5/10/2014

www.ipcs.org/print_article-details.php?recNo=4434

ARTICLES
Article No. #4399 , 22 April 2014

US IN ASIA PACIFIC

Military Implications of the Rebalance: Increasing

Chinese Aggression
Shreya Upadhyay
Research Intern, IPCS
Email: vini.shreya@gmail.com

Despite the crisis in Ukraine and Syria, the 2014 US Quadrennial Defence Review (QDR), US-ASEAN Defence forum and
a slew of ongoing visits by American leaders seek to reassure that rebalance has not lost steam. This article seeks to
explore two questions: How is the strategy fine-tuning the security structures in the Asia-Pacific? How is China
responding to the rebalancing?
Enhancing Security Partnerships
The US is mindful that establishing a military posture with deterrence as well as punitive capability is required in the
changing security environment. The Pentagon is focusing attention on countering Chinas growing aggressiveness, its
anti-access/area denial capabilities and creation of the Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ), that could be used to
restrict its military ability to operate in the region in the future.
Washington is therefore making attempts to bolster its alliances. The 2014 QDR mentions Australia, Japan and the
Republic of Korea (ROK) as traditional anchors of regional security. Philippines and Thailand are also listed as part of
the efforts to modernise and enhance security alliances. Obama's slated visit to Japan, ROK, Malaysia and Philippines
underscores their importance vis--vis US policy.
The US and Philippines are on the brink of inking a new security accord that will allow the US military to share local
bases with armed forces for maritime operations. Philippines might also purchase a third Hamilton-class high
endurance cutter that would aid its patrols in the grey zone of the South China Sea.
With Japan seeking to revise its defence ties, the two countries are moving further with their military cooperation.
During his recent Japan visit, US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel announced that the US will forward-deploy two
additional Aegis ships by 2017. The US' drones will also be used to step up surveillance around the Senkaku Islands.
Japan is also building an American-style national security council, a precursor to a more proactive security posture. All
these developments, including Hagel's Mongolia stop for securing cooperation in regional security, have further raised
Chinese suspicions.
Institutional Strategy
In April, the US hosted the first ever US-ASEAN defence forum in Hawaii. The aim was to encourage ASEAN nations to
construct a military posture on a region-wide basis. As US deals with fiscal constraints, it wants responsibility to be
shared among the regional players regarding military investments. Thus, Washington is working on wrangling ASEAN
states together along with traditional regional powers like Australia, Japan and the ROK as well as emerging powers
India and Indonesia to strengthen multilateral and bilateral security arrangements.
One of the major challenges in this regard is to ensure that the countries operate together. The nations on their part
have sought to manage the risks of USChina competition by hedging against both. Thus, efforts to develop a Pacificfocused intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) plan so far have been complicated by regional politics. The
US has also been promoting a de facto Asia Pacific Treaty Organisation (APTO) consisting of Japan, South Korea,
Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Australia. This loose China-free association has rung alarm bells in Beijing.
China's Growing Aggressiveness towards the Rebalance
Hagel, during his stop in China, was greeted with a tour of the countrys lone aircraft carrier, Liaoning. The Chinese

http://www.ipcs.org/print_article-details.php?recNo=4434

1/2

5/10/2014

www.ipcs.org/print_article-details.php?recNo=4434

Hagel, during his stop in China, was greeted with a tour of the countrys lone aircraft carrier, Liaoning. The Chinese
side trumpeted the visit as a show of transparency - a response to US constant nudging of the Chinese military. The
QDR 2014 already points that Chinas military modernisation is combined with a relative lack of openness regarding
both military capabilities and intentions. Beijing is often lectured on how transparency would help in reducing tensions
by reassuring the region that its military build-up is defensive in nature.
For Pentagon, Chinese assertiveness, military modernisation and secretiveness have become a headache, especially
as its own defence spending has been declining. The Liaoning tour was viewed by many as a Chinese attempt to
project its naval power. In February 2014, the Chinese military surprised the Australian government by conducting
military exercises closer to Australian territory, between Indonesia and Christmas Island. Aggressive remarks in
Chinese defense circles highlight the prevailing uncertainty in the regions security environment.
Both the US and China have been butting heads over who is to be blamed for these geographical tensions. Beijing
has expressed resentment over US treaty alliances with Japan and the Philippines. While talking to Hagel, the Chinese
had objected to the standard approach that "the US has treaty obligations to Tokyo and Manila." Washington of late
has also become more vocal in its criticism of China. Hagel drew a direct line between Russia's takeover of Crimea and
Chinese "coercion and intimidation" in the region. A US official recently claimed that US Marines would be able to
swiftly take back the Senkaku Islands should China invade them. This invoked a sharp response from China as well.
Chinese daily Global Times stated that "US warships in the East China Sea were slowly being considered as moving
targets. When facing China these soldiers are not worth anything."
Beijing has also redefined its understanding of national security with a comprehensive coverage and dual emphasis
on external and internal security with eleven security areas: politics, territories, military, economy, culture, community,
science and technology, information, ecology, natural resources and nuclear.
B 7/3 Lowe r Ground Floor, Safdarjung Enclave , Ne w De lhi 110029, INDIA.
Tel: 91-11-4100 1900, 4165 2556, 4165 2557, 4165 2558, 4165 2559
Email: office m ail@ipcs.org

Tel/Fax: (91-11) 4165 2560

C opyright 1997-2014, Institute of Pe ace and C onflict Studie s.

http://www.ipcs.org/print_article-details.php?recNo=4434

2/2