Essay Sample on U.S. Strategy in Asia-Pacific: Shaping the Power Balance Post WWII

Introduction

Since the cessation of World War II, the U.S. has dominated the power structure in Asia-Pacific. There has been a power balance that has been shaped by order in regards to security, prosperity, and freedom policy objectives. Strong but conflicting impulses have attributed the U.S. strategy in the Asia Pacific. Among them is the fact that Western Pacific has been a ground for Christian missionaries. This fertile ground represented the destiny for U.S. businesses and a favorable environment for the American international power projection (Sutter, 2009). Another of the impulses is the subordinate strategy by American policymakers to the European-based interests. Some leading countries have challenged the various economic and military objectives by America in the Asia-Pacific (McDougall, 2007). Recently, various Asian values have been an undermining factor in the expansion of Western political and cultural norms. Presently, there is a "pivot to Asia" that has created better centuries-long relationships that turn down the 21st-century geopolitical fault lines. However, the US has maintained a dominant military presence and enhanced the development of the region to maintain its hegemony (Shor, 2010). America can be perceived as a pacifier as it has acted as a security guarantor, a deterrent force, and a dispute arbiter (Russett, 2017).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Obama's administration saw an adjustment in the U.S. global strategy, causing the cessation of two wars while increasing investment and attention in the Asia-Pacific. A great turn has been taken after a long time of planning and implementation that has positively influenced the relations amongst America and Asia - particularly East Asia. Before Obama's administration, the primary focus was East Asia and the Western Pacific region. Critical areas such as Central Asia, South, and West Asia were excluded. The adjustments with Obama's administration led to touch on the policies governing Central Asia and South Asia in America. There were clear-cut terms in the South Asian region within the Asia-Pacific strategy that led to important linkages between the securities of Indian Ocean with and Western Pacific. In his second term, Obama led the publishing of a Defense Strategic Guidance that outlined the linkages between America's economic and security interests with the Western Pacific, East Asia, South Asia, and covering the Indian Ocean (Vicziany, Wright-Neville & Lentini, 2004: Panetta & Obama, 2012).

Various challenges existed within the region even with the linkages amongst the covered continents. Obama's reign was characterized by a strong sense of general layout to deal with international relationships. America successfully shaped a new regional structure while disregarding the small challenges (Ross, 2015). With the newest regional security and economic structure, America's relations with the region were characterized by a solid layout and its dominance, considering the rise of China (Ross, 2012).

Administrations before Obama had a security structure considered as "hub and spokes" (Abramowitz & Bosworth, 2003). The security strategy relied on a regional alliance with America acting as the pivot. China was continually rising compared to declining America (Ross, 2012). On the other hand, Japan was stagnant, letting the security structure not function properly related to the Asia-Pacific region's situation. Furthermore, some geopolitical roles of various countries in the region with rising power and influence were not considered. Washington was tasked with attaching their importance. However, with Obama's administration, the countries could be treated as critical partners in the Asia-Pacific region. The relationships led to the active development of cooperation in terms of security, economy, and politics (Yahuda, 2012). Therefore, the objectives outweighed existent bilateral relations between the US and ally countries. The policy structure is characterized by coordination amongst the various partners and allies, leading to an intertwined security layout.

The general structure of diplomacy, economy, and security issues was considered in the design and implementation of the U.S. Asia-Pacific strategy (Campbell & Ratner, 2014). The diplomatic pressures comprise developing partnerships with other countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia. The economic sense is such that the Trans-Pacific Partnership is maintained to enhance better regional economic frameworks (Manyin, Daggett, Dolven, Lawrence, Martin, O'Rourke & Vaughn, 2012). In regards to security, the United States considers the South China Sea factor in the creation of a multilateral security ground. This has led to the involvement of America in security matters in the region while dominating the many Southeast Asian countries. These strategies have been meant to contain rising China.

Obama's administration also took out Southeast Asia as the center of gravity. Previous policies focused on Northeast Asia, placing more emphasis on the Japan and South Korea countries. The Obama administration realized various gaps considering China's rising relations with Southeast Asian nations (Bader, 2012). As a way to have an entirely winning strategy and achieved objectives, America was involved in the East Asia Summit and opted for friendly relationships with Southeast Asian nations. As a result, there was the U.S.-ASEAN summit that led to a Lower Mekong Action Plan which aimed at creating strong relationships among multiple nations. The policy has even presently led to an understanding of the multiple aims that regard winning over Southeast Asian nations and driving a wedge between China and various other countries while containing certain actions such as activities by the Chinese navy.

In realizing various objectives, Obama's administration made sure that various aspects were directed against China. This was a unique operation considering previous acts such as the precautionary strategy towards China by Clinton and the "hedging" strategy by Bush (Beeson, 2006). The "balancing" strategy against China was even more focused compared to any previous strategies.

Conclusion

From the U.S. Department of Defense, the Defense Strategic Guidance notes the potential of a rules-based international order enhanced through friendships and cooperation. Through it, there has been more stable and encouragements of the constant but careful rise of new powers, effective defense cooperation, and economic dynamism. Obama's administration placed more emphasis on the dynamicity of the balance of force in Asia and Pacific to dominate more on the rules of the game and result to a dominant regional position (Meijer & Jensen, 2018). Some of the rules comprise free and open business activities and a peaceful settling of disputes. The policy has made sure to showcase soft but smart power over the nations covered. The results include access to various resources such as the sea and air, more freedom, openness, and fairness in an economic sense. The various rules are comprehensively apparent and evident in the existing regional economic and security structure.

References

Abramowitz, M., & Bosworth, S., (2003). Adjusting to the new Asia. Foreign Aff., 82, 119.

Bader, J. A., (2012). Obama and China's rise: an insider's account of America's Asia strategy. Brookings Institution Press.

Beeson, M., (2006). Introduction (Bush and Asia: America's evolving relations with East Asia). In Bush and Asia: America's evolving relations with East Asia (pp. ix-xv). Routledge.

Campbell, K. M., & Ratner, E. (2014). Far Eastern Promises: Why Washington Should Focus on Asia. Foreign Aff., 93, 106.

Manyin, M. E., Daggett, S., Dolven, B., Lawrence, S. V., Martin, M. F., O'Rourke, R., & Vaughn, B. (2012). Pivot to the Pacific? The Obama administration's rebalancing toward Asia. Library of Congress, Washington DC Congressional Research Service.

McDougall, D., (2007). The Asia Pacific in world politics (pp. 14-15). Boulder CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Meijer, H., & Jensen, B. (2018). The strategist's dilemma: Global dynamic density and the making of US 'China policy'. European Journal of International Security, 3(2), 211-234.

Panetta, L., & Obama, B. (2012). Sustaining US global leadership: Priorities for 21st-century defense. Washington, DC: US Department of Defense.

Ross, R. S., (2012). The problem with the pivot: Obama's new Asia policy is unnecessary and counterproductive. Foreign Aff., 91, 70.

Ross, R. S., (2015). East Asia in Transition: Toward a New Regional Order: Toward a New Regional Order. Routledge.

Russett, B., (2017). International security and conflict. Routledge.

Shor, F., (2010). War in the era of declining US global hegemony. Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies, 2, 65-81.

Sutter, R., (2009). The Obama administration and US policy in Asia. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, 31(2), 189-216.

Vicziany, M., Wright-Neville, D. P., & Lentini, P. (Eds.). (2004). Regional security in the Asia Pacific: 9/11 and after. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Yahuda, M., (2012). The International Politics of the Asia Pacific. Routledge.