As Iraqis prepare for a post-Saddam regime, elsewhere people are pondering over the next steps the US might take; it is clear that the US will not stop with Iraq and it will go after other targets, most of which are in Asia. Suddenly, Asia has become vulnerable.

After the end of the Cold War, bereft of enemies, the US has been looking for new ones to support the domestic military-industrial complex. For once, it appeared that the US would create an enemy out of China. A series of ‘China-threat’ theories manufactured by Pentagon portrayed China as another ‘strategic rival’, a second USSR, opposed to the US. But having seen the collapse of the Soviet Union, China is treading very cautiously. It has given up most of its Cold –War days’ ideological rigidity and has refused to compete with US in any leadership rivalry. China has a different priority – economic modernization. It is, therefore, seeking peace with every possible adversary, including US.

Frustrated, the US is looking for smaller mortals, and they are plenty in Asia. The quick operations in Afghanistan and Iraq have enabled the US to reposition itself in the Gulf region both economically and strategically. After all, Iraq sits over 10 percent of world oil reserves! But will the US stop after Iraq? Probably not. If Afghanistan was the beginning, Iraq is just one of the stops. The superpower is in the process of carving out many stops for itself. Its realist mindset has suddenly become very aggressive and assertive post-September 11. The technological leap that it enjoys over its adversaries gives it a new confidence.

It’s anybody’s guess that Iran and North Korea will feel most vulnerable, although the US is also indulging in some verbal gymnastics against Syria. Since 1979, US and Iran do not have diplomatic relations. The US made huge diplomatic investments in curtailing Iran’s regional influence but this has not paid rich dividends. On the contrary, Iran has emerged as a key regional player enjoying good relations with its neighbours. Post-Iraq, the US might pressurize Iran, there being no dearth of issues. For long the US has been naming Iran as a source of terrorism and is still suspicious of its missile and nuclear programme. The former Shah of Iran enjoyed good relations with the US, and replicating the Afghanistan and Iraq examples the US could push his supporters as a front against the ruling Islamic regime in Tehran. However, Iran will not be a cakewalk like Afghanistan and Iraq. The same holds true for North Korea that has nuclear weapons. And much to the chagrin of India, the US could pressurize it to solve the Kashmir dispute with Pakistan or face internationalization of the issue, thereby allowing a role for itself. Its active involvement in Philippines and Nepal on the anti-terrorism plank is just an eye-opener towards a larger goal of reaching out everywhere in Asia.

There is no denying that Asia is a troublesome continent characterized by many ‘hot’ spots. Perhaps realizing this, Asian countries, in the last one-decade, have been seriously debating a new approach to conflict resolution through ‘cooperative security.’ In fact, the ‘Asian security project’ initiated by Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries and joined by other countries including India and China is the most ambitious project to make Asia secure and stable. The countries of the region have come together to build a series of regional security structures such as ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), Conference on Interaction and Confidence- Building Measures in Asia (CICA) and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) wherein a number of initiatives have been undertaken.

There is little opposition to the involvement of the US in conflict-resolution processes. The problem is that the US is still not trained in the art of ‘cooperative security behaviour,’ its participation in ARF not withstanding. Its military approach has only complicated the situation in Asia. If allowed further, not only will it push back the security attempts of Asian countries through ‘cooperative instincts,’ but it will also threaten the core values of Asia. In particular, Asian attempts to develop an ‘alternative’ perspective in international relations, notably on human rights, development, democracy, and even the conduct of international relations, will be seriously undermined.

The remedy lies in not letting Iraq be a case in isolation. Afghanistan and Iraq have many lessons to offer both in terms of roots of conflicts and the ways to deal with them. It is time Asian countries develop a common consciousness and collective opinion. The emergence of many security platforms augur well for the region. They need to develop ‘ARF’ type initiatives on all issues of concern in their vicinity so as to eliminate any possibility for a military solution. The beginning can be made by collectively seeking a peaceful resolution to the North Korean nuclear stalemate.