Has US policy on Asia and China been taken over by hardliners?
Recent developments suggest the US is continuing the hypocrisy, demands, confrontation and military intimidation that characterised Trump’s Asia policy – and that ‘Asia tsar’ Kurt Campbell has been outmanoeuvred by China hawks
The China-bashing broadside by US Vice-President Kamala Harris last month in Japan raises questions of who is in charge of America’s China and Asia policy, and what it is.
Hopes ran high when President Joe Biden appointed Kurt Campbell as his “Asia tsar” on the first day of administration. But like those before him, Campbell’s turn at the helm of America’s Asia policy is not turning out as hoped. Indeed, from China to North Korea to Southeast Asia, US policy seems to be in disarray.
There were great expectations that a Campbell-driven Asia policy would repair the damage done by the Trump administration, which had alienated China and much of Southeast Asia. That hope had some basis because Campbell and US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan had advocated for a “competitive coexistence” with China, which seemed open to a reset in relations.
Moreover, Biden had proclaimed that “diplomacy is back at the centre of our foreign policy”, which Foreign Affairs Secretary Antony Blinken echoed by claiming that diplomacy – not militarism – would come first. He declared: “Real strength isn’t bluster or bullying.” This led to the expectation that the US would lighten up on its China-threat obsession and stop viewing other countries through a China lens.
Yet America’s Asia policy is continuing the same mixture of hypocrisy, demands, confrontation and military intimidation that characterised the Trump administration’s Asia policy. Diplomacy has lagged far behind military signalling.
This increased militarisation of the issues worries Southeast Asian countries, who fear the US will force them to choose sides. They worry the US will create a political, economic and military mess, then turn tail as it did in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq, leaving its “allies and partners” to deal with what’s left – including an angry and vengeful China.
03:26
US Vice-President Kamala Harris addresses China threat as she kick-starts her Asia tour
US Vice-President Kamala Harris addresses China threat as she kick-starts her Asia tour
Under Campbell’s watch, US-China relations reached a nadir unprecedented since diplomatic recognition in 1979. Relations have sharply deteriorated because in China’s eyes, the US has been salami-slicing the one-China policy that was the basis for their peaceful coexistence.
Under that policy, the US acknowledged China’s position that Taiwan is part of China and refrained from supporting Taiwan independence. But the US has since altered the status quo by significantly stepping up its supply of weapons and training under the excuse of helping Taiwan “defend itself”. This encourages Taiwan’s independence movement.
More worrying for China are Biden’s repeated gaffes which suggest the US policy of strategic ambiguity may be changing to one of military support for Taiwan in a conflict. And now the US wants to turn Taiwan into a military “porcupine”. Indeed, the US seems to be focused on deterrence, preparing for conflict with China and revising its Asia policy accordingly.
Kurt Campbell, the US White House coordinator for the Indo-Pacific, at the US-Asean Special Summit in Washington on May 12. Hopes were high when he was appointed as he had advocated a “competitive coexistence” with China. Photo: Reuters
US policy towards other Asian countries is increasingly made and implemented through an anti-China lens. It is pressing allies Japan and the Philippines to support it in a conflict with China over Taiwan. This has given the Philippines an opportunity to extract more in the bargain.
It is no longer even clear that Campbell has control of America’s Asia policy. Maybe he never did. Indeed, these developments raise the question of whether Biden, Blinken, Sullivan and Campbell have been outmanoeuvred by anti-China hardliners.
At best, Campbell and company seem left with little more than trying to re-establish the “ability to communicate honestly at the highest level” so they can negotiate “limits” and “guidelines” with an increasingly suspicious China.
Whatever behind-the-scenes work he and his colleagues may have been doing to mend fences and smooth ruffled feathers has been let down by other US government officials. Biden’s undermining of the US policy of ambiguity, disruptive visits to Taiwan by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and copycat US legislators, and bills dictating policy towards Taiwan and China support that notion.
Congress is even discussing the idea of recognising Taiwan as a “major non-Nato ally”. Harris’ recent broadside did not help.
Despite Campbell’s best intentions and efforts, the US remains focused on Europe and the Middle East. This was dictated by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the necessity to quell crises. It is symbolised by the optics of Biden’s attendance at Queen Elizabeth’s funeral, while Harris was sent to attend former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe’s funeral.
The question is whether the Biden administration will continue the US goal of sole hegemony in the region or shift towards a negotiated “balance” and “competitive coexistence” originally advocated by Campbell and Sullivan.
Compromise and power-sharing in the region, including the South China Sea, is the only peaceful solution to the US-China conundrum, and would be welcomed by most Asian countries – especially in Southeast Asia. This would be a better alternative than a Cold-War-like division of Asia into US and China camps, proxy wars or a direct US-China conflict risking nuclear war.
In retrospect, failure may have been predictable. Changing the established US pattern of free and frequent use of military threat and force would take monumental political courage and will. If any of Campbell’s original ideals and goals remain viable, he should show that now. Otherwise, it would appear that Campbell is just another of America’s best and brightest to have been stymied and swallowed by the system.
Mark J. Valencia is an adjunct senior scholar at the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, Haikou, China
