Chinese actions in maritime Asia are raising questions about American
willingness and ability to act decisively in the region. That ambiguity is bad
news for members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, traditionally
dependent on the US security umbrella and more recently enjoying rapid
expansion of trade with China.
Chinese
perceptions of American weakness are fueling the aggressiveness with which
Beijing is pushing its sovereignty agenda in the East and South China seas.
China perceives a Washington divided by political partisanship, a questionable
economic recovery, and budgetary restraints on military spending. Beijing is
also aware of the historical trend that presages a US shift away from
interventions abroad after engaging in major wars, in this case Afghanistan and
Iraq.
While
President Barack Obama tries to convince Asian allies and partners that he is
following through on his “rebalance,” or “pivot,” China is working hard to
counter that narrative. In this milieu, dangerous miscalculations with serious
geostrategic consequences are possible.
In response,
Asian countries are either hedging against the possibility that the United
States might not be able to underwrite their security, or are adopting a
pro-active stance against Beijing.
An
example of hedging is the public denial by the head of the Malaysian armed
forces that he had been surprised by China sending warships into Malaysian
waters in January. He said, incorrectly, that Malaysia, the United States, and
others had been notified before the Chinese ships “strayed into Malaysian
waters,” where sailors took an oath to safeguard Chinese sovereignty in the
South China Sea.
Responses
of this kind — intended to avoid escalating tensions with a rising China over
the South China Sea disputes — could encourage more aggressive behavior by
Beijing in the future. Such responses are based on perceptions rather than
realities, but America should still give its allies and security partners no
reason to depend on such pacification-by-hedging.
A strong
but nuanced US stance will encourage important Asian powers like Indonesia,
which is not a claimant in the South China Sea territorial disputes. An
Indonesian official declared recently that China claims part of Indonesia’s
waters off the Natuna Islands. Beijing includes part of the Natuna Sea within
the “nine-dash line” map depicting its extensive claims in the South China Sea.
As a
preemptive measure against instability, Jakarta has decided to deploy
additional forces around the Natuna Islands. While the measured Indonesian move
signals to China that its claims will not go uncontested, any military
escalation could be dangerous without a guarantee of broader international
intervention, which would be necessary in a face-off between two powers of such
disparate strength as China and Indonesia. Such intervention would have to be
an essentially American-led initiative.
But it
is precisely this confidence in a decisive America that is being tested.
Asia
wants to be convinced that the United States has the will and capacity to
sustain its role as the ultimate security arbiter in the Indo-Pacific. Savvy
Asian policy makers are looking for a US leader who will build a political
foundation for proactive engagement in Asia throughout the 21st century.
Sophisticated
Asian friends understand that long term security engagement must be accompanied
by enhanced trade and investment links. American priorities must be animated by
its national interests.
By
contrast, Beijing is developing a narrative of America as a declining power
whose weak economic recovery has been compounded by political gridlock serious
enough to make President Obama cancel his Asia visit last November. In
addition, the White House’s failure to aggressively petition Congress for trade
promotion authority, which is crucial for completion of the Trans-Pacific
Partnership trade agreement, even though economic engagement in Asia is crucial
to America’s long-term interests, erodes confidence in Washington’s ability to
remain the key offshore balancer in the region.
Worries
about an America in decline are of great concern to the 10 members of Asean,
whose prosperity and stability are a direct result of US engagement.
These
are just perceptions, but perceptions are real to those who hold them. The
truth is that China’s military advances do not even begin to challenge American
primacy. US investment in Asean, which far outstrips that of China, is the
foundation for development, and the American market remains the final
destination for many exports even in an economically ascendant Asia.
But
perceptions can have serious consequences, not least in encouraging missteps
and miscalculations. In particular, America’s pivot to Asia would prove to be
more dangerous than reassuring if it turned out to be a promise without serious
intent. Asian countries depending on determined US focus would be led into
making erroneous policy choices that would antagonize China, and then would
find no sustained American policy of engagement to fall back on.
Asia’s
strategic uncertainties give the United States an opportunity to match actions
with words and show the region that it is here to stay. This will be the
challenge Obama faces as he visits Asia this week. If that reassurance is
successful, China will come to understand the reality of US commitment and
change its behavior toward Southeast Asian countries accordingly.
Ernest
Z. Bower is a senior adviser and holds the Sumitro Chair for Southeast Asia
Studies at CSIS. Follow him on Twitter at @BowerCSIS.
Derwin
Pereira heads a Singapore-based political consulting company and also is a
member of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard
University.
No comments:
Post a Comment