Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323153756
label
Singapore and American Business Community--Singapore 1/4/92 [OA 8332] [4]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323153756
contentType
document
title
Singapore and American Business Community--Singapore 1/4/92 [OA 8332] [4]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13789-003
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323153756
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c129a36ccb97f7c8
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S; 2004-2265-S; 2004-2265-S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13789
Folder ID Number:
13789-003
Folder Title:
Singapore and American Business Community--Singapore 1/4/92 [OA 8332] [4]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
22
1
7
>]
HERITAGE T
TALKING POINTS
A Checklist on Vital National Issues
BUSH'S TRIP TO
CANBERRA, SINGAPORE,
SEOUL, AND TOKYO
December 30, 1991 - January 10, 1992
REAFFIRMING AMERICA'S
COMMITMENT TO ASIA
By Kenneth J. Conboy and
Richard D. Fisher, Jr.
The
Heritage Foundation
The
Heritage Foundation
The Heritage Foundation was established in 1973 as a nonpartisan, tax-exempt policy
research institute dedicated to the principles of free competitive enterprise, limited govern-
ment, individual liberty, and a strong national defense. The Foundation's research and study
programs are designed to make the voices of responsible conservatism heard in Washington,
D.C., throughout the United States, and in the capitals of the world.
Heritage publishes its research in a variety of formats for the benefit of policy makers, the
communications media, the academic, business and financial communities, and the public
at large. Over the past five years alone The Heritage Foundation has published some 1,000
books, monographs, and studies, ranging in size from 953-page government blueprint,
Mandate for Leadership III: Policy Strategies for the 1990s, to more frequent "Critical
Issues" monographs and the topical "Backgrounders" and "Issue Bulletins" of a dozen
pages. Heritage's other regular publications include the SDI Report, U.S.S.R. Monitor,
Heritage Foundation Federal Budget Reporter, Business/Education Insider, Mexico Watch,
and the quarterlies Education Update and Policy Review..
In addition to the printed word, Heritage regularly brings together national and interna-
tional opinion leaders and policy makers to discuss issues and ideas in a continuing series of
seminars, lectures, debates, and briefings.
Heritage is classified as a Section 501(c)(3) organization under the Internal Revenue
Code of 1954, and is recognized as a publicly supported organization described in Section
509(a)(1) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) of the Code. Individuals, corporations, companies, associa-
tions, and foundations are eligible to support the work of The Heritage Foundation through
tax-deductible gifts.
Note: Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The
Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.
The Heritage Foundation
214 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002
U.S.A.
202/546-4400
December 19, 1991
BUSH'S TRIP TO CANBERRA, SINGAPORE, SEOUL, AND TOKYO
December 30, 1991 - January 10, 1992
REAFFIRMING AMERICA'S COMMITMENT TO ASIA
INTRODUCTION
Thirty days after his inauguration, George Bush in February 1989 embarked
on his first overseas trip as President. That he chose Asia as his destination sent
a clear message about the strong American ties to the three countries on his
itinerary, the People's Republic of China, Japan, and the Republic of Korea. And
since Bush was a United States envoy to the People's Republic of China in
1975, many felt his Administration would have strong foreign policy interests in
the Asia-Pacific region.
Now, having postponed his trip for one month because of criticism aimed at
his handling of domestic priorities, Bush is planning a second trip to Asia. He
departs December 30 for an eleven-day swing that will take him to Australia,
Singapore, the Republic of Korea, and Japan.
In the nearly three years between Bush's two Asian trips, despite expectations,
Asia has not been on the front burner of Bush's foreign policy. First, Asia was
overshadowed by the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe. Then last year
came the Persian Gulf crisis. And this past summer, Bush faced upheavals in the
Soviet Union, while Secretary of State James Baker devoted much of his time to
arranging a Middle East peace conference.
Now Bush's trip to Asia comes at a time when he is under increased and jus-
tified criticism for neglecting domestic economic issues at the expense of his ex-
haustive foreign policy activities and travels.
Major Stake. Whether Bush now should take the time, in the midst of
America's longest post-World War II recession, to head off on a 26,000-mile
journey is a legitimate question to raise. Whatever the answer, it cannot be
denied that America now more than ever has a major stake in Asia. Last year,
U.S.-Asian trade totalled $310 billion. By contrast, U.S. trade with Europe was
only $220 billion. Just a dozen years ago America had more trade with Europe.
By the end of this century, the value of American trade across the Pacific is ex-
pected to be at least double that of trade across the Atlantic.
In Asia, the U.S.
deploys some
130,000 airmen,
marines, sailors,
and soldiers at
Seoul, Korea
bases in Japan,
Bush Arrives:
Korea, and Sin-
January 5, 1992
gapore. (Another
14,000 American
Tokyo and Kyoto,
Japan
servicemen in the
Bush Arrives:
Philippines,
January 7, 1992
meanwhile, may
leave by 1994 be-
cause the Philip-
Singapore
pine Senate vetoed
Bush Arrives:
a new basing
January 3, 1992
agreement this
September.) From
Sydney and Canberra,
these forward
Australia
bases, U.S. troops
Bush Arrives:
have helped
December 31, 1991
counterbalance
Soviet forces in
the Pacific, main-
George Bush: On the Road Again
tain stability on
December 31, 1991 - January 10, 1992
the Korean Penin-
sula, and keep
Over 26,000 Frequent Flyer Miles
open sea lanes of
Note: Boundary representations are not necessarily authoritative.
communication
running through Southeast Asia, on which pass 80 percent of the oil and
petroleum products destined for America's allies in Northeast Asia.
Anxious Asians. With the trip he is about to begin, Bush now has a chance to
reaffirm America's special relationship with the Pacific Rim. In many ways, the
Asia he will see this time is far different from the one he visited in 1989. There
is genuine anxiety in Asia, for example, that the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA), which is expected to be completed next year between the
U.S., Canada, and Mexico, will become a trade bloc like the European Com-
munity (EC). This has played into the hands of some Asian leaders, like
Malaysia's Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad, who advocate an Asia-
Pacific trade alliance that excludes the U.S.
Bush also faces a rapidly changing security environment in Asia. For one
thing, the Soviet military threat in the Pacific, which alone justified the presence
of some 135,000 U.S. military personnel in Asia through the late 1980s, is vast-
ly diminished. For another thing, the U.S. likely will have vacated its major
military bases in the Philippines, including Subic Naval Base, by 1994, depriv-
ing the U.S. Navy of its major forward deployment site in Southeast Asia.
2
Persistent Threats. America's friends and allies in the region, of course, are
worried that America prematurely might be relaxing its security commitment to
Asia at a time when threats persist despite the collapse of Soviet communism.
These threats include a 1.1 million-man North Korean army which menaces the
ROK; a communist insurgency in the Philippines; numerous territorial disputes
in the South China Sea; and questions about the future military intentions of
China-and even Japan.
At the same time, America faces several economic problems with Asia. Last
year, for example, America had trade deficits with all its major Northeast and
Southeast Asian trade partners, with the sole exception of Australia. Of these
deficits, the $41 billion trade imbalance in Japan's favor was America's largest
deficit with any trade partner.
Washington correctly charges that in many of these cases, restrictive Japanese
and other foreign trade practices prevent American goods and services from
competing fairly in Asian markets. Washington, too, complains loudly about in-
tellectual property rights violations in Asia, which result in hundreds of millions
of dollars in lost American sales when Asians illegally copy and sell copyrighted
and trademarked items.
Facing these concerns and problems in Asia, in each of the countries he visits
Bush should stress:
The North American Free Trade Agreement will not become an ex-
clusive trade bloc like the European Community, and that Washington
would welcome efforts to forge a free trade alliance between the NAFTA
and potential Asian counterparts, like the fledgling forum for Asia-
Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). 1
America remains committed to maintaining the conditions in post-Cold
War Asia on which rest the region's progress toward democracy, its fu-
ture as a economic dynamo, and its tranquility. This requires America to
strengthen its military alliance in Asia.
China cannot be ignored. Bush thus should urge Asian leaders to main-
tain constructive engagement with Beijing. In the post-Cold War era,
China may be the only effective brake on North Korea's nuclear ambi-
tions, a return to power in Cambodia by Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge,
and the twin specters of Soviet disintegration and Japanese expan-
sionism.
1
APEC was formed in 1989 and includes the U.S., Australia, Brunei, Canada, the People's Republic of China,
the Republic of China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the
Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand.
3
To begin his trip, Bush arrives in Canberra on December 31. As members of
the ANZUS 2 Alliance, Washington and Canberra traditionally have had close
ties. Most recently, Australia demonstrated its loyalty to America by quickly dis-
patching a naval task force and 1,000 servicemen in August 1990 to join
American-led coalition forces in the Persian Gulf. Australia also continues to be
an anchor of stability in the South Pacific and is an active ally in promoting
global free trade.
While in Australia, Bush should:
Thank Australia for its quick support during the Persian Gulf war and
urge Canberra to maintain an armed forces capable of reacting to
similar threats in the future.
Ask for continued Australian support to promote free trade in Asia.
Urge New Zealand to resume ANZUS cooperation.
Bush then flies to Singapore on January 3. There he will meet with Prime Mini-
ster Goh Chok Tong, President Wee Kim Wee, and, of course, former Prime Min-
ister Lee Kuan Yew.
In many respects, U.S.-Singaporean relations are among the best in Asia. Since
the early 1980s, for example, Washington and Singapore have cooperated close-
ly in supporting the non-communist resistance forces in Cambodia. Last year,
when talks between Washington and Manila concerning American use of
Filipino military bases were faltering, Singapore provided timely leverage for
Washington by offering basing facilities on Singapore as a replacement for some
of the U.S. forces in the Philippines. And when Malaysia earlier this year aggres-
sively began promoting an Asian trade bloc excluding the U.S., Washington and
Singapore on October 11 signed a trade and investment pact that could be a step-
ping stone to a bilateral free trade agreement.
While in Singapore, Bush should:
Praise Singapore's support for free trade, and call for discussions to
begin on a U.S.-Singapore free trade agreement.
Voice strong appreciation for U.S.-Singaporean defense cooperation and
laud Singapore as a model for American defense relationships in
Southeast Asia.
From Singapore, Bush heads for the Republic of Korea (ROK) on January 5.
There he will find a country that has made great progress in building democratic
institutions. No longer is Korea run by military strongmen. Already there has
2
ANZUS, created in 1951, includes the U.S., Australia, and New Zealand.
4
been one national election and two local elections since the current civilian ad-
ministration was elected in 1987; presidential and national assembly elections
are scheduled for next year. As basic freedoms have grown, Seoul also has main-
tained a strong economy, with an average annual 7.5 percent increase in gross
domestic product since 1989.
The ROK, moreover, has seen continued success in isolating communist North
Korea by building diplomatic and trade ties with Beijing and Moscow,
Pyongyang's twin patrons. Yet peace on the Korean Peninsula is far from as-
sured. Despite the non-aggression pact that likely will soon be signed between
Seoul and Pyongyang, South Korea remains threatened by North Korea's evi-
dent determination to build nuclear weapons and maintain a 1.1 million-man
armed forces, the fifth largest in the world.
To reassure Seoul's leaders of U.S. support, Bush should:
Stress America's admiration of South Korean President Roh Tae-woo's
progress toward strengthening Korean democratic institutions.
Emphasize that the U.S. remains strongly committed to the defense of
the ROK.
Demand that North Korea end its nuclear weapons development pro-
gram and open all of its nuclear facilities for international inspection.
Insist that Korea continue reducing trade barriers and resist protec-
tionist "austerity" campaigns.
Encourage Korea to expand its relations with China.
Bush's last stop is Japan on January 7. There he will see Emperor Akihito and
new Japanese Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa, address the Japanese Diet, and
visit the city of Kyoto.
During his meetings in Japan, Bush should:
Declare forcefully that the U.S.-Japan security alliance remains the
linchpin to peace in Asia.
Press Miyazawa to give priority to resolving U.S.-Japan trade disputes.
Press Tokyo to help the U.S. develop a defense against missile attack.
Urge Tokyo to make more Japanese technology available for the U.S.
military.
5
AUSTRALIA
When Bush arrives in Australia on
December 31, he will find traditional-
1991 Australia Databox
ly close Washington-Canberra ties in
good shape. In August 1990, for ex-
Official Name: Commonwealth of
ample, Australian Prime Minister Bob
Australia
Hawke dispatched a naval task force
Capital: Canberra
and nearly 1,000 military personnel to
Population: 16,923,000
fight alongside U.S. forces in the Per-
Head of Government: Prime Minister
sian Gulf. Australia remains com-
Robert Hawke
mitted to the 1951 ANZUS Alliance,
Gross National Product: $310.5 billion
despite the setback to the partnership
Exports to U.S.: $4.4 billion
in 1985 when New Zealand's Labor
Imports from U.S.: $8.5 billion
government adopted a strict anti-
Heritage InfoChart
nuclear policy that effectively has
barred U.S. warships from entering New Zealand ports.
Bush will find the main challenge confronting Australia is its economic recession.
Australian gross domestic product growth may decline from over 4 percent in 1990
to less than 1 percent this year.
Bush will find that trade is Australia's biggest worry, in particular, the impact of
foreign agricultural subsidies on Australia's farm exports. Canberra complains loud-
ly that Washington subsidizes 30 percent of America's annual output, and that the
European Community and Japan respectively subsidize 38 percent and 72 percent
of their yearly agricultural production. By contrast Australia subsidizes only 11 per-
cent of production. Farm products comprise about one-third of Australia's total ex-
ports, and Canberra justly complains foreign subsidies provide an unfair advantage
by undercutting Autralian farm products on the world market. This year, for ex-
ample, Australia estimates that American subsidies under the Export Enhancement
Program, and subsidies of the EC's Common Agricultural Policy, reduced the in-
comes of Australian wheat farmers by as much as $138 million and $339 million,
respectively.
Despite its ire over the farm subsidizing issue, Australia is a strong ally in promot-
ing free trade. Since 1983 Australia and New Zealand have been cooperating on a
free trade agreement called the Closer Economic Relations (CER) agreement. This
agreement has created a much larger consumer market and has spurred free market
economic reforms in both countries. In 1989 Hawke played a key role in estab-
lishing the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) group. At this November's
APEC meeting in South Korea, Canberra pushed hard for lowering trade barriers.
As Australia is an active partner in promoting free trade in Asia, and helping to
preserve the peace necessary to support this trade, Australia's importance to the
U.S. will increase.
Note: All Databox statistics are from Kenneth Conboy, ed., U.S. and Asia Statistical Handbook: 1991
Edition, (Washington, D.C.: The Heritage Foundation, 1991.)
6
To affirm this important relationship, Bush should:
Thank Australia for its unhesitating support during the Persian Gulf war.
Australia made a quick decision in August 1990 to dispatch military units to
the Persian Gulf. This was the largest force to come from the Pacific region.
Bush should praise Canberra for its decisive response. He then should also as-
sure Australians that as the decline of the Soviet threat makes possible
American force reductions in Asia, America remains committed to its ANZUS
Alliance with Australia. Bush, however, should remind Australian officials that
they need to continue to add modern ships and aircraft to their armed forces
that are able to deploy rapidly to assist U.S. forces during future emergencies.
Praise Australia's commitment to greater free trade in Asia.
Canberra took the lead in promoting trade in Asia when it helped form APEC
in 1989. Bush should praise Canberra for its efforts to push APEC's members
to lower trade barriers. Bush then should commit the U.S. to work with
Australia to lower trade barriers in Asia. In response to Australian complaints
about U.S. farm subsidies, Bush should say that Washington remains com-
mitted to the position that it has taken in the ongoing Uruguay Round of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) negotiations to reduce its farm
subsidies substantially.
Bush should tell Australian officials that if the Uruguay Round fails, Australia
should consider a free trade agreement with the U.S. The goal would be to
remove all barriers to trade between Australia and the U.S. This would expand
trade and investment opportunities between both countries and serve as an ex-
ample to Asia of free trade's benefits.
Urge New Zealand to resume ANZUS cooperation.
Bush will not be visiting New Zealand during this trip. Yet he can tell
Australians that America remains ready to resume military cooperation with
New Zealand as soon as New Zealand amends its anti-nuclear law to allow
visits by U.S. Navy ships. A resumption of U.S.-New Zealand defense coopera-
tion will strengthen ANZUS-which could play a greater role in responding to
possible threats to security in the South Pacific, such as upheavals in China or
possible Japanese rearmament, as the U.S. reduces its forces in the Pacific. But
Bush should also ask Canberra to encourage New Zealand's current National
government not to go ahead with the deep military cuts that it is contemplating.
He should tell Australian officials that New Zealand must be prepared to con-
tribute to collective defense if is to benefit from ANZUS Alliance defense
guarantees.
7
Urge Australia to participate in programs of the Strategic Defense Initia-
tive.
Bush should encourage Australian officials to reconsider their 1986 decision
not to participate in America's Strategic Defense Initiative, a program to build
defenses against nuclear missiles. He should tell Australian officials that the
threat from nuclear missile proliferation is going to increase. Bush should sug-
gest that improved U.S.-Australian satellite reconnaissance facilities now in
Australia could become an important component of a global missile defense
system.
SINGAPORE
In Singapore, Bush will find a
country the area of Chicago that has
1991 Singapore Databox
become a major regional power and,
in global terms, a very influential na-
Official Name: Republic of Singapore
tion. Last year's per capita Sin-
Capital: Singapore
gaporean income was $12,720-
Population: 2,770,000
higher than that in NATO members
Head of Government: Prime Minister
Portugal, Spain, and Turkey.
Goh Chok Tong
Singapore's gross national product
Gross National Product: $34.59 billion
has racked up higher than 9 percent
Exports to U.S.: $9.8 billion
annual increases since 1965, the
Imports from U.S.: $8.0 billion
highest rate in Southeast Asia. Sin-
gapore has become a model of free
Heritage InfoChart
enterprise for the Third World, and is
the world's third largest harbor, handling 113 million freight tons annually, more
cargo tonnage than any other port in the world.
U.S.-Singaporean relations today are the best in Southeast Asia. Singapore last
year exported $9.8 billion in goods to the U.S., while importing $8 billion in U.S.
products, making Singapore America's twelfth largest trading partner. What's more,
U.S. Trade Representative Carla Hills this October 11 signed a Trade and Invest-
ment Framework Agreement with Singapore. This pact calls for regular talks and
outlines principles for bilateral trade and investment. It also calls for immediate ac-
tion to discuss trade in services, copyrights and patents, and dumping. Indeed the
agreement is comprehensive enough for the U.S. to begin discussions with Sin-
gapore on a free trade pact.
U.S.-Singapore security cooperation is equally close. This is nothing new. In the
late 1960s, for example, Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, in sharp con-
trast to bitter criticism offered by some of America's NATO allies and other puta-
tive friends, strongly supported American efforts to assist the Republic of Vietnam.
Since the early 1980s, Singapore and the U.S. cooperated in calling for internation-
al assistance for the noncommunist Cambodian resistance against Vietnamese oc-
cupation forces.
8
Singapore, moreover, consistently told Manila that the U.S. bases in the Philip-
pines contributed to everyone's security in the region. And when U.S. talks with
the Philippines about renewing the bases agreement began crumbling last year, Sin-
gapore stepped forward and offered use of its limited air base facilities to American
military forces. As a result, beginning this year, U.S. Air Force F-16 Fighting Fal-
con fighter jets will be flying out of airfields in Singapore.
During his stay in Singapore, Bush should:
Praise Singapore's support for free trade and call for discussions on a U.S.-
Singapore free trade agreement.
Like Hong Kong, Singapore has relied completely on free trade for its
economic success. At a time when many countries, like those in the European
Community, are advocating exclusionary trade blocs, Bush should praise Sin-
gapore for its refusal to erect trade barriers. The U.S. last year exported $8 bil-
lion in U.S. goods to Singapore, primarily chemical products, electronic valves,
and data processing equipment.
Building on the U.S.-Singapore Trade and Investment Framework Agreement
signed this October, Bush should urge that discussions begin on a U.S.-Sin-
gapore free trade pact. For Singapore, such an agreement would exempt its
goods from U.S. duties and other trade restrictions; Singapore now faces U.S.
tariffs of up to 30 percent of the total value of its textile imports, up to 17 per-
cent on its pharmaceutical imports, and up to 10 percent on its electronics im-
ports.
Exemption from these tariffs would make Singapore's products cheaper and
more competitive in the U.S. market. This would allow Americans to buy Sin-
gaporean goods at lower prices. More important, such a pact could add momen-
tum toward further free trade agreements between the NAFTA and other Asian
nations.
Voice strong appreciation for U.S.-Singaporean defense cooperation and
laud Singapore as a model for American defense relationships in Southeast
Asia.
While the diminished threat from the Soviet Union means that America no
longer needs large military bases in Southeast Asia, many nations in the region
either publicly or privately state that they want America to keep troops in
Southeast Asia. This would help offset potential military expansion by main-
land China or even Japan. With the possibility of conflict in the South China
Sea, 3 moreover, a continued U.S. naval presence in the region would ensure
3
Among the nations with conflicting territorial claims in the South China Sea are Indonesia, Malaysia, the
People's Republic of China, the Philippines, the Republic of China on Taiwan, and Vietnam.
9
that the trade routes between the Strait of Malacca and Northeast Asia remain
open.
The best way for America to keep military forces in the region would be
through a series of bilateral agreements allowing for ship repairs, aircraft land-
ing rights, and temporary basing rights in some Southeast Asian nations. In Oc-
tober 1990, the U.S. and Singapore signed such an agreement, allowing for up
to six U.S. Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcon jet fighters to conduct extended
military exercises from Singaporean bases. Bush should praise U.S.-Sin-
gaporean defense cooperation and laud Singapore as an example of the type of
defense agreements that would be most effective in maintaining Southeast
Asian security in the post-Cold War period.
Lastly, Bush should exchange views with Singapore's leaders, including
former Prime Minister and veteran statesman Lee Kuan Yew, on issues like how
to encourage democratic reforms in China and Vietnam, and how to strengthen
the tenuous United Nations-sponsored peace process in Cambodia. Singapore,
after all, is among the most diplomatically astute nations in Asia.
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
In the Republic of Korea (ROK),
Bush will find Seoul fast maturing as
1991 Republic of Korea Databox
a democracy and an economic power.
President Roh Tae-woo is now in the
Official Name: Republic of Korea
fourth of his five-year term as
Capital: Seoul
Korea's elected chief of state. During
Head of Government: President Roh
his tenure, he has institutionalized
Tae-woo
free and fair elections, expanded civil
Population: 43,350,000
liberties, including ending most
Gross National Product: $223.85 billion
forms of press censorship. Presiden-
Exports to U.S.: $18.5 billion
tial, National Assembly and local elec-
Imports from U.S.: $14.4 billion
tions are planned for 1992. The
Korean economy, meanwhile, has
Heritage infoChart
seen the gross domestic product more than double from $90 billion in 1985 to near-
ly $224 billion in 1990.
U.S.-Korean trade relations, while suffering some strains, have improved greatly
under Roh. The ROK last year was America's seventh largest trading partner, with
two-way trade nearing $33 billion. After many years with the balance of trade
favoring the ROK, this year America may sell the ROK over $1 billion dollars
more in goods and services than America buys from the ROK. This is due largely to
Seoul's liberalization of trade barriers and increased Korean consumer spending on
American products.
While a potential trade surplus with Seoul is good news in Washington, it worries
Seoul, which this year faces a total trade deficit of $10 billion. To counter the
deficit, Korea consumer groups last year began a public campaign to discourage
consumption of foreign goods. This understandably drew harsh criticism from
10
Washington, which correctly perceived the campaign as government-inspired and
aimed specifically at American products.
With an eye on the national elections set for next year, meanwhile, the ROK
government in early September approved an "austerity" campaign ostensibly to im-
prove the trade deficit by further depressing public consumption. On September 17,
Roh told his cabinet that the government must prevent the campaign from targeting
foreign goods, a move that American businessmen fear will have little effect.
Volatile Flashpoint. Although the ROK has matured as a democracy and a major
player on the world's economic stage, the Korean Peninsula remains the most
volatile flashpoint in Asia. North Korean dictator Kim Il-sung refuses to allow any
of the economic or political reforms that have undermined communism in Eastern
Europe and the Soviet Union. Kim's 1.1 million-man armed forces, with 3,500
tanks and over 700 combat aircraft, remain poised for a blitzkrieg-type attack
across the 38th Parallel's De-Militarized Zone into the ROK.
Making matters worse, recent North Korean defectors report that Pyongyang
could make its first nuclear bomb in as soon as two years. Once North Korea
deploys nuclear weapons, the ROK of course becomes extremely vulnerable, espe-
cially following George Bush's September 27 decision to destroy most U.S. tactical
nuclear weapons, including those stockpiled in South Korea. Pyongyang,
moreover, is developing medium-range ballistic missiles based on the Soviet
SCUD design that could be fitted with nuclear warheads. North Korea has already
cooperated with Egypt and Iran to develop missile technology, and may have ex-
ported SCUDs to Syria. There is also the danger that Pyongyang may sell nuclear
weapons.
Countering Kim Il-sung's war machine are 750,000 South Korean soldiers, as
well as 40,000 U.S. servicemen, which, because of budgetary cutbacks, are
scheduled to be reduced to 37,000 troops by 1993. However, in reaction to North
Korea's refusal to begin dismantling its nuclear weapons-making facilities, the U.S.
and South Korea on November 20 announced a decision to delay any further U.S.
troop reductions. The ROK also is interested in obtaining the U.S. Patriot missile,
which is capable of shooting down North Korean SCUDs. Next year, joint com-
mand of these allied forces will for the first time pass to a South Korean. Seoul has
pledged $150 million to support U.S. forces stationed in the ROK during 1992, and
plans to increase support to $450 million by 1995.
Pressuring Pyongyang. While maintaining strong support for the U.S.-Korean
defense alliance, Washington also quietly has encouraged Roh's efforts to seek the
peaceful reunification of North and South Korea. To pressure Pyongyang, Seoul
has greatly improved its relations with the Soviet Union and China, both of which
have been strong supporters of Kim Il-sung.
Meanwhile, Roh's persistent efforts have led to five meetings between the prime
ministers from both Koreas. The latest meeting led to a broad agreement on Decem-
ber 13 that includes a non-agression declaration. In it Seoul and Pyongyang pledge
to negotiate a peace treaty to replace the 1953 armistace that ended the Korean
War, promise a ban on attempts to overthrow the other's government, and agree to
11
begin talks to expand family contacts between both countries. However, the agree-
ment contains few specifics and does not resolve the issue of Pyongyang's nuclear
weapons program.
Since the Reagan Administration, American policy toward the ROK largely has
succeeded in both defending and advancing freedom in Korea. Bush should use his
visit to Seoul to build on this success.
While in Korea, Bush should:
Stress America's admiration of President Roh's steps toward democracy.
Bush should laud Roh and his government for their impressive democratic
reforms, and the Korean people for fulfilling the promise of democracy. Bush
then should encourage Koreans to continue on this path. He can do so by prais-
ing Roh and the political opposition for beginning to master the democratic art
of political compromise and by praising Koreans for their intention to hold
three sets of elections next year. In saying this, Bush should underscore the
wide disparity between North Korea's oppressive totalitarianism and the ROK's
growing freedoms.
Emphasize that the U.S., while modestly reducing its military forces sta-
tioned in Asia, remains strongly committed to the defense of the ROK.
Bush should stress that Washington will base 37,000 U.S. troops in the ROK
as long as Pyongyang continues to field a 1.1 million-man army. He should ex-
plain that these forces are still needed in South Korea to deter attack by the
North and to assist rapid U.S. reinforcement in case of war. Bush also should
praise Seoul for its strong and professional military.
Bush should tell Korean officials that the U.S. remains ready to deploy
Patriot missiles to counter North Korean SCUD missiles. Bush should en-
courage South Korean officials to consider greater participation in programs of
the U.S. Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). Bush should emphasize that the best
protection against potential North Korean nuclear weapons is a weapon that
shoots down incoming nuclear arms. Thus Bush should suggest that Korean
companies consider participating in SDI research programs in areas like com-
puters or computer software.
Demand that North Korea end its nuclear weapons development program
and open its nuclear facilities to international inspection.
Pyongyang in 1985 signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), but
refused to allow inspection of its nuclear facilities by the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA), as called for in the NPT. Now that Bush has pledged to
destroy most U.S. tactical nuclear weapons, including those based in South
Korea, he should challenge North Korea to end its nuclear weapons develop-
ment program. Bush also should underscore Washington's long-standing
demand that North Korea permit international inspections of its nuclear
facilities.
12
Bush should tell South Korean leaders that their December 13 accord with
North Korea could represent the beginning of real progress toward peace on the
Korean Peninsula if North Korea sticks to its pledge and swiftly creates a "hot-
line" between military commanders, begins negotiations for a peace treaty, and
opens talks to expand trade and family contacts. Then Bush should signal that
peaceful gestures by Pyongyang, such as real progress in opening its nuclear
facilities to inspection, would elicit a positive response from Washington, like
relaxation of the 41-year old U.S. embargo on trade with North Korea.
Insist that Koreans continue reducing barriers to trade.
Bush strongly should urge Seoul to continue opening its economy to trade and
investment, as it has been doing since the mid-1980s. If Seoul does not, he
should say, this will cast a shadow over relations between Washington and
Seoul. Bush should praise Korea for already reducing average tariff rates from
23 percent in 1983 to 13 percent in 1990, enacting laws to protect copyrights,
liberalizing trade in up to 70 percent of farm and fish products, and agreeing to
allow greater competition by U.S. firms in the South Korean telecommunica-
tions market.
In private meetings with Korean leaders, Bush should ask that Korea
demonstrate continued willingness to negotiate with the U.S. to reduce those
ROK fees that make U.S. automobiles far more expensive in Korea than similar
autos are in the U.S., to allow greater U.S. access to ROK stock, financial, and
banking markets, and to enforce more rigorously laws that protect American
patents and copyrights.
In these meetings, Bush also should note that because most of Korea's im-
ported items are used to improve the efficiency of ROK infrastructure and in-
dustry, Seoul's growing trade deficit helps Koreans. As such, he should counsel
that Seoul's frugality campaigns should not be aimed at foreign luxury goods,
which account for about only 3 percent of Korea's trade deficit. Furthermore,
he should state that such a campaign will only result in greater pressure in the
U.S Congress for tougher trade laws that may reduce Korean exports to the U.S.
Encourage Seoul to keep pressing Beijing to convince Pyongyang to halt its
nuclear weapons program.
Bush should praise Seoul's efforts to expand relations with China. Bush
should state that the U.S. will continue to seek China's help to pressure North
Korea to end its nuclear weapons program. He should also say that China's
cooperation in helping to stop North Korea's nuclear threat will be the main op-
portunity in 1992 for China to prove it is committed to promoting peace in Asia.
13
JAPAN
In Tokyo, Bush will find a Japan
regaining its political stability after
1991 Japan Databox
months of upheaval. Toyko's most
recent political turmoil ended when
Official Name: Japan
Prime Minister Toshiki Kaifu failed to
Capital: Tokyo
win support in the Diet for political
Population: 123,642,000
reforms and announced on October 4
Head of Government: Prime Minister
that he would not seek reelection. He
Kiichi Miyazawa
is replaced by Kiichi Miyazawa, 72, a
Gross National Product: $2963.0 billion
former Deputy Prime Minister and
Exports to U.S.: $89.7 billion
long-time contender for the top slot.
Imports from U.S.: $48.6 billion
Miyazawa is a respected economist
and is fluent in English, which could
Heritage InfoChart
give his administration a high international profile that has been lacking in Japan
since Yasuhiro Nakasone held office between 1982 and 1987. Miyazawa, moreover,
has said that resolving trade disputes with the U.S. will be a priority of his govern-
ment.
This is welcome news because Japan's continuing trade surplus with America is a
major source of U.S.-Japan tension. Last year, Tokyo had a $41 billion trade
surplus with Washington, exporting $89.7 billion of goods to the U.S. while import-
ing only $48.6 billion. While this surplus has fallen from $59.8 billion in 1987, it
remains the largest of any American trading partner.
To help bridge the trade gap, the U.S. and Japan in September 1989 began the
Structural Impediments Initiative (SII) talks aimed at identifying and solving struc-
tural problems in both countries that may impede trade. In these talks, Tokyo
agreed to increase spending on its infrastructure, allow greater foreign access to its
construction market, and slowly allow some large U.S. retailers, like Toys-R-Us, to
open branches in Japan.
Cosmetic Results. Most of the results of these highly publicized talks, however,
remain cosmetic. Little has been done to get Japan to open its markets as much to
American goods and services as America is to Japanese goods and services.
American automobile parts manufacturers, for example, say they are prevented
from gaining a foothold in the Japanese market. The same could be said for
American financial services and construction firms.
U.S.-Japan security ties, too, while still close, are strained. Since 1951, when
Washington signed its first security agreement with Tokyo, the U.S.-Japan defense
alliance has been the most important in Asia. Although these ties were the object of
violent Japanese protests in the 1950s and 1960s, by the time of the Reagan Ad-
ministration there was strong bilateral agreement that this alliance was a linchpin to
stability in Asia. Today, the U.S. has its largest Asian military bases in Japan, with
50,800 servicemen deployed at seven air bases, four naval bases, one army base,
and one marine base.
14
While U.S. forces in Japan have been a major factor in maintaining stability in the
region, the diminished Soviet threat in the Pacific has raised questions on both
sides of the Pacific as to what, if any, U.S. military presence still is needed in Japan.
Younger Japanese, in particular, question why U.S. forces still must be based in
Japan, an issue that will become sharper with the official disintegration of the
Soviet Union. Budgetary pressure in Washington, moreover, dictates that U.S. for-
ces in Asia be reduced by 15,000 by 1993, which could force the closure of some
U.S. bases in Japan.
During his three days in Japan, Bush should:
Declare forcefully that the U.S.-Japan security alliance remains the
linchpin to peace in Asia.
Although the forces once commanded by the Soviet Union are today diminish-
ing as a military threat, Bush must emphasize the continued benefits of the U.S.-
Japan defense partnership. Bush, in fact, will be doing so when he signs in
Tokyo the so-called Pacific Charter, a joint declaration that will in general
terms restate the ongoing importance of the partnership. Tokyo derives its prin-
cipal source of security from the alliance, while Washington uses its Japanese
bases to protect its influential position in a region, whose importance will in-
crease over time.
But with budget cuts and growing calls in Washington for American
isolationism, the future of the U.S. forward presence in Asia increasingly is
being determined by domestic American politics. Bush should remind Japanese
leaders that now more than ever, Americans must remain convinced that Tokyo
is ready to be a genuine, full partner with the U.S. As probably the last
American President to have fought against Japan in World War II, Bush should
appeal directly to older generations of Japanese while emphasizing the stability
which the U.S.-Japan security alliance has helped bring to post-war Asia.
Toward the younger Japanese who do not remember World War II or its
humiliating aftermath, Bush should emphasize that the Washington-Tokyo
security partnership will be a key instrument in maintaining stability in an Asia
full of security threats despite the end of the Cold War.
Press Miyazawa to keep his promise about giving priority to resolving U.S.-
Japan trade disputes.
Bush specifically should urge Tokyo to allow American automobile parts
makers greater access to the Japanese market. Bush also should press Japan to
enact long-promised reforms that would lower the Japanese-imposed impedi-
ments that deny American investors equal footing in competing in the Japanese
financial market. Finally, Bush should tell Tokyo that, while he opposes
retaliatory measures like the so-called Super 301 clause of the 1988 Trade Law,
protectionists in the U.S. Congress may increase Japan bashing during the up-
coming election year if Tokyo does not further open its markets.
15
Press Tokyo to help the U.S. develop a defense against missile attack.
With Prime Minister Nakasone's 1986 agreement to participate in research on
America's Strategic Defense Initiative, the base for such cooperation already ex-
ists. The Pentagon's SDI Office has awarded contracts to Japanese corporations
in such areas as superconductivity and magnetic field technology.
Japan now needs to do more. Bush thus should invite Japan to become a
major partner in the effort to build an antimissile system. He should point to the
suitability of SDI, a defensive weapons system, to Japan's constitutional limits
on weapons that can be used for power projection, like aircraft carriers, or first-
strike attacks, like ballistic missiles. He also should note Japan's nearly total
vulnerability to ballistic weapons, which are finding their way into ever more
hands. Japan, for example, remains vulnerable to Chinese, and potentially
North Korean, missiles.
Urge Tokyo to make more Japanese technology available for the U.S.
military.
Tokyo's 1983 decision to allow export of military technology to America in
theory allows for increased availability of advanced Japanesc technologies. This
would reduce significantly production costs for the U.S. and decrease substan-
tially the long intervals that typically separate the completion of research and
development for U.S. weapons systems from their actual production.
Already five committees of American and Japanese officials are working on
agreements for the exchange of military technologies. These discussions would
be spurred if Bush emphasized the importance that America attaches to their
success. He should raise the matter when he meets with Miyazawa and propose
that the discussions be elevated from their current staff levels.
Tell Japanese leaders that the U.S. will remain engaged with China.
Bush should tell Tokyo that Washington will continue to engage Beijing con-
structively on a wide range of issues of concern to Asians. Bush should say that
he will work to expand U.S.-China trade relations. He should also encourage
Japan to continue its efforts to pressure China to curb its sale of ballistic mis-
siles to rogue countries like Syria. Last August former Japanese Prime Minister
Toshiki Kaifu unsuccessfully tried to convince China to do so; this must be con-
tinued by the Miyazawa government.
CONCLUSION
During his visit to Asia, George Bush will have the opportunity to reaffirm
America's commitment to a stable and prosperous Asia. This affirmation of
American intent sorely is needed at a time when some Asians are flirting with the
notion of an exclusive Asian trade bloc and others question Washington's willing-
ness to keep military forces in the Far East. It comes at a time, too, when some in
16
America are calling for Washington to concentrate on domestic issues instead of
foreign policy concerns.
In affirming American policy on Asia, Bush should articulate a vision of ex-
panded free trade between the Far East and the U.S., offering increased trade oppor-
tunities and economic prosperity for both shores of the Pacific. He should suggest
that the forum for Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation become a principal organiza-
tion for reducing trade barriers between Asia and America. He, too, should stress
that the U.S.-Mexican-Canadian North American Free Trade Agreement will not
mimic the trade barriers of the European Community. Bush, moreover, should un-
derscore to Asian leaders that reductions of trade barriers, especially in Japan and
Korea, will help counter mounting protectionist sentiment in the U.S.
Reassuring Asia. Bush also must remind Americans and Asians alike that they
must be wary of the threat to stability in the Far East from a heavily armed North
Korea and from other potential expansionist countries. By reaffirming American
commitment to deterring North Korean aggression and strengthening U.S. military
ties with Australia, Japan, Korea, and Singapore, Bush can reassure Asia that
America remains committed to preserving peace in that part of the world. Also im-
portant is the need to reassure Asian leaders that America will continue to en-
courage China to play a positive role in Asia, such as helping to end North Korea's
nuclear program and ending China's sale of ballistic missiles to rogue states.
By building on these twin pillars of free trade and continued American support for
Asian security, Bush can reverse the image that his Administration has neglected
Asia for nearly three years and once again begin building a strong, innovative U.S.
policy toward the Far East.
Kenneth J. Conboy
Deputy Director
Asian Studies Center
and
Richard D. Fisher, Jr.
Policy Analyst
Asian Studies Center
All Heritage Foundation papers are now available electronically to subscribers of
the "NEXIS" on-line data retrieval service. The Heritage Foundation's Reports
(HFRPTS) can be found in the OMNI, CURRNT, NWLTRS, and GVT group files of the
NEXIS library and in the GOVT and OMNI group files of the GOVNWS library.
17
POSSIBLE THEMES FOR SPEECH IN SINGAPORE
Security/New World Order
-- My generation fought a world war -- in Asia and the Pacific,
in Europe, in North Africa. Those of us who experienced that
war vowed that it would be the last world war, that the forces
of totalitarianism must be resisted and their aggressive
designs frustrated. As visionaries, we founded the United
Nations; as prudent men and women, we also established a
structure of alliances to contain totalitarianism.
-- In the largest sense, we have achieved our goals. Despite
-- and perhaps in some ways because of -- the advent of weapons
of mass destruction, the threat of global war today is smaller
than at any time since 1945; indeed, it has almost vanished.
The specter of world communism has disappeared; state-
controlled economies are discredited; the democractic tide is
higher than it has ever been, with elected governments in many
nations on all continents; the advantages of the free-market
system are evident worldwide.
-- For many years the United States, by its military presence
and its influence, has fostered stability in several parts of
the world. Nowhere have the benefits of that stability been
greater than here in East Asia, where many nations have
prospered to a degree beyond anything that might have been
imagined 20 years ago: first Japan; then the Dynamic Asian
Economies of Singapore, Hong Kong, the Republic of Korea and
Taiwan; and now Malaysia and Thailand. Others such as
Indonesia are following rapidly. Economic growth in East Asia
today far outstrips growth anywhere else in the world.
-- The alliance structure succeeded in containing
totalitarianism and preventing global conflict, but it did not
preclude smaller wars or other kinds of regional or local
conflict. We are still dealing with some of those situations,
but the end of superpower rivalry has made the search for
solutionsd more productive. We have reached a stage at which
we can realistically discuss what I have called the New World
Order, under which nations will resolve their disputes without
resort to the use of force.
-- We have already seen the United Nations take on new vitality
and begin to exercise the role its founders intended for it,
most notably in rolling back the invasion of a small state,
Kuwait, by a much larger one, Iraq. We have enjoyed good
cooperation from the Soviet Union in convening a historic
Middle East peace conference.
-- Here in Southeast Asia multilateral diplomacy has achieved
what we trust will be a notable and lasting success: the case
of Cambodia. I will not try to trace here the history of that
-2-
unhappy country -- a history in which the United States itself
is of course involved. But I want to record my appreciation
for the solidarity of Singapore and four other ASEAN members
with Thailand, the nation immediately threatened in the 1970s
and 1980s by the potential spillover of combat. More recently,
another ASEAN member, Indonesia, together with France, has led
the search for a settlement, in which the four other Permanent
Members of the Security Council have joined, together with the
United Nations, Australia, Japan and other governments. That
long search reached a milestone six weeks ago in Paris with the
signing of the settlement documents.
-- A settlement in Cambodia truly means the start of a new
era. For virtually the first time since World War II,
Southeast Asia is without serious conflict. For the United
States, that settlement makes possible a process of healing in
our relations with the states of Indochina: representation in
Cambodia for the first time since 1975, accredited to the
Supreme National Council headed by Prince Norodom Sihanouk; a
restoration of our diplomatic relations with Laos -- never
broken --- to the pre-1975 level; and the start of the process
of normalization with Vietnam. Just how far and how fast we
move in that process with Vietnam will depend on progress in
resolving the cases of our military personnel missing in action
-- but the trend in recent months has been decidedly positive.
-- For the people and the governments of Indochina, the
settlement in Cambodia holds great promise. The embargos on
trade and investment which many governments imposed can now be
lifted; travel and communications can be opened up; the
international financial institutions will be able to lend
freely for worthwhile projects. Most important, perhaps,
Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia will be able to emerge from their
isolation and, if they chose, free themselves of the policy
constraints that have hindered their development. In fact,
Laos and Vietnam in recent times have both shown a
receptiveness to foreign private investment. The United States
looks forward to this new era, as, I am sure, do the peoples
of Singapore and the other five ASEAN nations.
-- Clearly, then, the situation in East Asia has improved in
recent months, as has the world situation generally. But we
remain in a transitional phase; we cannot wish away continuing
threats to peace and stability in such areas as the Korean
peninsula, and we cannot rule out sudden threats to world peàce
and the rule of law such as the one that arose in the Persian
Gulf only sixteen months ago.
-- For those reasons, the United States will remain engaged
militarily in East Asia and the Pacific for the foreseeable
future. Here, as in Europe, we will take advantage of reduced
-3-
levels of threat and of increases in the speed, range and lift
capability of our ships and aircraft to slim down our
forward-deployed forces and the number of our bases. The
character of our presence will change; we will place more
reliance on access to a larger number of facilities owned and
controlled by others. Our total numbers may be reduced, but
our presence in the region could be more widespread and more
frequent.
-- The agreement signed in Tokyo a year ago by then-Prime
Minister Lee Kwan Yew and Vice President Dan Quayle exemplifies
this new type of arrangment. Under its terms, our ships and
aircraft -- based elsewhere -- are making increased use of
Singaporean military facilities. They exercise jointly with
Singapore's forces as well as on their own. They are gaining
familiarity with the geography and the operating conditions of
this part of Asia. We are open to the possibility of similar
arrangements with other nations of the region.
-- The eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines in June
settled the fate of Clark Air Base there. If we are able to
remain at Subic Bay, we shall do so, but if not we shall
continue to honor our treaty commitments. We have already
relocated headquarters, troops and equipment to Guam.
Meanwhile, United States forces will remain in Japan and
Korea. Our treaty relationship with Australia, the country I
shall visit next, is stronger than it has ever been. We hope
the day will come when New Zealand allows us to resume defense
cooperation under the historic ANZUS alliance.
-- In short, we will stay on the scene in East Asia. The test
of our security policy, or of any nation's, is not the size or
location of our forces; rather, it is the ability to deal with
any and all likely threats to the peace, and to deal quickly
and decisively with unpredictable crises, and that is precisely
how the United States and its partners in the multinational
coalition -- acting through the United Nations -- dealt with
the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
Economic Cooperation
-- Interdependence and cooperation are equally important in the
world economy. That lesson is fully understood here in
Singapore, where total trade is three (??) times the value of
your gross domestic product. If the prosperity that so much of
East Asia already enjoys is to continue and spread, we must
have an open global trading system. To reach that goal, we
need a framework for economic integration, and we must avoid
regional fragmentation.
-4-
Trade across the Pacific has expanded dramatically in recent
years, in step with dramatic economic growth in many East Asian
countries. Some ten years ago America's trade with the Pacific
surpassed our trade across the Atlantic; today, it is nearly
one-third larger. The ASEAN countries, taken together,
constitute America's fifth-largest trading partner. Singapore
alone is a bigger export market for U.S. goods than Italy,
Spain or the USSR. Nations on the eastern rim of the Pacific,
from Mexico to Chile, are eager to join in this booming
trans-Pacific commerce. I urge U.S. firms take advantage of
these dynamic markets and to redouble their efforts to export
to and invest in the ASEAN countries.
-- The Pacific Basin is a natural trading region, and it is
logical that the governments of the region concert to promote
that trade by eliminating barriers and establishing common
policies. An excellent forum for doing so already exists: the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, or APEC, grouping. The
concept had occurred to a number of people in several
countries, but it was Prime Minister Bob Hawke of Australia who
developed the idea and convoked the first APEC ministerial
meeting in Canberra two years ago.
-- APEC has since met twice more, here in Singapore last year
and again last month in Seoul. Its original group of twelve
participants has grown substantially with the simultaneous
addition of China, Hong Kong and Taiwan, and APEC can look
forward to further growth in the years ahead.
-- APEC is performing many useful functions, but none is more
important than mobilizing the support of all fifteen
participants for a successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round
of multilateral trade negotiations to update and extend the
system known as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.
The nations of APEC are convinced that the GATT system must
cover world trade in agricultural products, as it has long
covered manufactured goods, and that it must be extended to new
realms such as intellectual property rights, services, and
investment.
-- The alternative is a likely failure of the global trading
system, a reversion to exclusionary trading blocs, and,
eventually, the constriction of world trade. It is incumbent
on all of us -- in North America, in Asia, in Europe -- to
overcome parochial interests, abandon protectinist rules and
tactics, and expose our economies to the rigors of competition.
-- Even while we pursue reform of the global system in the
Uruguay Round, we can reduce and eliminate barriers to trade
with our immediate neighbors. That is what the United States
and Canada are doing right now, and what we and Canada propose
-5-
to do with Mexico, thereby creating a North American Free Trade
Area, or NAFTA, which will have few internal barriers and will
be more accessible than at present to other world traders such
as Singapore.
-- Thailand has proposed that ASEAN establish a free-trade area
of its own over the next fifteen years, and the other five
governments have agreed. Such action is the direct parallel of
what we in North America are doing in NAFTA, and the United
States applauds this decision by the ASEAN nations.
The Spread of Democracy
-- The most inspiring single event of the last few years was
the tearing down of the Berlin Wall. The Wall symbolized the
worst of totalitarianism, and its destruction stands for the
desire of people everywhere to control their destinies and to
be governed only by their own consent.
-- To a gratifying degree, that is happening. The democratic
impulse is alive, whether fed by relative proposerity, as
seemed to be the case in China, or by economic failure, as in
the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. And in many places the
impulse is flourishing. In recent years elected governments
have come to office everywhere from the Philippines to Poland
and from Nicaragua to Mongolia.
-- There are basic human rights, universally recognized though
not universally observed, but there is no copyright on
democracy and no one form of government or set of practices to
which every nation must adhere. The United States recognizes
the legitimacy of diversity.
What the United States cannot condone, however, is the
suppression of the popular will -- and that is what has
occurred in Burma, where the military leadership permitted
elections last year but, when the results proved not to the
military's liking, refused to allow the winners to take their
rightful seats and organize a government. So long as this
situation continues, the people of Burma will remain victims,
subject to torture and intimidation and deprived of the chance
to share in the general properity and well-being which so many
of their neighbors already enjoy.
(NEEDS CONCLUSION)
UNCLASSIFIED
RECORD ID: 9109158
NSC/S PROFILE
RECEIVED: 16 DEC 91 15
TO: SCOWCROFT
FROM: SUPER, K
DOC DATE: 16 DEC 91
SOURCE REF:
KEYWORDS: AP
JAPAN
PERSONS:
SUBJECT: REQUEST PRES VISIT TECHNICAL CENTER OF DUPONT JAPAN LTD
DURING VISIT TO JAPAN
ACTION: APPROPRIATE ACTION
DUE DATE: 18 DEC 91
STATUS: S
STAFF OFFICER: SITTMANN
LOGREF:
FILES: WH
NSCP:
CODES:
DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION
FOR ACTION
FOR CONCURRENCE
FOR INFO
SITTMANN
CARNEY
EMERY
HILLIARD
Tomy Referrace Snow
Defent
would remarks to for Kodak good at over wanther PAAL PATTERSON Topal Jasan success "Just stors.' fluo
in
COMMENTS:
DISPATCHED BY
DATE
BY HAND W/ATTCH
OPENED BY: NSJWD
CLOSED BY:
DOC 1 OF 2
UNCLASSIFIED
9158
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
RESPONSE DUE DATE:
December 18, 1991
REQUEST FOR SCHEDULING RECOMMENDATION
MEMORANDUM FOR:
GOVERNOR SUNUNU
PHILLIP BRADY
ANDREW CARD, JR
DAVID DEMAREST
ROGER PORTER
MARLIN FITZWATER
SIG ROGICH
FREDERICK MCCLURE
SUSAN PORTER ROSE
TIM MCBRIDE
EDE HOLIDAY
X
BRENT SCOWCROFT
CONSTANCE HORNER
C. BOYDEN GRAY
GREGG PETERSMEYER
DORRANCE SMITH
FROM:
KATHY L. SUPER
PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENTS AND SCHEDULING
Please provide your recommendation the following scheduling request:
EVENT:
Visit the Technical Center of DuPont Japan Ltd.
DATE:
January 1992
LOCATION:
Yokohama, Japan
Additional information concerning this event is attached.
YOUR RECOMMENDATION:
Accept
Regret
Surrogate
Message
Priority
Video
Routine
Satellite
Teleconference
Written
If your commendation is to accept, please cite reasons below
PLEASE RETURN TO WINDY WHITE, ROOM 182. OEOB, BY THE RESPONSE DUE DATE ABOVE SO THAT
YOUR COMMENTS MAY BE CONSIDERED AS WE PROCEED WITH IS REQUEST.
THANK YOU
OUPONT
292430
WILMINGTON, DELAWARE 19898
CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD
Sche duling 1/92
December 5, 1991
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
I am aware through reports in the press and other public information that you
intend to visit a U.S. company operating in Japan during your visit to that country in January.
I
am writing specifically to invite you to visit the Technical Center of Du Pont Japan Ltd.
The Du Pont Technical Center is in Kohoku New Town, Yokohama. The center is
conveniently located between Kawasaki and Yokohama and can be reached by helicopter from
Tokyo in 10-15 minutes. It is the largest research facility of any foreign company operating in
Japan and represents an investment in excess of $100 million. It is a major regional
technology center serving Du Pont customers throughout the Asia-Pacific area. The primary
focus of the research there is the evaluation of photo-resist films used in the manufacture of
printed circuits, and the center has its own circuit board production line. Staffed by 250
researchers from Japan, the U.S., and Asian countries, the Du Pont Technical Center is a prime
example of a U.S.-based firm committing to - and competing in - the high-tech markets of
Japan and Asia.
As only the second company ever to receive a National Medal of Technology,
Du Pont would be privileged to demonstrate to you how our scientific legacy of creating "better
things for better living" has been transplanted so successfully into the heart of one of the
world's most competitive and advanced high-technology markets.
We hope you will accept our invitation. I would be happy to discuss this matter
with your staff or to provide additional information as you plan the itinerary for your trip.
Sincerely,
Edgar E.S. Woolard, S. woolarly. Jr.
ESW:mlb
Better Things for Better Living
VP-10413
P.1
DEC 16 '91 15:49
U.S.-Japan Business Council, Inc.
1020 19th Street, N.W.. Suite 130
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: (202)728-0068
Fax: (202)728-0073
TELEFAX TRANSMITTAL FORM
URGENT, PLEASE HAND DELIVER:
TO:
Dong Paal
COMPANY:
NSC/ White House
FAX #:
395-3380
FROM:
DATE:
Roger 12/16/91 Swanson
MESSAGE
copy
Photocopy-Preservation
PAGE 001
DEC 16 91 15:14
/
DEC 16 '91 15:49
P.2
TO:
Doug Paal
FROM:
Roger Swanson
RS
Tony Snew note vraction Sidence WT
DATE:
December 13, 1991
DPaal
Although the train has not yet left the station, I want to thank you and Torkel for your
efficiency and thoughtfulness concerning arrangements for the President's trip to Japan. I shall
refrain from commenting on the efficiency some of those folks at Commerce.
Incidentally, one of my Board members, Henry Wendt, Chairman of SmithKline Beecham, was
present at President Bush's AEA December 4 speech. It was extremely well received.
u
I will be in further touch on many things I'm sure, but I did want to take advantage of this
breather to thank you. Our Council's intention is the same as when you and I first spoke -
to wholeheartedly work with and support the President on these absolutely crucial trade and
competitiveness issues.
Photocopy-Preservation
DEC 16 91 15:15
PAGE 002
TS -
DRAFT FOR
KOREA TOASTI
Au WE HAVE NOW
JB
PRESIDENTIAL TOAST
STATE DINNER
Mr. President, Mrs. Roh, ladies and gentlemen. Tonight we
have many things to celebrate. First and foremost is our solid
partnership. It was born in the turmoil of war as together we
deterred aggression. And while we continue to work together
for that purpose, our partnership has solidified and matured
during the ensuing years into a broad-based political,
economic, and security relationship. And I can assure you of
our commitment to ensure that it will continue into the 21st
century.
Second is the Republic of Korea's emergence as a major
actor on the world stage. Through hard work and a commitment
to development seldom matched in world history, your nation has
moved from a war-ravaged past to a prosperous and enviable
present. The future promises even more as you join the world
community in helping create a more open trade regime which will
bring long-term benefits to all the world's peoples.
(IF APPLICABLE) Third is the progress you have made in
resolving your differences with North Korea. While the road to
unification remains long, I can only admire your steadfastness
and commitment to resolving your differences peacefully. If
your brothers in the North can finally do the same while
abandoning their belligerence and their nuclear weapons
program, I assure you, Mr. President, that we will all we can
to help assure that peace and unification on terms acceptable
to all the Korean people finally come to this divided land.
Finally, and central to all of the above, are the many
accomplishments of our host this evening. Mr. President, I
know you are a modest man. Thus it is important that those who
know you well, such as myself, emphasize properly the historic
role you have played in leading the Republic of Korea during
this period of incredible change.
I would only note a few of important events during your
presidency. Hosting the 1988 Olympics; hosting the 1991 APEC
conference; your ground-breaking and courageous non-nuclear
policy statement; your nation's entry into the United Nations
in 1991; the many successes of your Nordpolitik policy,
including enhanced relations with Russia and China and an
active dialogue with North Korea; strengthening and assuring
the success of democratization throughout your nation; the
breathtaking growth in your nation's economy; your commitment
to full cooperation in completing the Uruguay round, and many
more.
Some have said that you have focused too much of your time
on foreign policy and that domestic problems should get more of
your attention. I can, believe me, Mr. President, empathize
with you when you hear such criticism.
But we both understand that foreign policy and domestic
policy are inextricably intertwined, that good relations with
your neighbors and the international community are essential in
the emerging new world order. The world is growing smaller
every day, and all the world's people are becoming more and
more inter-dependent. Our cooperation for our mutual benefit
is essential if we are to truly begin a new era of peace and
security in the world.
The same is true for our relationship, Mr. President, and I
have not the slightest doubt that cooperation for our mutual
benefit will continue to be the essential underpinning of our
partnership, our friendship.
Mr. President, in a matter of months you will be passing
the reins to your successor. Until then I know that you will
continue to lead Korea further toward peace and prosperity.
And I also know that history will look back upon your years in
office as among the most eventful and positive in the long
history of your great nation.
So, Mr. President, I would like now to raise my glass to
toast our firm partnership, peace and unification in Korea, the
rise to prominence of your nation, and, finally, your
leadership of the Republic of Korea during this period of
historic events.
ECONOMIC THEMES FOR THE PRESIDENT'S TRIP TO ASIA
Both the U.S. and Asia benefit from free trade and open markets:
Our economic relationship is not a zero-sum game for either
partner.
The American economy and American jobs increasingly depend
on free trade and open markets.
-
In the United States, nearly half (49%) of our GNP
growth between 1985 and 1990 was attributable to
exports.
-
In 1991, U.S. will export close to $700 billion worth
of merchandise and services.
-
Record 7.2 million jobs were supported directly and
indirectly by U.S. merchandise exports alone in 1990.
-
More than 19,000 jobs are supported per billion
dollars of U.S. exports.
Asia's stake in the trading system is greater than ours.
The export strength and economic growth of Asian economies
will continue to be dependent upon open international
markets for goods, services, and investment.
-
Asian economies are relatively more dependent than the
U.S. economy on exports and imports.
-
In 1990, exports amounted to 32% of GNP in Korea and
15% of GNP in Japan; by comparison, U.S. figure is 10%.
If the open trading system cannot be preserved and expanded
in the Uruguay Round, Asia's prosperity could be jeopardized
by stagnant world trade.
Asia is increasingly important to the U.S. economy:
The United States is a Pacific power, with vital economic,
as well as political, interests in the region.
Asia is an important and growing market for U.S. exports and
a source of U.S. job creation.
-
Japan (#2), Korea (#6), and Taiwan (#9) were among top
10 markets for U.S. exports in 1990.
-
In 1990, U.S. manufacturers sold $115 billion of goods
in the Asia-Pacific region (29% of total U.S. exports) i
by comparison, $113 billion in goods were sold in
Western Europe.
- 2 -
-
Exports to Japan and the four Asian NIE's alone support
an estimated 1.7 million U.S. jobs.
Trade with Asia accounts for large and growing proportion of
total U.S. trade.
-
In 1980, U.S.-Asia trade accounted for 24% of total
U.S. trade (imports and exports). By 1990, Asia
accounted for 34% of total trade.
Asia is also a large consumer of U.S. services, including
financial services, an area in which the United States has
special expertise.
-
In 1990, U.S. sold $22.9 billion in services to Japan
and Australia alone.
The westward shift of U.S. population, immigration patterns,
and increased cultural diversity in the United States point
to ever closer economic relations with Asia and the Pacific.
-
The U.S. population is increasingly concentrated in the
Western states (21.2% of total U.S. population in
1990).
-
A large and increasing share of U.S. GNP is produced in
the Western states.
-
Asians represent growing share of U.S. population (6.9
million in 1990 or 2.8% of total vs. 1.6% in 1980) and
growing share of U.S. immigration.
Asia needs our exports:
Asia's demand for imports -- our exports -- will increase as
Asian economies grow wealthier.
Asian consumers need access to foreign goods and services if
they are to raise their standard of living and enjoy the
fruits of their labors.
-
Japanese Prime Minister Miyazawa, for example, recently
stated that Japan should become a "lifestyle
superpower". This will benefit our economy by
increasing opportunities for U.S. exporters.
Asian countries have cooperated with the U.S.:
The U.S. -Asia relationship helps reinforce global
cooperation for the benefit of citizens of all nations.
Several Asian nations helped shoulder the economic burden of
- 3 -
the international effort to counter Iraq's aggression.
-
$10.4 billion was committed by Japan ($10.0 billion)
and Korea ($355 million) to offset U.S. military costs
of Operation Desert Storm.
-
$2.8 billion in economic assistance was committed by
Australia ($14 million), Japan ($2.7 billion), and
Korea ($115 million) to ease impact of Gulf Crisis on
the frontline states in the Middle East (Egupt, Turkey,
and Jordan).
In the G-7 and Economic Summit fora, Japan has helped foster
sustainable world growth with low inflation.
Japan has also supported U.S. initiatives to resolve the
international debt problems of the developing nations. For
example:
-
It pledged $500 million for the Multilateral Investment
Fund (MIF) for Latin America, one third of total MIF
funding.
-
Japan contributed almost $500 million to international
efforts to clear the arrears owed by Panama, Nicaragua,
and Panama to the international financial institutions.
Asian countries have helped the U.S. in efforts to
strengthen market forces in Eastern Europe and in developing
countries. This will help open up these economies for U.S.
trade and investment.
Treasury Department
December 10, 1991
KOREA
FINANCIAL SERVICES
The Korean financial system is antiquated, over-regulated,
and ill-suited to the needs of Korea's dynamic economy.
U.S. banks and securities firms face numerous barriers to
entering and operating in the Korean market.
In addition, elimination of Korea's pervasive controls over
interest rates, credit allocation, and capital flows is
essential if U.S. financial institutions are to enjoy long-
term competitiveness in Korea, and U.S. businesses are to
find adequate funding sources.
The Treasury Department and Korean Ministry of Finance have
made some progress in bilateral talks in addressing both
specific national treatment issues and broader financial
liberalization. However, much work remains to be done.
The USG has also sought Korean cooperation in bringing about
a strong financial services agreement in the Uruguay Round;
Korea's support thus far has been very disappointing.
Our specific objectives for the President's trip include:
-
A public statement by the ROKG of its commitment to
financial liberalization, including support for a
strong Uruguay Round financial services agreement.
-
Issuance of a comprehensive blueprint for financial
market liberalization, with a clear timetable for
implementation.
-
Implementation of a commitment last spring to ease
restrictions on deferred payment terms for imports by
the end of 1991.
Treasury Department
December 10, 1991
JAPAN
ECONOMIC THEMES
The U.S. and Japan have the single most important
bilateral economic relationship in the world.
-
With the world's two largest economies, their
actions impact many other nations, as well.
Despite disputes over trade issues, Japan has
cooperated closely with the U.S. (e.g. in the Economic
Summit and G-7 framework) to foster sustainable world
growth with low inflation, and has been very supportive
of a number of U.S. initiatives, including resolving
the debt crisis in developing countries.
However, a number of contentious economic issues in the
area of trade, financial services, and investment
plague the bilateral relationship, despite continuous
bilateral consultations.
Uruguay Round:
Agriculture is the key to compromise; Japanese need to
show leadership and contribute to a successful
conclusion.
Also need liberalization in financial services area.
Japan's External Surpluses:
We are concerned about Japan's rising current account
surplus
-
Surplus is expected to rise from $36 billion in 1990 to
$68 billion in 1991, according to the IMF). This
imbalance can disturb financial markets and feed
protectionism.
Although the U.S. trade deficit with Japan fell from a
peak of $57 billion in 1987 to about $42 billion last
year, it is beginning to increase again and still
accounted for two-thirds of the overall U.S. trade
deficit through September, 1991.
This highlights need for Japanese to maintain economic
growth and open markets.
Export Dependency and Bilateral Trade:
Although both the U.S. and Japan have major stakes in
preserving the open trading system, Japan is somewhat
more dependent on exports than the U.S.
- 2 -
-
Japan's exports of goods and services accounted
for 15 percent of GNP in 1990. For the U.S., the
figure was 10 percent.
-
The U.S. is Japan's most important market,
accounting for almost 32% of Japan's exports and
almost 22% of Japan's imports in 1990.
-
Japan is the U.S.' second most important market,
accounting for 12% of U.S. exports and 18% of U.S.
imports in 1990.
-
In finance-related service transactions (royalties
and license fees, financial services and
insurance) the U.S. has a surplus with Japan.
U.S. receipts amounted to $4.0 billion in 1990,
compared to payments of $1.4 billion.
Foreign Investment:
The U.S. market is far more open to foreign direct
investment than Japan's. This has fed Congressional
and popular concern in the U.S.
Cumulative direct investment inflows into the U.S. during
the period 1981-90 amounted to $355 billion ($80 billion
from Japan alone), compared with only $6 billion in the same
ten year period into Japan from all sources.
-
During the period 1981-90, cumulative foreign
direct investment in the U.S. represented about
5.7% of total U.S. fixed investment. In Japan,
the equivalent number was 0.1%, a difference of
more than 50:1.
Exchange Rate:
Yen/dollar rate has been quite stable since October
1991 G-7 Ministers meeting.
U.S. believes rates in G-7 countries are consistent
with balance of payments adjustment needs and
underlying economic fundamentals.
Japanese Financial Markets:
Despite U.S. efforts to open up Japan's financial
markets, Japanese banks are far more important in the
U.S. than U.S. banks in Japan. Japanese banks in the
U.S. hold 11% of U.S. banking assets; U.S. banks in
Japan hold less than 1% of Japanese bank assets.
- 3 -
We have been negotiating with the Japanese since 1984
to liberalize financial markets. Significant progess
has been achieved, but more needs to be done.
Recent financial scandals are symptomatic of the continued
lack of transparency and competition in the Japanese market.
Japan needs to take steps to reform its system and restore
international confidence.
Structural Impediments Initiative (SII): :
SII represents an important initiative to reduce
impediments to competition and adjustment of external
imbalances. SII success can help to head off
protectionism.
-
For example, U.S. has urged Japan to: increase
public infrastructure investment to improve
economic well being; reduce monopolistic effects
of keiretsu business practices; and open up
distribution system to imports,
Some progress has been achieved, but it is essential
that we re-energize the SII process by introducing new
commitments on both sides.
Treasury Department
December 10, 1991
AUSTRALIA
ECONOMIC THEMES
Australia has been an invaluable negotiating partner in the
Uruguay Round, especially on agricultural issues like the
CAP.
Facing its fourth year of declining agricultural income,
Australia has pressed the U.S. on farm issues:
-
It has complained about U.S. subsidized wheat sales, is
unhappy with having to negotiate with the U.S. a
voluntary restraint agreement on beef, and is concerned
about a 34% cut in its sugar import quota due to
increased U.S. production.
Australia's financial markets have been relatively closed to
foreign entry. However, under reforms recommended to
Parliament in November, foreign banks would be allowed
easier entry and operation.
Treasury Department
December 10, 1991
SINGAPORE
FINANCIAL SERVICES
Singapore is an important offshore financial center, and
maintains a relatively open market for foreign firms.
However, U.S. firms face discrimination in the significantly
smaller domestic market.
The U.S. seeks Singapore's support for a strong financial
services agreement in the Uruguay Round. At a minimum, the
U.S. would like to see Singapore stop blocking progress and
play a more constructive leadership role.
-
The lack of support from Singapore and the other ASEAN
countries for a strong financial services agreement in
the Uruguay Round has been very disappointing.
In the bilateral financial services negotiations, the U.S.
seeks a commitment from Singapore for a level local playing
field in both the banking and securities sectors.
Treasury Department
December 10, 1991
SII - U.S. Commitments
Issue:
GOJ officials have criticized the USG for not following
through on as many of its commitments as the GOJ has done. By
their count, Japan has completed 80 percent of its commitments,
while the USG has completed 20 percent, at best.
Suggested Talking Points:
--
What matters most in SII is the significance of the
undertakings, not the quantity.
The U.S. deserves credit for making substantial progress on
its commitments, which, in many respects, have been more
difficult politically than those that Japan has undertaken.
There is an asymmetry to U.S. and Japanese undertakings. In
many cases, Japan is being asked to open up its economy and
improve the lifestyle of its people, while the U.S. is
trying to cut public expenditures to reduce its budget
deficit and stave off protectionist pressure to close the
U.S. market.
The GOJ may have passed a larger number of pieces of SII
legislation than in the U.S., but the U.S. has resisted a
larger number of protectionist and budget-busting bills than
Japan.
In both countries, we are trying to deal with ingrained
structural problems in a way which will have a lasting
effect, even if it takes some time for their effects to be
felt.
The two most important efforts by the United States include:
o
undertaking major budget reforms, which are holding the
line on deficit spending, even in a difficult recession
year;
-
This package included tax increases that were
undertaken at great political cost, and an even
tighter rein on discretionary spending.
-
We haven't seen a sustained reduction in the
deficit numbers yet; nor has Japan in its trade
numbers. The U.S. budget deficit will come down,
though, and the reduction will be lasting.
-
In comparison, the parallel Japanese commitment to
increase public infrastructure spending benefits
numerous Japanese constituencies and is
politically popular.
2
vigorously defending open investment policy;
-
Administration has maintained its open investment
policy in the face of numerous protectionist
proposals and growing mood of isolationism.
-
In contrast, Japan's commitments are aimed at
opening its markets, with benefits for the
consumer.
[May wish to note Presidential Statement
strongly reaffirming open investment policy,
if released.]
---
In addition, U.S. has taken a number of other measures:
intensified export promotion efforts, with a particular
focus on Japan;
embarked on an ambitious program to improve workforce
education and training;
-
In April 1991, President Bush outlined strategy to
achieve national education goals, called "America
2000," which involves major reforms to primary and
secondary education system.
increased Federal support for research and development
efforts;
:
The FY 1992 budget proposed to allocate about $76
billion for R&D in 1992, an increase of over $8
billion, or 13 percent over 1991 levels. This is
the highest level ever.
and
o
continued to work toward strengthening incentives for
private saving and long-term investment (e.g.,
reduction of capital gains tax; enhanced IRAs; Family
Savings Accounts), despite strong political resistance.
-- U.S. intends to intensify these efforts.
12/9/91
Treasury
THEMES FOR ASIA TRIP
Overall
America is an Asia-Pacific partner for the long haul
(America will not retreat into isolationism/protectionism)
:
Economically
--
Politically
-- Security
As outlined in the President's Asia Society speech, there
are six keys to America's long-term vision for the Asia
Pacific. The trip will highlight each of these:
I.
PROGRESSIVE TRADE LIBERALIZATION
--
Aggressively pursue Uruguay Round Settlement (if still
pending) (Japan, Korea, Australia)
--
Promote APEC (All countries)
-- Push access for American products and services (Japan,
Korea)
Encourage American investment in the region (Singapore,
Japan, Korea)
II. SECURITY COOPERATION
--
Maintain pressure on DPRK nuclear program. Stress need for
united action against DPRK nuclear program (all countries;
encourage Singapore to get ASEAN action during upcoming
ASEAN Summit)
U.S. will restructure, but remain engaged
--
Continued air and naval presence at current levels in
Japan for the foreseeable future
--
Korea presence dependent on progress for lasting peace
on the peninsula; however, envision long-term air
presence for regional deterrence into the future
--
Singapore agreement as model for access arrangements of
the future in other parts of the region
III. A SHARED COMMITMENT TO DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Continue pressure on ROK (last visit by Pres. Bush made a
difference)
Lay out position on Vietnam (Singapore)
Highlight China if necessary
2
IV EDUCATIONAL AND SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION
Show link between domestic agenda and foreign policy
--
Highlight S&T progress (all countries)
:
Examine educational differences that we can learn from
(Japan, Korea)
V
RESPECT FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
--
Note progress made and areas for improvement (Japan, Korea)
Announce SE Asia initiative (if ready)
VI
APPRECIATION OF DISTINCT CULTURAL HERITAGES
--
Announce various cultural exchange initiatives (all
countries)
001
12/19/91
17:05
703 841 1283
T.N.C.
The
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION
1815 North Lynn Street
Nature
Arlington, Virginia 22209
(703) 841-5300
(`onservancy
Fax: (703) 841-1283
TO:
Tony Snow, White House Communications
FAX:
(202) 456-6218
FROM:
Lori Forman, Director of Program Development/Pacific Region
DATE:
19 December 1991
SUBJECT:
The President's Trip to Japan
PAGE 1 of 3
Dear Mr. Snow:
I am following up on a referral from Chase Untermeyer (correspondence attached), regarding
information for one of the President's speeches when he travels to Japan.
By way of background: I am in charge of Japan programs at The Nature Conservancy. Our goal is to
actively include Japanese partners in all aspects of our international conservation projects. Everything is
going surprisingly well, with both the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and with the corporate community in
Japan. Yes, it's unusual for Japan to collaborate with an environmental group, but then, the TNC's
collaborative, non-confrontational history of success is a relatively easy message to deliver in Japan.
11 was in this context -- and because of my prior experience at USAID in coordinating US-Japan foreign
aid collaboration programs -- that I was contacted in August by colleagues at AID and the State
Department. We talked about suggestions and proposals for a "joint US-Japan environmental initiative"
to be announced when the President goes to Japan. In line with the Administration's "points of light"
philosophy, I of course highlighted the valuable role the private and non-profit sector can play in this
field.
One thing I have found over the last few years is that "encouraging collaboration" alone isn't enough;
instead, progress happens when there,an example provided of what specifically we want done, and with
whom. This is particularly true in the case of encouraging collaboration with "environmental groups."
Unless specific examples to the contrary are provided, the general immediate reaction is that we are
asking the corporate community of Japan to support confrontational green groups which are going to turn
around and protest against their very sponsors. The best way to get the message across Shat is to provide
a specific example of the right kind of group (e.g. The Nature Conservancy) that they should collaborate
with, or even emulate.
12/19/91
17:06
703 841 1283
T.N.C.
002
Fax to Tony Snow
19 December 1991
Page 2
TNC is an excellent example not only because of our operating philosophy (and not only because
President Bush is a member), but also because the Japanese have already decided that - as a long-range
goal -- they would like to emulate our operations. We are in discussions right now with KEIDANREN,
The Federation of Economic Organization in Japan, as to how best accomplish this goal. To have
established a functional partnership with KEIDANREN this quickly is something we at TNC are quite
proud of, and gladly offer it as an example of the kind of private sector collaboration that should be
encouraged. I can also substantiate this by forwarding copies of Japanese newspaper articles about
KEIDANREN-TNC collaboration if you wish; however, the articles are in Japanese.
If it is useful, I will talk to our corporate partners to see if they would be willing to have their company
name used as an example. Short of that - and perhaps even better in the consensus-oriented world of
Japan -- it would be useful to say:
We encourage the private sectors of our countries - including the non-profit and non-
governmental organizations -- to join in this important effort to protect our global resources. We
applaud collaborative efforts which are being devised, such as those between The Nature
Conservancy and KEIDANREN.
Our president, John Sawhill, and some of our board members (e.g. John Smale, Procter & Gamble) have
ulready communicated with President Bush and appropriate policy staff regarding TNC and our Japan
efforts. If you have any questions, please contact me directly. I would also appreciate knowing whether
or not it will be possible to include such sentences in the President's remarks or communiques; if so, I
will be back in touch with our Japanese partners to accelerate progress on our negotiations. You can
contact me by calling 703-841-4839; if I am not there, please leave a message on my voice mail and I
will return the call as soon as possible.
Regards,
you
Lori A. Forman
Director of Program Development/Pacific Region
Attachment: Note from Chase
Tony Dug up afew things for Jould thought Dincerely, them you also.
EXCERPTS FROM JOHNSON SPEECHES.
(JOHNSON FIRST PRES TO VISIT
AUSTRALIA.)
From Johnson speech in Canberra (October 21, 1966) --
"
he serves his nation who understands his times."
Johnson also relayed these words of a Chinese philosopher:
"Of a great leader, who talks little,
When his work is done, his aim fulfilled,
They will all say
'We did this ourselves!"
Non-isolationism reference from Johnson speech (October 22,
1966 at Art Gallery in New South Wales): "I have had an old
lesson reinforced in my mind during the past few days that I
have been away from my country. A great society cannot end
at the water's edge in New York or in Los Angeles -- nor can
it end at the water's edge in Sydney or in Perth. A truly
great society can exist only in a great and unifying world
that is dedicated to bringing out the best in people from
all over the world."
More color --
Letter excerpt from convict after arriving in Australia:
"Blessed and sweet Liberty, that I had been doomed to
forfeit in a place of unparalleled torture and sin, now
appeared to me in all its grandeur."
Possible tie-in with yesterday's anniversary of our Bill of
Rights. The Constitution for the Commonwealth of Australia
came to force on January 1, 1901 (POTUS speech on January 2
-- 91 years later -- an anniversary reference also)
The first landing of convicts occurred in 1788, with the
arrival of the First Fleet at Botany Bay -- "the Noah's ark
of small-time criminality" -- and continued until the last
ship in 1868
"Australia is so good that, just tickle her with a hoe, and
she laughs with a harvest." -- Douglas Jerrold
Thomas Paine said at the time of our country's great
Revolution -- "If there must be trouble, let it be in my
day, that my child may have peace." "
10.31.91 02:25 PM
P 0 2
ffice
United States Department of State
Historian of the
Bureau of Public Affairs
HIGHLIGHTS IN RELATIONS BETWEEN
THE UNITED STATES AND AUSTRALIA, 1792-1989
1792: The merchant ship Philadelphia was the first American
ship to call at Port Jackson in New South Wales.
May 20, 1836: James H. Williams of Boston was appointed the
first American Consul at Sydney. He served until 1858.
August 20-September 18, 1908: The U.S. Navy's "Great White
Fleet" received an enthusiastic welcome when it visited Australia
during its round-the-world cruise.
May 27-30, 1918: Prime Minister William M. Hughes met with
President Woodrow Wilson in Washington en route to wartime meetings
in London. Hughes was the first Australian Prime Minister to visit
the United States.
July 4, 1918: The first U.S.-Australian military cooperation
took place when elements of the U.S. 33rd Division joined Australian
troops in the capture of Le Hamel, France.
September 1918: Trade Commissioner Mark Sheldon became
Australia's first official representative in the United States.
July 9, 1935: Prime Minister John A. Lyons met with President
Franklin D. Roosevelt during a visit to the United States. They
discussed prospects for reducing trade barriers.
January 8, 1940: The United States and Australia announced the
52
establishment of diplomatic relations. Australian Minister Richard
G. Casey presented his credentials on March 5, and U.S. Minister
years
Clarence E. Gauss did BO on July 17.
December 22, 1941: The first U.S. Army personnel arrived at
Brisbane. with most of its armed forces serving in the
Mediterranean, Australia was obliged to rely primarily on the United
States for its defense during the war in the Pacific. Nearly
500,000 U.S. military personnel were stationed in Australia during
World War II.
may 1942 Battleof Cocol sea
March 17, 1942: General Douglas MacArthur arrived in Australia
six days after leaving the Philippines. As Supreme Commander of the
Southwest Pacific Area (SWPA), MacArthur maintained his headquarters
in Australia until October 1944. Australian General Sir Thomas
Blamey commanded SWPA's ground forces. U.S. and Australian forces
fought side by side in the Southwest Pacific, notably in New Guinea.
10. 31. 91
02:25
PM
P03
2
September 3, 1942: The United States and Great Britain signed
an agreement providing for Lend-Lease aid to Australia.
July 9, 1946: The United States and Australia raised their
Legations to the rank of Embassies. Australian Ambassador Norman J.
O. Makin presented his credentials on September 11; U.S. Ambassador
Robert Butler did so on September 25.
October 1950: Australian troops began serving with the British
Commonwealth Brigade in the Korean War. The last Australian
military personnel left the U.N. Command in Korea in August 1957.
September 1, 1951: The ANZUS security treaty between Australia,
New Zealand, and the United States was signed at San Francisco.
September B, 1954: Australia was one of the signatories of the
Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty (SEATO).
March 9-14, 1957: John Foster Dulles became the first U.S.
Secretary of State to visit Australia when he attended a SEATO
ministerial meeting in Canberra.
February 25, 1960: The United States and Australia signed an
agreement establishing tracking stations used in manned space flight
programs.
not
May A. 1963: The United States and Australia signed an
notable
agreement establishing a U.S. naval communications center
June 1965: The first Australian soldiers arrived in South
Vietnam. The last were withdrawn on March 1, 1972.
October 20-23, 1966: Lyndon B. Johnson became the first U.S.
President to visit Australia. In December 1967 he returned to
attend memorial services for Prime Minister Harold Holt.
July 27-29, 1976: Prime Minister J. Malcolm Fraser made the
first of several visits to the United States. He and President
Gerald Ford stressed the need for continued cooperation between the
ANZUS countries.
May 1, 1982: Vice President George Bush visited Australia to
commemorate the 30th anniversary of the ANZUS Treaty.
July 15, 1985: Secretary of State George P. Shultz and
Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs Bill Hayden issued a joint
statement in Canberra reaffirming the importance of the ANZUS Treaty
and expressing hopes for full cooperation between all its
signatories 1988-89 Australian celebrated bricentenuary of European settlement.
June 24-27, 1989: Prime Minister Robert Hawke made his fifth
visit to Washington and met with President George Bush.
PA/HO 10/23/89
U.S.
funds for an america
Gallery it the wat.
M Museum inine
DEC 12 '91 14:22 AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 65 3384550
P.1
FAX TRANSMISSION
American Embassy Singapore
Economic/Political Section
30 Hill Street
Singapore 0617
Tel. (65) 338-0251, Ext. 309
FAX (65) 338-4550
TO: Ms. Michelle Nix
DATE: December 12, 1991
White House
FAX #: 202-456-6218
NO. OF PAGES 5
FROM: C. Lawrence Greenwood
**
Economic/Political Counselor
Art Kobler asked me to send you some information on the
Singapore lecture. I have enclosed a pamphlet from last
year's lecture and a mock-up of the one the Institute is
planning to use for the President's address. The pamphlet
explains the background of the lecture series and includes
the past lecturers. Let me know if you have questions on
this. I think Art mentioned that we have sent a number of
cables outlining themes the President may want to raise in|the
speech. If you're having trouble locating them, Pepper
Richhart on the desk at State (647-3278) can help you.
P.2
INTERNATIONAL
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENTS
DEC 12 '91 14:22 AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 65 3384550
The Institute of Southeast Asian Studies was established as an
autonomous organization in 1968. It is a regional research centre
for scholars and other specialists concerned with modern Southeast
Asia, particularly the multi-faceted problems of stability and security,
economic development, and political and social change.
The Institute is governed by a twenty-two-member Board of Trustees
UNDER THE DISTINGUISHED CHAIRMANSHIP OF
comprising nominees from the Singapore Government, the National
University of Singapore, the various Chambers of Commerce, and
MR S. RAJARATNAM
professional and civic organizations. A ten-man Executive Committee
FORMER SENIOR MINISTER
oversees day-to-day operations; it is chaired by the Director, the
(PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE)
Institute's chief academic and administrative officer.
SINGAPORE
The Singapore Lecture Series was inaugurated by the Institute
in 1980 with a founding endowment from the Monetary Authority
WEDNESDAY, 3 APRIL 1991
of Singapore (MAS), which has since been augmented with a
SINGAPORE CONFERENCE HAVE
generous donation from Mobil Oil Singapore.
The Singapore Lecture is designed to provide the oppor-
P.3
tunity for distinguished statesmen, scholars and writers,
and other similarly highly qualified individuals specializ-
ing in banking, commerce, international economics and
finance, and philosophical and world strategic affairs, to
visit Singapore. The presence of such eminent personalities
will allow Singaporeans, especially the younger executives
and decision-makers in both the public and private sectors,
Rudolphus (Ruud) Franciscus Marie Lubbers was born on 7 May 1939 in Rotterdam and educated at the
to have the benefit of exposure to - through the Lecture,
Canisius College in Nijmegen and the Netherlands School of Economics (the predecessor of the University
of Rotterdam), where he studied Economics. As suggested by the title of his 1962 thesis - "The influence
televised discussions, and private consultations - leaders of
of differing productivity trends in various countries on the current account of the balance of payments" -
thought and knowledge in various fields, thereby enabling
his main interest was in monetary affairs.
them to widen their experience and perspectives.
He originally planned an academic career, but was compelled by family circumstances to join the management
of Lubbers Construction Workshops and Machinefabriek Hollandia BV.
In 1964 he became Chairman of the Young Christian Employers Association, later becoming Chairman of
the Catholic Association of Metalwork Employers and a member of the board of the Netherlands Christian
Employers Federation.
DEC 12 '91 14:23 AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 65 3384550
From 11 May 1973 to 19 December 1977 he was Minister for Economic Affairs in the Den Uyl government
7.00 p.m.
Arrival of guests
and a member of the Catholic People's Party (KVP).
He chose to return to Parliament on the formation of the Van Agt government in 1977, becoming Senior
7.40 p.m.
All guests to be seated
Deputy Parliamentary Leader of the Christian Democratic Alliance (CDA), the alliance between the KVP and
the other two main denominational parties. In the autumn of 1978 he became Parliamentary Leader of the
3.00 p.m.
Introductory Remarks by the
Alliance. From 4 November 1982 to 14 July 1986 and from 14 July 1986 to 7 November 1989 he was Prime
Chairman, Mr S. Rajaratnam,
Minister of the first and second Lubbers government. On the latter date Her Majesty the Queen reappointed
followed by the Lecture by
him Prime Minister to lead the third Lubbers government. He also holds the post of Minister for General
the Hon. Mr R.F.M. Lubbers
Affairs. From 7 to 14 November 1989 he was (pending a permanent arrangement) Minister for Netherlands
Antillean and Aruban Affairs.
Mr Lubbers is the longest-serving post-war Prime Minister of the Netherlands.
He will concurrently be President of the European Council from July to December 1991. He is now part
of the Troika for European Political Co-operation dealing with matters of regional and global concern.
Mr Lubbers is married to M.E.J. Hoogewegen and they have two sons and a daughter.
6th Singapore Lecture
5 December 1985
10th Singapore Lecture
P.4
15 October 1989
Deficits, Debts and
Demographics: Three
Trade Outlook:
Fundamentals
Globalization or
Affecting Our Long-tern
Regionalization
Economic Future
by BRIAN MULRONEY
by PETER G. PETERSO
9th Singapore Lecture
14 December 1988
Regionalism, Globalism
5th Singapore Lecture
and Spheres of Influence:
8 November 1984
ASEAN and the
Challenge of Change
The Future of the
into the 21st Century
Western Alliance and
by MAHATHIR BIN
Its Implications for Asia
MOHAMAD
by JOSEPH LUNS
DEC 12 '91 14:23 AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 65 3384550
4th Singapore Lecture
10 November 1983
8th Singapore Lecture
The Soviet Union:
27 November 1987
Challenges and
11th Singapore Lecture
Responses as Seen
3 April 1991
The Challenge of Change
from the European
International Economic
in the Asia-Pacific Region
Point of View
by BOB HAWKE
by HELMUT SCHMIDT
Developments
by R.F.M. LUBBERS
7th Singapore Lecture
25 November 1986
3rd Singapore Lecture
2 December 1982
Trends in the
International Financial
Peace and East-West
System
Relations
by RAYMOND BARRE
by GISCARD D'ESTAIL
P.5
The Singapore Lecture is designed to provide the
opportunity for distinguished statesmen, scholars
and writers, and other similarly highly qualified
individuals specializing in banking, commerce, inter-
national economics and finance, and philosophical
and world strategic affairs, to visit Singapore. The
presence of such eminent personalities will allow
Singaporeans, especially the younger executives
and decision-makers in both the public and private
2nd Singapore Lecture
sectors, to have the benefit of exposure to -
30 October 1981
through the Lecture, televised discussions, and
private consultations - leaders of thought and
American Foreign Policy:
knowledge in various fields, thereby enabling them
A Global View
to widen their experience and perspectives.
by HENRY KISSINGER
The Singapore Lecture Series is organized by the
Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. The Series
was inaugurated in 1980 with a founding endow-
ment from the Monetary Authority of Singapore
12 '91 14:24 AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 65 3384550
(MAS), which has since been augmented with a
generous donation from Mobil Oil Singapore.
Inaugural
Singapore Lecture
14 October 1980
The Invisible Hand in
Economics and Politics
by MILTON FRIEDMAN
DEC
P.6
DEC
12 '91 14:25 AMEMBASSY SINGAPORE 65 3384550
H.E. MR GEORGE BUSH
George Herbert Walker Bush is the 41st President of the United States, the first incumbent vice president to move
up to the presidency through the choice of the voters since 1836.
He was born on 12 June 1924 in Milton, Massachusetts and received his high school education at the prestigious
Phillips Academy in Massachusetts. On his eighteenth birthday in June 1942, soon after graduation, he enlisted in
the navy. He was still eighteen when he received his wings and became the youngest pilot in the U.S. Navy at that
time. Later Mr Bush was awarded a Distinguished Flying Cross and three Air Medals.
When World War II ended, he went on to study at Yale University and earned a degree in economics in only two-and-
a-half years. He received a Phi Beta Kappa key in recognition of his outstanding academic record.
Mr Bush began his career in business, in 1948, as an oilfield supply salesman. In 1951 he co-founded the Bush-
Overbey Oil Development Company. In 1953 he and two other friends founded Zapata Petroleum Corporation, and
six-years later started Zapata OffShore Company, one of America's pioneer offshore oil-drilling enterprises. He also
served as Executive Committee Chairman of the First International Bank of Houston during 1977-78.
Subsequently Mr Bush decided to leave the business world and enter politics, and in 1966 was elected to the U.S.
House of Representatives from Houston's 7th District and was re-elected two years later.
in December 1970 President Richard Nixon asked Mr Bush to become the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations,
a position he held until January, 1973. When Mr Nixon was forced to resign and Mr Gerald Ford became the-new
president, Mr Bush was appointed head of the U.S. Liaison Office in the People's Republic of China, 1974-75. From
1976 to 1977, he served as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
In 1980 Mr Bush sought the Republican nomination for president. He became Mr Ronald Reagan's strongest rival,
but later withdrew from the race and asked his delegates to shift their support to Mr Reagan. Mr Reagan subsequently
asked Mr Bush to be his vice-presidential running mate. In the November election, the Reagan-Bush team won a
landslide victory.
Mr Bush served for eight years as vice-president. In the area of foreign affairs he was head of the Reagan
Administration's "crisis management" team. He also acted as a special emissary for the president.
InAugust, 1988 Mr Bush was nominated as candidate for the U.S. presidency by his party at their convention. He and
his vice presidential candidate, Mr Dan Quayle, then went on to win the U.S. election in November 1988.
He is married to Barbara Pierce and they have four sons and one daughter.