Pushing trade as the paramount value in international relations is one of the reasons the Clinton administration has felt so at home with the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation. Nor will you hear any protests from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the only other major pan-Asian regional body with any political clout. The United States has long preferred to deal with Asian nations bilaterally rather than see effective regional structures developed or encourage greater global involvement in Asia's problems. Even if the United States were ready to take on a more ambitious and visionary role in stabilizing Asia, it would receive no significant support from its European allies, who take an even more shortsighted view of Asia as a source of profits than do Americans. The Europeans look the other way when North Korea rattles missiles at American forces or China threatens Taiwan.
Regional structures are no panacea.
But their lack is a telling admission of a refusal by Asian , governments and their American and European partners to set standards on human rights and democracy in Asia and then seek to hold Asian governments to those standards. Western thinkers who say they practice realpolitik elsewhere grow misty-eyed and romantically patronize Asians as societies with different values when massacres occur. Indonesian President B.J. Habibie and his Foreign Minister Ali Alatas have abetted the attacks on the East Timorese by denying that the bloodshed is occurring under the complaisant eyes of their military. As the attacks intensified, these leader's insisted that their forces were in control and no international intervention was needed. Such public lies would be material for war crimes indictments in Europe today.