U.S. Navy and Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force ships steam in formation during their military manoeuvre exercise known as Keen Sword 15 in the sea south of Japan, in this November 19, 2014 handout provided by the U.S. Navy. REUTERS/Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Chris Cavagnaro/U.S. Navy/Handout
Richard Javad Heydarian, National Interest: The End of U.S. Primacy in Asia
Washington is being outmaneuvered in the Pacific.
The world is steadily confronting the prospect of full-fledged Chinese domination in the world’s most important waterway, the South China Sea. America’s decades-long naval hegemony in Asia, as we know it, may soon vanish into thin air as a resurgent China reclaims primacy in the region. Though economically vulnerable, Beijing has lacked nothing in terms of geopolitical assertiveness. In a span of two months, China has dramatically redrawn the operational landscape in adjacent waters.
China kicked off the year with a bang, conducting several test flights to its newly built airstrips in the Spratly chain of islands. This was followed by China’s decision to (once again) deploy a giant oil rig, Haiyang Shiyou 981, into Vietnamese-claimed waters in the South China Sea, just as Hanoi deliberated on a high-stakes leadership transition. When President Barack Obama, during his “short-sleeve” summit with Southeast Asian leaders in Sunnylands, sought to mobilize regional diplomatic pressure on China, Beijing upped the ante by redeploying an HQ-9 surface-to-air missile (SAM) system to the disputed Paracel chain of islands.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: It is too early to write-off the U.S. in the East-Pacific. The U.S. may have a small military footprint in Asia (in comparison to China and everyone else in the region), but it has an enormous economic and political presence, and many countries in Asia look to the U.S. as their ally .... especially when it comes to their border disputes with China.
1 comment:
China is the dominant power in the South China Sea and will be for the foreseeable future. If they are ever to be challenged, it will not be by the US but by someone else. The US has to many economic vulnerabilities, lack of technical expertise, poor leadership compared to China, and poor training compared to China to be able to confront China. The US and other nations need to understand this and act accordingly.
To "look to the US" as an ally in this regard is foolhardy in the extreme on the part of these nations. It's also foolhardy in the extreme on the part of US leadership to think they can represent the interests of these nations in a dispute with China.
While the US does indeed have an "economic and political" presence in the region. The US presence here is not nearly as "enormous" as that of China. To use an analogy, the biggest strongest patron in a biker bar sits wherever he wants to for however long he wants to. The other patrons recognize this reality, act accordingly, and as necessary adjust their behavior in accordance with reality.
China is the biggest strongest nation in the region and is going to remain the biggest strongest nation in the region for a very, very long time unless the Russians should choose to enter the region. This is the only way that calculus will change.
The US and other nations need to adjust to reality and act accordingly. The US might be able to defeat China. (The Red Sea could part or something of this magnitude might happen.) However, it would be prudent not to base one's policies on such unlikely events.
While on "economic presence," the US currently needs "made in China" far more than China needs to provide "made in China" to the US. While the US could and should attempt to address this problem, even if we started today, right now, it would take at least a decade and perhaps longer to correct this situation.
If I'm aware of this, I'm sure the "deal maker" Donald Trump has to be. As such, attempts to "get tough" with China on the South China Sea or pretty much anything else are, at best, only going to further exacerbate the problems we already have. Since he has to be aware of this, his get tough rhetoric during the election campaign has to be just that, rhetoric and the "deal maker" must have worked out a side deal with China that should he get elected they understand it is just rhetoric in an election campaign and certain concessions are going to be made so China does not retaliate against us.
Off topic, but a great thing for the "deal maker" to do would be to renegotiate all of these ridiculously one-sided "alliances" where America gives and gets very little in return such as the defense agreements with South Korea, Japan, NATO countries, and a host of others.
Post a Comment