What Hawks and Doves Both Miss on the Asia Pivot

A group of MV-22 Ospreys taking off from the USS Bonhomme Richard during operations in the East China Sea

U.S. Navy

AA Font size + Print

A group of MV-22 Ospreys taking off from the USS Bonhomme Richard during operations in the East China Sea

Depending on one's perspective, China is either unchecked or overly provoked. But there is a bigger point still missing from most debates. by Janine Davidson

President Obama’s long awaited trip to Asia has highlighted the ongoing debate about the military part of the “rebalance.”   Criticism comes from all sides.  Those who claim the Obama administration has not matched its verbal commitment to the region with real action or military investment are countered by others who worry that the policy is overly militaristic and provocative.  Depending on the perspective, China is either going unchecked or being provoked, both of which would lead to instability if not corrected.

But this China-centric debate misses the bigger point about the role America plays in the region and the way that role is changing.  The network of alliances and partnerships the U.S. has developed with over a dozen countries throughout the region represents the foundation of America’s Asia-Pacific policy – and is our most important asset. It is sustained multilateral engagement focused on promoting cooperative approaches to stability and security among these allies and partners, not swelling U.S. force deployments aimed at preparing for war against China, that will be the real benchmark of success for the rebalance.

Contrary to common misperception the rebalance was never designed as a zero-sum “pivot” from Europe or the Middle East to Asia.  Rather it was meant to rebalance attention and resources back to Asia after a decade of large-scale counterinsurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.  For instance, throughout the last decade, Marines normally postured in Okinawa, Japan were nearly perpetually deployed from the region to support operations in the Middle East.  Air assets in the region and army units based in Korea were periodically pulled from their forward stationed bases to support the two wars.

Although, as I have previously written, the non-military elements of the rebalance to Asia are predominant, the military shifts are not insignificant.  In terms of physical changes to U.S. military presence across the region, what the U.S. has decided to keep in Asia is as important as what it decided to add.  Many forget that the Bush administration had initiated a downsizing of the U.S. military presence in Korea, which in turn understandably fueled concern about America’s commitment.  Therefore, one of the first steps of the rebalance was to halt that repositioning and to announce the U.S. would sustain a robust presence in both Korea and Japan (28,500 and 50,000 military respectively).

Next, recognizing that the U.S. military presence was heavily weighted in the northeast, the rebalance called for increased presence and engagement with countries to the south, such as Australia, Singapore, Thailand, and the Philippines.  Up to 2,500 Marines will conduct regular six-month deployments to Darwin, Australia for exercises with Australian and other regional forces; while two new littoral combat ships will stage out of Singapore to conduct exercises with various Southeast Asian militaries.  Other moves include the Navy’s posturing of 60 percent of its fleet in the region and new access and cooperation agreements with the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam.

Meanwhile, the President’s visit to Japan underscores the increased military assets the U.S. has recently committed, including increased global hawk rotations to monitor the contested areas around the Senkaku islands, a second missile defense early warning radar and the forward-deployment of two more AEGIS ballistic missile defense ships focused on the threat from North Korea.

Contrary to popular critiques, this military presence is neither provocatively aimed at China nor insignificantly robust.  Nor is it unsustainable.  Sure, the U.S. is downsizing.  But even with the cuts being taken, the U.S. military’s base (non-war) budget is still $136 billion more in 2015 dollars than in 2001. This is more than a reasonable  level of investment to sustain America’s commitment to the Asia-Pacific.

This post appears courtesy of CFR.org.

Close [ x ] More from DefenseOne

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from DefenseOne.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Software-Defined Networking

    So many demands are being placed on federal information technology networks, which must handle vast amounts of data, accommodate voice and video, and cope with a multitude of highly connected devices while keeping government information secure from cyber threats. This issue brief discusses the state of SDN in the federal government and the path forward.

  • Military Readiness: Ensuring Readiness with Analytic Insight

    To determine military readiness, decision makers in defense organizations must develop an understanding of complex inter-relationships among readiness variables. For example, how will an anticipated change in a readiness input really impact readiness at the unit level and, equally important, how will it impact readiness outside of the unit? Learn how to form a more sophisticated and accurate understanding of readiness and make decisions in a timely and cost-effective manner.

  • Cyber Risk Report: Cybercrime Trends from 2016

    In our first half 2016 cyber trends report, SurfWatch Labs threat intelligence analysts noted one key theme – the interconnected nature of cybercrime – and the second half of the year saw organizations continuing to struggle with that reality. The number of potential cyber threats, the pool of already compromised information, and the ease of finding increasingly sophisticated cybercriminal tools continued to snowball throughout the year.

  • A New Security Architecture for Federal Networks

    Federal government networks are under constant attack, and the number of those attacks is increasing. This issue brief discusses today's threats and a new model for the future.

  • Information Operations: Retaking the High Ground

    Today's threats are fluent in rapidly evolving areas of the Internet, especially social media. Learn how military organizations can secure an advantage in this developing arena.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.