In
announcing a separation from
the US, the Philippine’s President Duterte recently flagged a closer
relationship with China, stating, "America
has lost…I’ve realigned myself in your [China’s] ideological flow."
Although Duterte subsequently walked back from his
position, the perception is emerging that the Philippines under Duterte is at
best charting a more independent path, and at worst, decisively aligning with
China.
On the South China Sea, Duterte indicated
that he’ll put aside the outcome of the Arbitral Tribunal and engage with
Beijing bilaterally. In an apparent quid pro quo, Chinese Coast Guard vessels have
left the Scarborough Shoal. This implies reward for Manila for aligning itself
with Beijing. The risk is other ASEAN states will
seek similar benefit, further
undermining the already fragile ASEAN unity. Beijing already has enough influence over
Laos and Cambodia to make consensus over ASEAN joint communiqués on the South
China Sea impossible.
Having the Philippines in its pocket would allow Beijing’s to divide and weaken
ASEAN, and the Philippines’ leadership of
ASEAN in 2017 could further enhance Beijing’s influence.
Duterte also suggested reviewing the
2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), which allows the US regular access to five
Philippines bases under the
2011 Manila Declaration.
Even if EDCA survives, an unpredictable and hostile Duterte, motivated by a
lifetime of personal resentment
towards America, could cause severe problems for Washington. His threats to end
joint US–Filipino naval
patrols and US Special Forces operations
against Islamist groups in Mindanao would sour relations even
further. Purchasing Russian
and Chinese military hardware would probably end the US–Philippines defense
relationship. It would certainly tear a hole in the Obama’s rebalance to Asia.
Clearly the next US administration can’t
simply continue with the same policy as before. A Philippines realignment
would be a huge blow to US interests in Asia, and if TPP ratification
also fails, the confluence of two such important events would introduce greater
uncertainty to what would follow a failed US Rebalance. The US needs a new
strategy for Asia, but any policy change will take time to emerge after the new
president’s inauguration, and may be outpaced by events—as was dramatically
demonstrated by Duterte’s time in Beijing last week
Kurt Campbell has already
been thinking about that challenge, and argues in The Pivot (2016)
that the American strategy for Asia must evolve if it’s to be successful.
Campbell lays out a ten-point plan which focuses on bolstering alliances
through joining together the ‘spokes’ of the ‘hub and spokes’ arrangements and
strengthening the various bilateral spoke arrangements. Although The Pivot was
written before Duterte’s bombshell, Campbell’s suggestion of a federated
approach through building greater integration in defense and security,
economics, political and cultural ties between the spokes makes a great deal of
sense. The goal of the Campbell strategy is to open up new opportunities for US
forward presence by strengthening and integrating the other spokes, such as
Japan, Australia, South Korea and key ASEAN allies. Hubs and spokes survive—but
not as we know it.
As part of that approach, Campbell makes
clear that the US has an interest in additional basing for its forces in
Australia, including naval vessels and more regular joint exercises. He also
specifically notes the potential for cooperation on missile defense as a
counter to Chinese A2/AD capabilities.
Campbell’s suggestions are echoed in a recent report (PDF)
by the US Studies Centre at the University of Sydney, which makes twelve
recommendations for strengthening the US–Australia alliance. Those include
deploying long-range airpower into northern bases, and homeporting a US carrier
battlegroup in Australia. Certainly, in line with Campbell’s interest in joint
missile defense, Australia could consider an option to fast-track acquisition
of integrated air and missile defense against ballistic and land-attack cruise
missile threats. Hooks for those already appear in Australia’s 2016 Defence
White Paper. Those capabilities would be particularly important for countering
submarine-based land-attack cruise missile (LACM) threats to
Australian defense facilities used by US forces.
Missile defense would be more effective if
the ADF knew where potential submarines capable of launching LACMs were, and
that suggests greater efforts towards monitoring our underwater maritime
approaches. We could work with the US to develop a Theatre ASW
capability as part of an enhanced US–Australia partnership. That could
eventually be expanded to include other key partners such as Japan in a manner
that is consistent with Campbell’s suggested approach of building webs between
spokes.
The strategy suggested by Campbell in The
Pivot, and echoed by the US Studies Centre report, is more relevant than ever
given the direction Duterte is leading the Philippines, and of the broader
trends and events that are challenging US interests across Asia. Duterte’s
approach will present a serious challenge to the next US administration, and by
extension, to Australia’s regional security interests. His approach to foreign
policy is akin to a bull in a China shop. The US, Australia and others will
have to pick up the pieces.
This first appeared in ASPI's The Strategist by Malcolm
Davis
No comments:
Post a Comment