Korean people that transcends the current division on the Korean Peninsula. We believe that there will be important regional security dynamics that will keep the United States interested in being involved. Ultimately, that decision will be a decision for the Korean people together, but we are trying to look over the horizon and think about the common issues that have united us for these many years. Q: I have seen Australia described as "the southern anchor" of the U.S. and allied strategic positions in Asia-Pacific region. What does that mean? CAMPBELL: I know that expression has received quite bit of negative attention in China. The important thing is that the United States and Australia have an extremely close political and security partnership. It has been that way for years. I think our recent years have been among our best. We are working very closely with Australia. We share common goals in Southeast Asia in terms of the integration of Indonesia, engaging China. And Australia is a big supporter of the U.S. forward presence and will continue to be so, I believe. And we continue to have strong overall interests in the maintenance of peace and stability. Our relationship with Australia is one of the linchpins of, again, our engagement in the region and we spend a lot time trying to nourish that more closely with our Australian friends and allies. I think that relationship also helps Australia to be an interpreter and a helpful supporter of the United States in the region. Q: What about U.S. initiatives with respect to Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam? CAMPBELL: In each of these countries, as you know, we have a variety of security initiatives. We have demining programs, which are important and will continue and grow in certain cases. We also have a powerful and dynamic commitment to POW (Prisoner-of- War) and MIA (Missing-in-Action) issues. And in each of these countries, in varying degrees, we're also interested in beginning a subtle and careful and cautious military-to-military dialogue. So we think that is important as well, but that has to go slowly within the context of domestic limitations in the United States and in those countries. Q: How important are countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand to the United States? CAMPBELL: Very important. I think you will see the United States increasing its presence, increasing its opportunities for training and access and other kinds of things in Southeast Asia. And we consider that to be very important. Q: What, if anything, is on the agenda for the United States and Burma, or Myanmar? CAMPBELL: On the security front, not much. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has said: look, let us deal with Burma in the Asian way, let us work with them in the context of ASEAN. Well, okay. You have your opportunity now. Let's see if you make any more progress. Q: Do you think the issue of defense burdensharing is in the forefront of congressional thinking about the Asia-Pacific region? CAMPBELL: I do. In my discussions with members of Congress, they have all raised questions both about Japan and (South) Korea. Certainly, in Japan we have probably the most generous burdensharing and support for U.S. forward-deployed forces of anywhere in the world. Currently, the Japanese spend about $100,000 a year per soldier, sailor, and marine in Japan. That's a lot of money. That's a substantial commitment. Q: How many U.S. forces do we have there? CAMPBELL: About 47,000. Q: What is the key security challenge that the United States faces in the Asia-Pacific region in the Clinton administration's second term? CAMPBELL: Managing the implications of Russia's emergence from the former Soviet Union into a sort of market democracy was one of the biggest challenges of the administration's first term. A major challenge for the second term is to create the mechanism, the framework, for helping to integrate China into the international community. And there is so much associated with that in terms of our security framework and our political interactions. So I think that will be very important. Q: As you look down the road, what are some of the emerging threats in the Asia-Pacific region? CAMPBELL: Non-proliferation concerns, obviously, on the Korean Peninsula. We would like to see dialogue across the Taiwan Straits. That issue clearly has the potential to create uncertainty and instability. We are watching carefully the economic volatility in the region with the clear understanding that that can sometimes lead to political or security concerns as well. I think, by and large, the region as a whole is simultaneously stable and slightly insecure. And that there is a sense that this tremendous progress that Asia has made in the last 30 years can be upset with very small steps. And so constant vigilance, intensive dialogue, these are things that, hopefully, will prevent the emergence of crises that threaten our mutual stability. ------------------------------------- End of transcript.