Biden is risking his Indo-Pacific strategy

At a time when America’s global superiority is being seriously challenged by China, the future of the current US-led international order and America’s own position in the Indo-Pacific region, particularly in Asia, are likely to be determined. This explains why Joe Biden is the third consecutive US president to commit to shifting America’s primary strategic focus to the Indo-Pacific. Still, it is not certain that he will succeed where his two predecessors failed.

Strategy on the Indo-Pacific

If anything, Mr. Biden is increasingly distracted from the Russian move to the Indo-Pacific. Rising US-Russia tensions over NATO’s forward policy, with Ukraine as a flashpoint, threaten to become the defining crisis of the Biden presidency. The crisis, fueled by a drawn-out and dangerous confrontation, could deepen an already expanding US involvement in European security.

The White House released its long-delayed ‘Indo-Pacific Strategy’ document on February 11, the same day it publicly warned that Russia could launch an invasion of Ukraine within days. A Russian offensive into Ukraine’s heartland would give Mr Biden little time for the Indo-Pacific, which explains why the 19-page document was released in haste on Friday afternoon, amid criticism that the President’s comments on India Staying in office for more than a year despite lack of clarity on Pacific policy.

Mr Biden’s Indo-Pacific strategy, in the form of a bare-bones paper for public consumption, provides a bird’s eye view of how his administration views the Indo-Pacific landscape. With its brief or vague references to key regional issues and challenges, the document does not provide sufficient clarity on the thrust and direction of US policy in the region.

In fact, it is like a watered-down version of the ‘United States Strategic Framework for the Indo-Pacific’ of former President Donald Trump’s administration. More significantly, it comes without the assumptions, objectives and actions that were clearly defined under each theme in that strategic framework, which was declassified with only mild reforms in the final days of the Trump presidency.

The fact is that Mr Biden’s Indo-Pacific strategy document is essentially an exercise in public diplomacy, while the Trump administration’s once secret strategic framework is designed to advance its policy of a ‘free and open Indo-Pacific’ (FOIP). – A concept was originally written by the then Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. The purpose of the declassification of the strategic framework was to clearly underline that the successor administration had inherited a coherent, comprehensive and realistic strategy on the Indo-Pacific.

The FOIP vision remains the centerpiece of Biden’s Indo-Pacific strategy. However, the document reaffirms the shift initiated by Biden of the Quad toward geoeconomic and other larger issues – from “global health security” and climate change (Mr. Biden’s pet concern) to “critical and emerging technologies, driving supply- The series “for cooperation, joint technology deployment and advancing common technology principles.” Such a broad and ambitious agenda threatens to undermine the Quad’s strategic focus on the Indo-Pacific.

a more conciliatory approach

Mr Biden has yet to deliver his long-awaited China strategy speech to present the administration’s vision for a country that faces a military, economic and technological challenge on a scale the US has not seen before. Mr Biden’s outlook, however, appears to be more favorable, largely to the policy of China set by his predecessor.

While the Trump administration launched an ideological offensive against China as a violent communist state without political legitimacy or the rule of law, Mr. Biden assured Chinese President Xi Jinping in a virtual summit last November that the US would follow China. Will not try to change the political system. , This assurance is embodied in the Indo-Pacific Strategy Paper, which clearly states that, “We do not aim to replace the PRC. [People’s Republic of China] But to shape the strategic environment in which it operates…”

The Indo-Pacific Strategy Document acknowledges that China seeks to “become the most influential power in the world” and that “our allies and partners in the region bear the very high cost of the PRC’s harmful behavior”. It nonetheless declares that the US seeks to “responsibly manage competition with the PRC” and “work with the PRC in areas such as climate change and non-proliferation”.

The strategy paper, endorsing “India’s continued rise”, referred to China’s military actions against India since 2020 as “aggression” (a term the White House has used almost every time to describe Russia’s moves against Ukraine). Day uses), but in neutral language – as in “the conflict along the Line of Actual Control with India”. And the press briefing in the background on the newspaper’s release referred to “China’s behavior across the Line of Actual Control”.

Since taking office, Mr Biden has treated China with more respect than Russia. For example, last year he imposed two rounds of sanctions on Moscow and even called Russian President Vladimir Putin a “murderer”. Turning Russia’s military build-up against Ukraine into a major international crisis, Mr. Biden hasn’t uttered a word on a major military build-up – by China along the Himalayas – that threatens to launch a war on America’s strategic partner India. gives.

shifting focus

Today, Mr. Biden is pouring military resources into Europe and focusing on controlling Russia’s regional ambitions at the expense of countering China’s campaign to achieve global superiority. And although Mr. Biden has left Ukraine to its fate by refusing to come into direct defense of that beleaguered country, Washington has been at the forefront of drumming up the war.

If the US is to turn meaningfully into the Indo-Pacific, it must exercise strategic restraint in Europe, not escalate tensions with Russia through NATO expansionism or military exercises. Last autumn’s US-NATO military exercises near Russia’s Black Sea coast angered Moscow, reflecting the current crisis.

The US must address its strategic redundancy, not seek to increase it through greater entanglement in European security. With its relative power declining, it must conserve its strength to focus on maintaining its global superiority, including making the strategic trade-offs necessary to remain a leading power in the Indo-Pacific. Economically and strategically, the global center of gravity is shifting to the Indo-Pacific. Creating a stable balance of power in the Indo-Pacific has become more important than ever for international security. Nevertheless, the US still prefers NATO to dominate European security, while the bulk of its economic aid and military aid goes to West Asia and North Africa.

Unless Mr. Biden judiciously recalculates foreign policy objectives with the resources and capabilities available to reduce America’s strategic reach, he will not only be able to strengthen US leadership to deal with major challenges in Asia, including in Asia. but also undermine our newly unveiled India. -Pacific strategy that seeks to make America’s role “more effective and sustainable than ever” in that most important region.

Brahm Chelani is a geo-strategist and author of nine books, including the award-winning ‘Water: Asia’s New Battleground’.