Interesting article on Kerry in Asia

[karynnj]

Last edited Fri Feb 5, 2016, 01:10 PM - Edit history (1)

The funny thing is that as they posit that his "hot diplomatic streak" might end with working with China on North Korea, the arguments essentially boil down to China will do what is best for them. They also bring up the neoliberal all time favorite that seems to be mostly just TPP - the pivot to Asia which I still don't get - because as HRC said - the President can't choose his issues.

However, though there is that pall over a meeting yet to have occurred, when they list his accomplishments recently and then a list that no one saw in 2004 on his accomplishments in Asia as a Senator. (In fact, until Prosense documented it, I never heard the good work he did in Cambodia,)

Kerry, whose recent diplomatic victories include the conclusion of an Iran nuclear deal and the release of U.S. Navy sailors and prisoners from Iranian custody, the re-establishment of ties with Cuba after decades of estrangement and a historic international agreement on climate change, has given less attention to Asia than his predecessor Hillary Clinton.

His focus on other regions has disappointed some Asian diplomats given that he's no stranger to the region, having famously fought with distinction in the Vietnam War, played a leading role in the re-establishment of diplomatic relations with Hanoi and helped set up a tribunal for surviving Khmer Rouge leaders in Cambodia while in the Senate.

So he may be keen to put a personal stamp on the Obama administration's Asia policy, which has so far yielded a massive Trans-Pacific Partnership designed to ensure Western rather than China-dictated standards underpin the regional trading system; tightened alliances South Korea, Japan, the Philippines and Australia amid Chinese territorial muscle-flexing in the East and South China Seas; and helped steer Myanmar out of isolation and through a political reform process.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/26/politics/john-kerry-north-korea-china-visit/


Note they missed his long shot important work on the US/China climate pact.


While it is understandable that NK is the big deal on this troop, they are missing a lot about this very trip. It started in Laos and Kerry is there to help Obama prepare for a conference with countries from that region that Laos is the current chairman of. In addition, Kerry was there to build on the efforts of Ben Rhodes and Tony Blinken for a bigger commitment to rid Laos of the unexploded bombs from the 1960s and 1970s. (Similar efforts were spoken of in Combodia.) https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/world/2016/01/22/john-kerry-discuss-unexploded-bombs-trip-laos/kz3Irm3OlwhgZOOUHifpeN/story.html

Laos is the most bombed country in history, posing a poignant challenge for Kerry, who served in the Vietnam War, then returned home to become one of its leading protesters and launch his political career.

“We thought we were a moral country, yes, but we are now engaged in the most rampant bombing in the history of mankind,” Kerry said on “The Dick Cavett Show” in 1971, long before the scope of the so-called secret war in Laos was publicly known.

Kerry played a big role in normalizing relations with Vietnam as a US senator from Massachusetts. As America’s top diplomat, he now emphasizes bomb cleanup efforts as he builds ties in the region.


Honoring the 60th anniversary of diplomatic relations last year, Kerry said the United States continues to “make real our pledge to help clear Laos of unexploded ordnance.”

In Laos, Kerry met someone working now - and since he met Kerry in the 1990s on finding the bodies of those killed in the Vietnam war.

In Cambodia, he met with the President, with whom he worked years ago on a way to have trials for the Khmer Rouge.

Years ago, as a member of the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I traveled here several times in the 1990s to try to help find a way to hold the Khmer Rouge accountable for the terrible events of the killing fields where nearly two million people were killed. And I worked with Prime Minister Hun Sen and the UN to help create a structure that became the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia. And we were able to break a gridlock between the government and the UN that resulted in accountability for the crimes of the Pol Pot era. Now, not everybody paid the price of that court. Pol Pot himself died before, as did some others. But there are those in prison today as a result of its continued work and accountability still continues.

I also was very privileged to chair the United States Senate committee that sought a full accounting for Americans lost during the war in Southeast Asia. And this is an effort in which Cambodian support was both sought and given. I will never forget one of my last trips here, 1999 – not the last, but in 1999 -- Ambassador Heidt was then an economic officer at the embassy. And on that visit I had the honor of meeting the late King Sihanouk and we discussed a shared common vision of a democratic, prosperous Cambodia at peace.

So I am very, very conscious, in returning here now in 2016, at the extraordinary distance that has been traveled by Cambodia, a country that has developed rapidly, seen its citizens now move into the – or just about to break the barrier of the lower end of middle income categorization. And this city, which, when I first came here, was a city of 350,000 people and a very war-torn economy is now a city of 2.2 million people with a very modern hospital, skyscrapers, enormous energy, and many, many tourists. So I am very conscious of how much progress has been made and how far we have traveled in our relationship.

This continues on the joint efforts they are doing with Cambodia.

http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2016/01/251694.htm

If he was not also working on Syria and NK, these would be incredible important newsworthy efforts. One thing that runs through all of the many remarks pages on state.gov is the depth of his relationships from when he headed the POW/MIA effort.

[ladym55]

1. Nice summary of JK's work

He is doing an amazing job, and he continues to be under appreciated.

[MBS]

2. + 1000 n/t

[karynnj]

3. Thanks and I agree that he is under appreciated, but I think that is actually changing

In the past, CNN would never have included the sentence speaking of the how some had hoped that he would focus his attention there - mentioning the work he did as a Senator. Think back to 2004 - though some spoke of his work on the POWs, there was absolutely nothing on the fact that he is credited with working out the compromise that the UN and Cambodia used for trials - in the long ago Prosense thread, it surfaced again when the UN used the procedures in Sierra Leone. (Then think of the inside the beltway garbage when he was not picked as SoS that it was because he was a lightweight -- I suspect by the same people who diminished Biden as soon as there was speculation that he would run in this year's race.)

I think being (other than Obama in both cases because the go ahead of the President was obviously needed) the essential American in getting both the Iran deal, that very possibly avoided what would be a worse war than Iraq AND the essential American in getting the China/US climate change pact and the Paris agreement on climate change. Others can claim they were important in either of these - and in both cases there were many many people who worked hard to get where we are), but these are both part of Kerry's legacy.

In addition, for those who do not think he has an over reaching vision on foreign policy, it is mostly that he has one that is a VERY major shift from their POV. This includes most of the "foreign policy experts" - most are neo liberals or neocons. What is interesting is that many of them are grudgingly respectful of his ability as a diplomat. This is significant because it is (limited) praise for someone working against their goals. (google Aaron David Miller or Michael O'Hanlon for two neo libs.) If they shy away from conceding he is as significant as Kissinger and Baker, it is fair to say that it is because they actually agree with a foreign policy - Kissinger's and Baker's - that most of us think wrong .. and immoral.

The Iran deal really is a done deal. It is international and there really is no Republican gain in pulling out. While they can impose US sanctions - they will be more ineffective than the unilateral Cuba sanctions. As long as Iran is not violating the agreement, there is no chance of getting the rest of the world to agree. In fact, all that happens is that US businesses are excluded from a potentially lucrative market. Climate change is more fragile - but with any luck, the agreement has tipped the balance towards green energy. One question I have - far outside my knowledge that I have not seen answered is - would the energy companies that change their power plants to comply with the EPA have any real economic incentive to change back -- or are the upgrades or changes now sunk costs? (I know one answer is elect a Democrat so we don't have to find out, but I wonder what the economics at this point are.)