{"id":3447,"date":"2016-01-06T15:20:41","date_gmt":"2016-01-06T10:20:41","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/jwt2015\/?p=3447"},"modified":"2019-11-18T14:50:23","modified_gmt":"2019-11-18T09:50:23","slug":"united-states-asia-pivot-politics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/internationalaffairs\/united-states-asia-pivot-politics\/","title":{"rendered":"United States & Asia Pivot Politics"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"United<\/a><\/p>\n

In 2011, President Barack Obama announced \u2018Pivot to Asia,\u2019 his new strategy for the Asia-Pacific region. It was also coined as \u2018Act of Strategic Rebalancing\u2019 which emphasizes that the US is going to stay in the Asia Pacific and it\u2019s going to re-infuse new ideas into its security and economic presence in the region. The US appeared to contest the growing influence of China by revitalizing its partnerships with its old allies in the region and also reach out to other like-minded countries for their support for US-led initiatives.

<\/div>
<\/div><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

After a decade of conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the policy shift in form of \u201cPivot to Asia\u201d signalled a new direction for US foreign policy in the twenty-first century. Nonetheless, existing public debates and analyses have so far tended to oversimplify key aspects of the policy. First, they have focused almost exclusively on the military dimension of the rebalance. Second, the US rebalance toward Asia has often been depicted, in a rather reductive manner, as a US \u201cgrand strategy\u201d of military containment of the People\u2019s Republic of China (PRC). Washington, it is argued, is tightening its alliances and enhancing its military capabilities across the Asia Pacific in order to contain the rise of China, its most likely future military near-peer competitor.
\nIn the subsequent years, the US tried to reinvigorate its alliances with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and Australia, and tried to reach out to countries like India to have a larger and effective grouping to support US positions in regional politics. Even in the economic arena, an ambitious project in the form of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was given more importance. As mentioned earlier, the US\u2019 \u2018pivot to Asia\u2019 was less a strategic balancing and more a counter-measure to China\u2019s growing political and military might, and a last attempt to maintain the US position as the prime mover in the Asia-Pacific. However, it might be said that the US\u2019 re-entry has not been impressive because of the lack of intensity as well as many internal rifts between the US allies such as mistrust between Japan and South Korea, lack of consensus among other countries of the Asia-Pacific such as India and ASEAN countries on the US move, and more than anything else, decline in US capacity. It has led to the \u2018pivot\u2019 being less appealing in subsequent years. Till now, TPP was not able to make any clear headway \u2014 it seems it will take more time to realise the TPP on the ground. It may be contrasted with the Chinese project of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which has been successfully launched with wide participation by the countries of the region, including South Korea.<\/p>\n

To counter China within the military realm, the US Department of Defense released, in January 2012, its new Defense Strategic Guidance (DSG) \u201cSustaining US Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense,\u201d intended to reshape the Pentagon\u2019s priorities and capabilities in an era of budgetary constraints and after a decade of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It unambiguously stated that \u201cwhile the US military will continue to contribute to security globally, we will of necessity re-balance toward the Asia Pacific region\u201d (emphasis in the original). That same month, the Pentagon also released the Joint Operational Access Concept (JOAC) that establishes the guiding precepts and capabilities necessary to overcome anti-access and area-denial (A2\/AD) threats. The administration has also sought to strengthen and update existing formal military alliances with Australia, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea and Thailand, while diversifying and deepening its diplomatic and security cooperation with partners such as Indonesia, New Zealand, Singapore, and Vietnam. Washington announced, among other initiatives, the re-posturing of the US Navy from the existing 50\/50 split between the Pacific and the Atlantic to a 60\/40 split between those two oceans by 2020, the transfer of several elements of US forces based in Okinawa to Guam, the upgrading of its missile defence posture, the deployment of marines to Darwin in Australia (as part of what is meant to become a 2,500-strong rotational force), the deployment of littoral combat ships to Singapore, and signed an enhanced defence cooperation agreement with the Philippines. These steps aim to redistribute and disperse American forces across the Asia Pacific, making US defence posture in the region more agile, flexible, and financially sustainable.<\/p>\n

\"United<\/a>There is another unsaid but equally, if not more, significant \u2018pivot to Asia\u2019, which has been gradually but very decisively taking more space in the political and economic landscape of the Asia-Pacific: China\u2019s \u2018pivot to Asia\u2019. China\u2019s growing influence in the region is undisputable, especially in the economic sphere. China has emerged as the Asia-Pacific hub, being the number one trading partner of almost all the countries. With the successful launch of the AIIB and \u2018One-Belt, One-Road (OBOR)\u2019 initiative, China has almost become a pivot of the entire region in the economic sphere. In security affairs also, undeterred by US moves, China has become more assertive and has been making its intent and design more open. It has deliberately discarded its old policy of \u2018hide your capabilities\u2019 and asserted its foreign policy goals. It has made it clear that it would not accept any code of conduct for the South China Sea and in 2013 declared an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea. China probably wants to make its claim for the \u2018pivot\u2019 known and open at this point of time, though it might not be eager to execute them immediately.<\/p>\n

Japan, under the current Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, has also its own \u2018pivot to Asia\u2019 intent. An important shift in Japan\u2019s approach in recent years has been an aggressive policy to erode its peaceful constitution and unlock all the restrictions on Japan\u2019s military role in regional politics. By citing China\u2019s growing assertiveness and the need for an Asia-Pacific response, Japan has been able to convince the US that a changed Japanese posture is a much-needed stance. Japan is aware that the neighbouring countries would not be happy with this attempt to become a \u2018pivot\u2019 to Asia and has thus been trying to reach out other, distant countries in Asia, including India, to garner support.<\/p>\n

In the past one and a half years, more specifically after the Ukraine Crisis, Russia has also been trying to engage more with Asia. At this point in time, Russia has neither capacity nor intent to become a regional pivot in the security sphere, though it has been trying to be a player, at least, in East Asia via its cooperation and connections with North Korea. Moscow has signed a nuclear agreement with India and has been strengthening its relationship with China. Russia\u2019s renewed interests in Japan, Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam are also reported to be part of its agenda to build a Russia\u2019s \u2018pivot to Asia\u2019. Russia is more interested in the economic landscape of the region, and in April 2014, Moscow announced a special economic zone in Vladivostok to reach out to Asia-Pacific countries.<\/p>\n

Few other \u2018pivots\u2019 such as ASEAN\u2019s as a collective entity, which tries to offer an ASEAN way in regional politics, as well as India\u2019s growing regional interests, could also be cited as important variables that are going to shape the future of the region. However, they are nascent and less influential at this point of time.<\/p>\n

Amidst all the \u2018pivots to Asia\u2019, the region has become an arena of contest between the various players of \u2018pivot politics\u2019. A multiplicity of \u2018pivots\u2019 means that there is no one who has substantial influence over the regional security and economic dynamics, leading to complex scenarios. It has resulted in less predictability and more instability in the region. The interplay of these \u2018pivots\u2019 \u2014 their contest as well as alliances \u2014 is going to shape the future of regional political and economics and must be keenly observed.<\/p>\n

United States is redirecting its foreign policy attention, priorities, and resources \u2014 in the post\u2013Iraq & Afghanistan wars period \u2014 toward the world\u2019s most strategically sensitive and economically dynamic region. In the words of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, \u201cThe future of politics will be decided in Asia, not Afghanistan or Iraq, and the United States will be right at the center of the action.\u201d China\u2019s strategic and economic clout certainly is a central concern for US policymakers as the American pivot to the Asia Pacific is driven by a much broader and complex set of political, strategic and economic objectives.<\/p>\n

The overarching ambition of the US re-balance is to preserve American supremacy in world politics while avoiding a major power tussle with the PRC. In order to do so, Washington does not seek to contain China \u2014 as this strategy is deemed to be hopeless and ineffective. The re-balance seeks to sustain US pre-eminence by re-adjustment in the complex \u201cweb of linkages\u201d between the diplomatic, military and economic components of American presence in the Asia Pacific since the end of WWII.<\/p>\n

\"United<\/a><\/p>\n

Courtesy: IndraStra Global<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In 2011, President Barack Obama announced \u2018Pivot to Asia,\u2019 his new strategy for the Asia-Pacific region. It was also coined as \u2018Act of Strategic Rebalancing\u2019 which emphasizes that the US is going to stay in the Asia Pacific and it\u2019s going to re-infuse new ideas into its security and economic presence in the region. The …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":153,"featured_media":3450,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[1,3082],"tags":[3104,1877,574,3105,257,8438,1226,3109,3106,3108,2231,1161,1638,1844,3107,2663,3103,8467,3790],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3447"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/153"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3447"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3447\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25956,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3447\/revisions\/25956"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3450"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3447"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3447"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jworldtimes.com\/old-site\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3447"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}