America's Evolving Indo-Pacific Strategy: Implications for the Philippines-U.S. Alliance (original) (raw)

Global Hegemony vs. Regional Hegemony: How the US Strategically Influences Power, Comparative Politics, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2020

The article explores the controversial thesis that the United States strategically and consistently maneuvers against the emergence of regional hegemons across the globe. Whether it is Russia in the former Soviet space, China across the South China Sea, the United States works to disallow the expression of regional hegemonic power despite its own continued reliance on its global hegemony being accepted. The author goes to the heart of power positioning and exploitation in the 21 st century: is the emergence of regional hegemons disruptive to the global system or benefi cial?

The US Rebalance Policy and the Management of Power Politics in Asia Pacific

Journal of ASEAN Studies, 2014

The policy was introduced by the U.S. President Barack Obama early in his first administration in 2010, marked specific changing to the U.S. foreign policy like never before. The U.S. continuously views South and South East Asia, including the Indian Ocean, as a crucial driver for America’s economic growth and prosperity throughout the 21st century. Numerous numbers of cooperation and partnership have been done to enhance the ties between the U.S. and the regions. The U.S. presence and involvement in most essential regional meetings and summits can also be seen as an effort to seek opportunities, politically, economically, as well as security. This article tries to analyze how the U.S. rebalance towards Asia policy, a term used for the U.S.' foreign policy influenced the regional stability in Asia-Pacific region.

How Indo-Pacific Geopolitics Affects Foreign Policy: The Case of the Philippines, 2010-2017

How Indo-Pacific Geopolitics Affects Foreign Policy: The Case of the Philippines, 2010-2017, 2018

This article examines how two Philippine presidents took into account the ongoing geo-strategic competition between the U.S. and China. At the start of his sixyear term, President Benigno Aquino III became concerned that China’s maritime expansion threatened the Philippines’ territorial rights over its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the South China Sea. He then pursued a balancing policy towards China’s maritime expansion into this area. Aquino pursued this policy as a reaction to China’s naval expansion but also considered the Obama Administration’s strategic rebalancing to Asia. President Rodrigo Duterte, however, is unraveling his predecessor’s geopolitical agenda in the South China Sea. Duterte has pursued an appeasement policy on China to take advantage of Beijing’s One Belt, One Road (OBOR) initiative. Strategically, President Duterte has shown a sensitivity to Chinese security interests. In conclusion, both Filipino presidents, in crafting their respective foreign policies, have taken into account the geopolitical developments in the Indo-Pacific region in terms of the prospect of losing either territorial rights or economic gains. Keywords Philippine

Great Power Politics: The Indo-Pacific, Southeast Asia, and the Global South

Comparative Connections, 2023

In 2023 marks the 50th Year of ASEAN-Japan Friendship and Cooperation, and there are expectations that their relationship will be upgraded to a “comprehensive strategic partnership.” Given the good diplomatic, security, and economic relations between Japan and Southeast Asian states, ties are likely to be strengthened. However, Japan is now taking a more competitive strategy toward China, as indicated in the three security documents issued in December 2022, while Southeast Asian states generally continued the same strategic posture by which they have good relations with all great powers in the Indo-Pacific region. Also, while Japan issued the “New Plan for the Free and Open Indo-Pacific” that emphasizes the “Global South,” it remained silent about ASEAN centrality and unity in the Indo-Pacific, and it was unclear what roles Japan expects ASEAN to play. Although both Japan and Southeast Asian states need to adjust their roles in the Indo-Pacific region, it remains to be seen whether the 50th anniversary becomes an opportunity for clarification.

Great-Power Competition in Southeast Asia: A Philippine Perspective

The presentation noted that the regional security environment is increasingly being defined by great power competition. Whilst ASEAN was founded during the Cold War rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, the current geostrategic competition between Washington and Beijing is different in at least two ways. First, Washington and Beijing—as well as other countries in the region—are much more economically interdependent with each other. Second, with such economic interconnectedness, it is more difficult for most countries to have clear-cut strategic alignment, as many states did during the Cold War. The presentation noted that for many years, ASEAN has been the driver of multilateral diplomacy in the region. The fact that major powers continue to engage and participate in ASEAN-led platforms suggest ASEAN’s continued diplomatic role. However, the strategic milieu of the 1990s when ASEAN’s centrality in multilateral diplomacy began to emerge is different from the current geopolitical context. In this regard, the emergence of new platforms, like the Quad or AUKUS, that also aim to manage or address security challenges, could be seen as complementary rather than in competition with ASEAN. After discussing the risks and opportunities of great-power competition for Southeast Asia, the paper underscored that ASEAN’s primary role is to manage the relations between and amongst its members. If ASEAN manages Southeast Asian relations well, great powers would have minimal opportunities to exploit the organisation’s internal divisions. A more coherent and peaceful ASEAN will enhance the organization’s agency, as well as that of its member-states. In moving forward, the presentation pointed out that there is an imperative to bridge the development gap amongst AMS. Strengthening the capacity of AMS to address various security challenges is another key imperative. The ADMM-Wide Education and Training Exchanges (AETE) can be used in this regard. In both areas, ASEAN can leverage its long-standing relations with Dialogue Partners to advance security and development. There is also a need for ASEAN to enhance its current platforms and initiatives. Despite criticisms, ASEAN – the ADMM in particular – has adopted measures to help manage traditional security concerns, such as ASEAN Direct Communications Infrastructure (ADI), Guidelines for Maritime Interaction (GMI), and the Guidelines for Air Military Encounters (GAME). The implementation of the Concept Paper on the ADMM’s External Engagements will reinforce ASEAN centrality in regional defense diplomacy. Moreover, there is also an imperative for ASEAN to continuously adapt to the evolving security environment, as well as to contemplate and help address emerging security concerns such as cybersecurity, and coercive actions which fall below the threshold of armed conflict.