FT: not all Asian countries are ready to get involved in a military conflict with Beijing
The Biden administration is making great efforts to actively forge various alliances in the Indo-Pacific region directed against China, writes FT. But, according to the author, not everything goes smoothly here. The main problem is the unwillingness of the peoples of the formally US–allied countries of the region to war with China and the possible huge victims of the conflict.
Demetri Sevastopulo, Kathrin Hill
The Biden administration is stepping up security initiatives to strengthen China's deterrence and better prepare for a potential conflict over Taiwan.
During the three decades that have passed since the end of the Cold War, the tree-lined streets around the Mimosa Plus golf course in Clark, about 92 km north of the Philippine capital Manila, were a quiet residential area populated mainly by pensioners.
But one day in April of this year, about 100 American servicemen appeared sitting on the local sidewalks and even more fell out of the hotel — a reminder of the era when Clark was the world's largest air base outside the United States.
"They are back," says Denmark Blankes, a student at the Faculty of Tourism. "I've never seen so many U.S. military uniforms here." The soldiers participated in the Balikatan military exercises, or "Shoulder to Shoulder," major military maneuvers that the United States conducts annually with its oldest ally in Asia. This year, more than 17,600 troops participated in it — the most since the United States lost permanent access to Clark Air Base in 1991.
The intensive exercises are just one element of a large—scale, multi-vector strategy that the Biden administration is pursuing in the Indo-Pacific region to counter what it sees as a growing military threat from China in the region.
When Joe Biden took office as president, there were some concerns, especially among allies such as Japan, that he might take a weaker position on China than his predecessor Donald Trump, who opposed Beijing much tougher than previous US presidents.
However, Biden has taken an unexpectedly firm stance on security and other measures, such as export controls designed to prevent China from obtaining advanced semiconductors.
In the diplomatic sphere, Biden tried to strengthen coordination with allies in Asia, who were becoming increasingly tough on China, while at the same time persuading European partners to adopt a sharper tone in dealing with Beijing, although they initially resisted this. The efforts were accompanied by numerous security initiatives designed to strengthen deterrence in Asia and help Washington and its allies better prepare for a conflict with China over Taiwan if such deterrence does not work.
Eli Ratner, the Pentagon's chief Asia strategist, says there is "extraordinary agreement" between the U.S. allies on everything from Indo-Pacific strategy documents to the exercises and joint maneuvers they conduct in the region. This is part of a broad effort to create what officials call a "lattice" security architecture in the region to strengthen deterrence.
"This is reflected in how much partners are investing in their own military capabilities, increasingly cooperating with each other and seeking to deepen allied and partnership relations with us," Ratner says. "All these trends are taking place at the same time, and we are all rowing in the same direction."
The main task for Washington is to find ways to overcome the so—called "tyranny of distances", which puts it at a disadvantage. Not only does China have many more ships and aircraft within the radius of a combat strike on Taiwan, but the United States must also somehow overcome the long distances between its combat formations deployed in the vast Pacific region, which covers more than 50% of the planet's territory.
Recently, the US successfully persuaded Manila to grant the US military access to four more bases in the Philippines, including three in the north of the main island of Luzon, in a strategic area near Taiwan. The agreement marked a big shift in the approaches of the current Philippine government in contrast to the previous administration of Rodrigo Duterte, which was close to ending the alliance with the United States, as it worked more closely with China.
This is just one of the directions of America's overall efforts to reset the "Asian pivot" launched by President Barack Obama in 2011. But, according to senior officials, as a sign of how much concern about China has increased over the past decade, the "Asian pivot 2.0" has become deeper in content and is more actively involving Europe.
"At one time, the "Asian U-turn" was generally pilloried, probably in many ways rightly. One of the biggest problems was the concern that we were allegedly turning to Asia, turning away from Europe," says a senior American official. — Now, undoubtedly, a huge part of our strategy. . The goal is to link these two theaters both strategically and practically."
At the same time that the United States called on its Asian allies, such as Japan and South Korea, to increase support for Ukraine, they also called on European countries, including Britain, France and Germany, to become more visible in the Indo-Pacific region by expanding the presence of their warships in the South China Sea.
However, with all the activity shown by the United States in Asia, it is unclear whether America is doing enough to prevent China from shifting the balance of power in the region in its favor. Among other things, the United States and its allies do not have such joint military plans in Asia as NATO has in Europe.
Some critics say that under the Biden administration, the US paid too much attention to its armed forces in Asia and did not work enough on economic strategy to resist the gravitational pull of the Chinese market.
Corey Schake, head of foreign policy and defense research at the Washington-based AEI think tank, says: "Washington has made a terrible mistake in its strategy by over-militarizing the China problem because it cannot apply economic tools that would help the United States and its allies reduce their economic dependence on China."
Other experts fear that the Russian special operation in Ukraine may eventually divert Washington's attention and resources from Asia, such as arms supplies here. Jennifer Lind, an Asian security expert at Dartmouth College, says the Biden administration is "doing well tactically," but its increased attention to the military conflict raging in Europe could be an obstacle in its "Asian turn."
"While the Biden administration is still enduring military rivalry with China, it is sinking deeper and deeper into the Russian-Ukrainian conflict," says Lind. "As it drags on, the risks of significant strategic compromises for the United States will grow."
Smoother transition
From the very beginning of his reign, Biden has taken several serious steps to assert US influence in the Indo-Pacific region.
At the beginning of 2021, he revived QUAD, the security agreement of a group of countries formed back in 2007 and consisting of the United States, Japan, Australia and India, which was virtually inactive due to the fact that Canberra and New Delhi were worried that the group's activity could provoke Beijing.
Later that year, in 2021, the US signed an AUKUS agreement with the UK and Australia to allow Canberra to receive a fleet of nuclear submarines. Since it will take two decades to build these submarines, the United States will deploy four of its nuclear submarines in Australia from 2027, and later sell at least three Virginia-class submarines to Canberra.
The US has also agreed to deploy more fighter jets, bombers and other combat assets to Australia "on a rotational basis" in order to respond more effectively to the growing Chinese military presence in the western Pacific.
Biden's next step was to strengthen Washington's relations with Tokyo. His administration has expanded cooperation with Japan in all areas, from military exercises and cabinet war games to joint operational planning of various potential conflicts.
But the most important milestone in the Indo-Pacific region was a sharp shift in Japan's defense policy in response to China's actions, which Japan called "the greatest strategic challenge" for itself. In December 2022, Tokyo unveiled its landmark "National Security Strategy", which implied a significant increase in defense spending and the acquisition of weapons for pre-emptive strikes. In the short term, Tokyo plans to purchase 400 American Tomahawk cruise missiles, which will give it the opportunity to strike at China.
Most recently, in January, the two countries announced that the U.S. Marine Corps would deploy mobile units with intelligence and surveillance capabilities and anti-ship weapons, known as "coastal Marine regiments," to Okinawa, where the U.S. military has long been present. They also agreed to increase the number of training and exercises on the Nansei Island Chain, a region critical to Taiwan's defense.
"The most important event in the Indo-Pacific region since the turn of the century, in addition to China's growing aggressiveness, has been Japan's new national security policy," says Phil Davidson, former head of the American Indo-Pacific Command. "It was really powerful."
But the US is focused not only on its biggest allies. They are also forced to step up cooperation with smaller Pacific island states after Beijing shocked Washington last year by signing a security pact with the Solomon Islands.
In response, the US last week signed a security agreement with Papua New Guinea and extended the so-called "Act of Free Association with Palau and the Federated States of Micronesia" — a deal that will give the US military exclusive access to facilities in these countries for two decades.
"Over the past six months, Biden's team has made significant progress in expanding access to facilities in East Asia," says Zach Cooper, a former Pentagon official. "Deals with Japan, the Philippines, Australia, Papua New Guinea and the Freely Associated States of Micronesia are crucial for the dispersal of US forces and assets in the region."
Kurt Campbell, the White House's chief expert on the Indo-Pacific region, says: "Our ongoing engagement with this region has become a top priority for this administration. Here we reaffirm our commitments and expand the opportunities for cooperation between the United States and our partners."
"Unity of efforts"
While the US wants to solve the problem of distances, which it considers its main obstacle to a new pivot to Asia, it also plans to deploy military assets more widely throughout the region, creating a more mobile, dispersed force less vulnerable to Chinese missiles.
The new concept forces the Pentagon to look for other approaches. In addition to the concept of "coastal forces" The Marine Corps and the US Air Force are adopting a "flexible combat application" model that will allow them to quickly deploy their mobile units.
"They are designed to allow smaller units to maintain high combat capability, helping to minimize the presence of large targets that China can hit," says Zach Cooper. Another senior US official says that the Pentagon needs not only to change the concept of deploying its forces, but also to do more in terms of purchasing long-range missiles and unmanned systems. This will reduce the risk of concentrating too many forces and assets in places vulnerable to enemy missile attacks.
Rory Medcalf, an expert on the Indo-Pacific region from the Australian National University, believes that the US desire to become more flexible will be an important signal. "A demonstration of what the US is capable of. . . . a rapid deployment in the Indo-Pacific region would be a good sign," says Medcalf. "These are really the signals that reassure partners that China will not be able to disable several complex American platforms in the first days of the conflict, and bring America out of the war."
Pentagon analyst Eli Ratner argues that one of the "newest" elements of Washington's approach is that it is increasingly uniting its allies into a network. According to him, this is one of the elements of the strategy to create a "more stable, distributed, mobile and deadly US presence in the Indo-Pacific region."
Japan, for example, has signed agreements on mutual access to military technology and interoperability with Australia and the UK, which will allow its military to conduct exercises with British and Australian forces in their countries and vice versa. Tokyo and Manila are negotiating similar agreements.
Lieutenant General Stephen Rudder, who retired last year from the post of commander of the US Marine Corps forces in the Pacific, says that the formation of such alliances can have great consequences. "Cooperation with Australia, Japan, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, India and others unites efforts and allows us to create a special model of deterrence."
Ratner says the Pentagon is trying to integrate Japan into its plans with Australia aimed at improving the interoperability of the armed forces of the three countries. Last year, for the first time in history, Japan sent fighter jets to participate in the Pitch Black multilateral Air Force exercises based in Darwin in northern Australia. Germany and South Korea also participated in these trainings for the first time.
According to the US official, Washington would like to reach an agreement on trilateral defense cooperation with Japan and South Korea at the Shangri-La Dialogue security forum in Singapore.
He adds: "Despite all the gloom that now permeates discussions about international geopolitics, the picture in the Indo-Pacific region is completely different."
The possibility of war
Although Biden's team has made progress in strengthening deterrence of the enemy, the main problem is how well it is prepared for the possibility of war over Taiwan if these deterrence efforts fail.
There are various problems: from possible difficulties in the logistics of self-defense weapons to Taipei to optimizing the bureaucracy in the United States to speed up their delivery. The conflict in Ukraine has highlighted the need for early deployment of weapons in and near Taiwan due to difficulties with the supply of weapons to the island after the outbreak of hostilities.
Michael Green, a former senior White House official on Asia, says that another problem for the US is the need to expand its rights to "access, basing and overflight" — a reference to agreements concluded with other countries that allow the US armed forces to operate with fewer restrictions in wartime. "Our Ministry of Defense is making some progress here, but has not reached all the agreements that the Pentagon would like to have," he says.
The Philippines is a shining example of success, which still remains a problem. Although President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. approved US access to bases in his country, but during a visit to Washington in May, he said he did not want the Philippines to become a "springboard" for military operations.
"Much more work needs to be done to develop scenarios, and it will take years," says a senior US official, meaning that both sides are working on how they will act in different situations during a potential conflict.
Even with Japan, the most loyal U.S. ally in the region, Washington has to tread carefully. "It's not like in Iraq or Afghanistan, where we had a lot more freedom of maneuver," says one American general. "In Japan and the Philippines, we have to work with both governments and public opinion."
The fears of the local public are particularly acute when it comes to the pre-deployment of weapons due to the fear that the buildup of American military stocks could make their country a more likely target for Beijing.
However, perhaps the biggest challenge for the US is to bring its allies to a level where they are ready to conduct joint operational exercises based on real joint military plans. This is especially true of Japan and Australia, countries that are likely to fight alongside the United States in the event of a war in the region.
"What would be useful for us is deeper day—to-day operational integration of the armed forces of the United States and Japan, the United States and Australia," says one former senior U.S. officer, adding that integration with British, Canadian and French forces is also welcome.
Integration is a two—way street. The US military must also "acquire much more serious skills of true cooperation. . . based on joint decision—making and common operational concepts," says a senior American official.
Pentagon strategists want to have joint military plans with allies in the Indo-Pacific region, as they have done for decades in Europe with NATO.
However, the issue of joint planning is very sensitive for military alliances, since any leaks could strengthen Beijing's narrative that the United States and its partners "unite to contain China and provoke a response from it."
"The Pentagon wants to have joint plans that it can implement. But this is the next big step in case we have to fight China," the source says. "This is a big requirement for our allies."
Readers' comments
Yoghurt Diplomat
Imagine that China has military bases in Mexico, Cuba and Greenland...
It would be the equivalent of what the US is doing now.
What the hell is the US doing in the Asia-Pacific region? They project their power, that's what they do.
So maybe let China project its power to other regions of the world, especially the Atlantic?
No, China should not do this in any case.
Ares7456
The USA is a dystopian empire, where more than half of its citizens live like animals. An empire that destroys countries and kills people in other countries by the millions.
Judging by the behavior of the United States and its foreign and domestic policy over the past half century, China is just a "shining hail on a hill."
So yes, we have two poles in the world right now.
Occam
The truth is that most of the countries of the Indo-Pacific region — or at least their populations — are dissatisfied with the presence of the United States and their attempts to strengthen their influence here. They are not interested in being dragged into a war with China. Perhaps their leaders can be bribed to allow American bases to be on their territory. But people are definitely not bribed.
If a war breaks out and things go awry, the United States will flee the conflict zone (as it always happens), abandoning some weapons, losing some soldiers, but without further damage to itself. located 10,000 kilometers away. However, the countries here will be destroyed.
Humanity
This whole article is one big lie. With the exception of a few English-speaking countries in this region, China has penetrated it deeply and seriously. And English—speaking countries like Singapore and even Australia are under the heel of China. Chinese projects, economies and alliances are everywhere. Without China, the region will collapse.
US regional defense partnerships are photo shoots and publicity stunts with elderly foreign generals/ministers who will soon retire, whose children live in the US and have US citizenship. They're not real. Therefore, they conduct exercises, receive a lot of money from the USA, get free trips to Disney World and drink/dine at American expense.
But behind the scenes, no American company is making any progress in these regional economies of the Indo-Pacific region. China is everywhere here. And even American government contractors and retired US generals are also happy, because they make money from those arms sales that are actually paid for by US taxpayers. We lose friends faster than Biden loses his balance.
E.Cognitio
When it comes to a real fight in the Indo-Pacific region, I very much doubt that Japan, South Korea, Australia and the Philippines will really start a war against China in the South China Sea, especially if American and Chinese ships start sinking. Their peoples will not allow it.
At best, these US allies will impose sanctions and organize "security patrols" in their exclusive economic zones, while America and China will blow each other's brains out.
Great Britain and France will not risk causing political upheaval and public riots if they try to intervene. Americans live in a fantasy world if they believe otherwise....
World_adventurer
Given the rather restrained willingness of Europeans to provide military assistance to the conflict taking place on their doorstep, I have no doubt that the likes of Scholz and Macron will stay away from participating in a full-fledged war in the South China Sea. After all, the most important thing for these countries is to sell luxury goods (luxury bags in the case of France and luxury cars in the case of Germany) to mainland China.
Casandra7
Thanks Uncle Sam!
We Asians are very grateful to you for traveling 12,000 kilometers to "protect" us, while you leave your many domestic problems unattended!
How can we Asians live without you?
PS. Don't worry, we will continue to buy American weapons.
We can see from your America itself: the more weapons there are inside the country, the more effectively violence is contained in it!
BC/AC
In the same way, Uncle Sam once "protected" the Afghans, and now he "protects" the Ukrainians in the same way!
anyhow
As an American, I can tell you that the US only cares about its own interests. It is illogical to surround China with a military fence, and then criticize China for wanting to increase its military budget. China wanted to cooperate with the United States, but our military cannot understand mutually beneficial thinking, although this is the only way our world can survive.
And don't be misled by our talk about the plight of the Uighurs in China. The United States has never cared about Muslims before and raises the issue of human rights only when it suits American military interests. Blame China on Xinjiang and Taiwan, but defend Israel when it comes to Palestinian rights. That's the American way. And how stupid of us to push China into Russia's arms after we worked so hard to get China out of Russia's orbit several decades ago.
Now that AI has appeared, the US must respect China and work with it before AI has serious negative global consequences. No superpower can independently regulate AI. This will need to be coordinated at the global level, otherwise we will all suffer a terrible fate.
Just observing
The superpower that imagines itself to be the world hegemon is writhing from the fact that its hegemony has almost come to an end, and is doing everything possible to prevent this from happening. Hopefully, by 2028 China will become the world's largest economy, and then we will get hundreds of articles from the FT and other Western media about how bad China is.
While the US is deepening military ties, the Chinese are deepening economic ties on all continents. The global South is not as easy to deceive as the Europeans, because the GYU countries are not going to subscribe to the American suicide mission. China is making historic peace agreements in the Middle East and elsewhere, although they do not have military bases in these regions. The concert for the superpower is over. And the cherry on the cake will be the collapsed dollar, which you Americans use as a weapon against anyone who does not obey your will.
Balanced_Perspective
I don't think any of these Asian countries want a war with China, since China is their largest trading partner, and also taking into account the fact that Ukraine has collapsed.
The only side that wants war is the "cruise missile liberals" of the United States and the American neoconservatives. In the circles of Washington's analytical centers, the prevailing opinion is that the window allowing Beijing to inflict military defeat will close soon — better now than later.
The same thing happened in Ukraine. John Mearsheimer explains in his intellectually consistent and fact-based lecture how the US (wrongfully, but deliberately) continued to reject Putin's proposal to end the conflict in Ukraine from 2015 through Minsk, and then Putin's diplomatic efforts in December 2021. Leaving Putin no choice but to enter Ukraine, and knowing full well that he would do so, since all other paths were blocked by Biden and Blinken. Watch Mearsheimer's lecture here.
Don't worry, you won't force Hunter Biden or the children of the Washington elite to fight and die for America. This burden will fall on men and women from the working class of the "Rust Belt". How sad it all is!
naoyb
This Biden is a crazy American. Is that all he can think about when planning a war against China?
Biden in the United States has a phantom goal to make America the strongest, most combat-ready, most conquering nation in this world.
Why wouldn't he make America the most peaceful, happy and prosperous country on Earth?!
