Inherency 15 Inherency Energy Dept Blocking 16
UX – Pivot Successful Now
Download 0.9 Mb.
|
UX – Pivot Successful NowUS military credibility is Asia is high – Obama leadership keySheridan 13 – The Australian FOREIGN EDITOR (Greg, 4-30-13, “SILKEN STRANDS OF OBAMA'S ASIA WEB,” Lexis) Washington is also well embarked on the rebalance, or "pivot" to Asia. This is not solely, or even mainly, about military resources, but the US plans to have 60 per cent of its fleet in the Asia-Pacific before 2020.¶ Polling shows for the first time that the American public believes the Asia-Pacific is the most important region in the world to its future. Obama believes this, and has said so more than once.¶ I have just spent two weeks in the US, half in Washington, and held dozens of conversations with administration officials, politicians, military personnel, defence industry figures, a wide range of think-tank scholars, journalists and foreign diplomats. A three-dimensional picture of a complex US strategy in Asia emerges from these discussions.¶ The US is the biggest, most dynamic, most diverse governing system in the world. Policy in Washington is like a rugby maul. Many players exert pressure, but where the ball is, and who has possession of it at any moment, is often a mystery. It's less of a mystery under Obama. On the biggest issues, policy is centralised in the White House. Ultimately, Obama has directed the US Asia strategy.¶ It is centred on the critical US-China relationship, but it is much broader than that. It is strategy across all policy dimensions -- economic, diplomatic, military, intelligence, aid, technology and popular opinion. As far as anything can be in the sprawling US system, Asia policy is a coherent whole, far more coherent, better resourced and better implemented than Canberra's efforts.¶ Last month, Obama's National Security Adviser, Tom Donilon, outlined the administration's goals in a speech to the Asia Society. The speech was designed in part to reassure Asia that the Obama first-term pivot to Asia was going to live on fully in the second administration.¶ New Secretary of State John Kerry said the same thing. There is even a bit of territorial dispute between the White House and former State Department figures over who was the primary author of the pivot. This doesn't matter. The decider on all the key questions was Obama himself.¶ Donilon laid out the second-term Asia strategy: "As the President explained in Canberra, the overarching objective of the United States in the region is to sustain a stable security environment and a regional order rooted in economic openness, peaceful resolution of disputes and respect for universal rights and freedoms.¶ "To pursue this vision, the United States is implementing a comprehensive, multi-dimensional strategy: strengthening alliances; deepening partnerships with emerging powers; building a stable, productive and constructive relationship with China; empowering regional institutions; and helping to build a regional economic architecture that can sustain shared prosperity."¶ There are gaps in the US strategy, and some question whether it can be delivered.¶ I interviewed Republican senator John McCain who, reflecting on US defence cuts, said: "Despite our policy (of the Asia pivot) we are reducing our shipbuilding and our aircraft construction".¶ But there is no doubt the US government is prosecuting a serious Asia strategy, at the same time as its giant economy and society are more deeply engaging with Asia.¶ The centrality of the US-China relationship is a given. The US has systematically built the densest web of consultations with Beijing of any nation. Before Xi Jinping, who studied in the US as a young man, became President, he spent 10 days as a guest of US Vice-President Joe Biden, and Biden spent 10 days as his guest in China.¶ Biden is responsible for one of the classic locutions of US-China relations: "We can't contain you, and you can't expel us."¶ But whereas in Obama's first year in office too much was expected of US-China co-operation, now there is a hard-headed quality to the US approach: engage fully, engage respectfully, but hold China to its word at every point, accept that there will be areas of competition as well as co-operation, and deal with differences frankly and undramatically.¶ At the same time, Washington needs to pursue the broadest positive strategy with the rest of Asia. And finally, while engaging with China, Washington also hedges militarily, so that military deterrence is maintained. A senior administration official outlined the evolution of the Asia pivot to me: "The President came into office convinced that America was underinvested in the Asia-Pacific region and that much of our destiny was tied up in the Asia-Pacific."¶ Washington wants a positive agenda for Asia, beyond the traditional promotion of democracy and beyond enhanced military co-operation with friends and allies. The centrepiece of this is the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an effort to promote a free trade agreement among a diverse group of APEC members including the US, Japan, Canada, Australia, Mexico, Chile, Singapore and Malaysia, among a few others.¶ Washington feels it needs to do this to show it has a positive, non-security agenda for Asia; that friendship with the US can still mean big advantages economically. Everyone in the region notices the absence of China from the deal. But the proposed agreement is structured so that any member of APEC can sign on if it's willing to embrace the market disciplines involved. Most criticism of the TPP has centred on the absence of China and the potential the agreement has for dividing the region.¶ I find the TPP the least convincing element of Washington's Asia strategy, not because it will divide the region but because it seems completely unachievable.¶ Obama has said more than once that he wants the deal done by the end of this year. And all officials faithfully echo their President's wish. But Japan has only just come into the negotiation. Having Japan involved gives the TPP clout, but can anyone really believe that a US-Japan free trade agreement could be negotiated by the end of this year, if ever?¶ Are the Americans even really serious, despite the President's unambiguous words? Obama has not yet appointed a US trade representative for his second term. The administration does not have trade negotiating authority from congress.¶ If the TPP is ultimately successful, it will be a signal achievement for Obama, but the Americans should be careful of investing too much prestige into something unlikely to succeed.¶ The pivot, or rebalance, to Asia has had its sharpest focus in Southeast Asia. Obama has committed to joining, and therefore attending, the East Asia Summit.¶ The defence partnership with Singapore has been enhanced. Washington has worked hard to establish enduring architecture with Indonesia, most evident in the annual US-Indonesia joint ministerial commission. Myanmar's reform is a big success. Obama has attended four ASEAN summits.¶ The senior official says: "We made it a point not to build our Asia strategy around the problems, not just to follow the laser points."¶ All this has enhanced US standing in Asia, which is high, according to regional polls. At the same time, Obama has not been shy of using hard power. In response to North Korea's bellicose rhetoric and threats, the US deployed stealth F-22 fighters and B-1 and B-52 strategic bombers to the Korean peninsula, as well as seriously beefing up its missile defence capabilities. This was an important show of reassurance to allies and deterrence to the North Koreans.¶ Having done this hard-power stuff, Washington then scaled back its rhetoric, and delayed an unrelated missile launch of its own as a gesture of conciliation. This was a shrewd, nuanced and well-sequenced response. First the strategic reassurance, then, from a position of strength, the gestures of conciliation and de-escalation.¶ It may not be enough on the Korean peninsula, but it was measured, thoughtful, proportionate. It was the response of an administration well and truly paying attention.¶ At the same time the Obama administration has responded positively to Japanese moves to beef up its military capabilities and to move more fully to a normal, reciprocal alliance between Washington and Tokyo.¶ But the biggest area of Asia strategy, of course, is China policy.¶ The senior official describes the administration's approach: "We not only accept China's rise but we welcome China's peaceful rise. And we are happy to ensure that China gets a seat at the table. We expect China to take on the responsibilities consistent with its size and that means adhering to the rules."¶ The list of difficulties Washington has with Beijing include: the lack of openness in the Chinese military budget, its behaviour in maritime disputes, its performance in defending nuclear non-proliferation norms and human rights norms, and the whole issue of behaviour in the cyber realm.¶ The cyber issue has come to the fore in recent weeks as the US is politely but firmly demanding a much more substantial dialogue with Beijing over the issue. Washington doesn't want the conversation to become unduly accusatory but it doesn't want to be fobbed off.¶ There are some personnel doubts about the US strategy. People who know him well say that Kerry's primary orientation is to Europe and the Middle East. Like many senators, he is well informed about certain parts of Asia that he has dealt with in Senate hearings, but he has not really demonstrated an appreciation of the overall US strategic system in Asia.¶ Hagel did not put in a brilliant performance at his confirmation hearings. But he has just appointed Mark Lippert, the Pentagon's Assistant Secretary for Asia, as his chief of staff. Lippert is a former adviser to Obama. Having an Asia hand with presidential connections at the Defence Secretary's right hand is no bad thing.¶ Similarly, it is easy to overstate US defence budget cuts. The US will still spend about $US500bn on defence this year. China has developed so-called asymmetric capabilities, especially missiles, designed to produce an "anti-access/area denial" (A2/AD) capability against the US. In turn, the Pentagon has developed the "air-sea battle concept", designed to allow it to blind the Chinese military and disable its A2/AD capabilities.¶ Every rational person on the planet hopes that no such conflict will ever come about, but the US move can be seen as a determination to maintain the credibility of its conventional military deterrence.¶ US policy on Asia is immensely sophisticated and long-sighted, central to our long-term national welfare, and remarkably unscrutinised in Australia. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 0.9 Mb. Share with your friends:
|