The paper strives to present the gradual transformation within the global political scenario where China is perceived as a growing power, while US as a declining power. The study also incorporates the most significant hegemonic theories of Power Transition and Balance of Power. It, furthermore, unfolds the significance of Asia- Pacific and the competition of global powers over the reserves within the South-China Sea. Being China as a threat to US, the paper offers a comparison between US old strategy of containing Soviet’s expansion and Its latest strategy of containing China.
Moreover, it also presents the implications of US refinancing on such a vulnerable state of Pakistan. Introduction: The recent changes in the global politics and economy have spurred the world powers to do the utmost in furthering their national goals in-order to seek multiple financial gains. The economic hunger and greed have become the defining characteristics of today’s powerful states as the Inclination of International community towards Asia-Pacific Is one such example. It has been acknowledged that the one dominating the Asia-Pacific would also be in the position to become a excessive global might.
Being Mediterranean Ocean as a concern of the past, Atlantic as merely a topic of the present, the focus of the entire international community has shifted towards the whole new facet I. E. The Asia Pacific . The phenomenal development and growing might of China have not only disturbed America but also Its partner states since a powerful China could only challenge the US global status. Over the last two decades, Washington has remained stuck In Afghanistan and Iraq, thus paving way for China to advance its political influence within the Asia-Pacific.
Pivot to Asia”, or more specifically “US refinancing”, demonstrates the realization of American strategic thinking towards the threat which Beijing poses to Washington not only diplomatically but also economically. Aim: To study the US strategy of “pivot to Asia” In its historical and contemporary perspective so as to draw its Implications on Pakistan. Significance of Asia-Pacific: The significance of Asia Pacific lies in the geopolitical interests of the key powers of the global politics.
The Key players which define the politics of the Pacific include US, Japan, China and several smaller regional actors. The years following the financial predicament of 2009 have witnessed some crucial political and strategic changes since the region has become the centre of attraction driving the global politics. The region finds Its Importance In the economic and political concerns of the major global powers since It Is not only strategically vital but also possesses a symbolic meaning.
The one dominating it would determine the political and the financial future of the world as the South China Sea (CSS) contains an enormous bulk of natural reserves. Its importance could be deduced from the fact that as high as two-thirds of the global sets are being deployed within the area thereby, validating the assumption that by 2050 the centre of gravity would unfalteringly shift to the Asia Pacific. Keeping in natural reserves in that area have become the flashlight.
The tussle over the gas, oil, fish and the other reserves have provoked the powers, especially US and China, to adopt a belligerent military posture and to stand eye-to-eye before each other. The CSS, being bordered by China, Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan, Brunet, Malaysia and Indonesia, elongates to approximately 3,500,000 sq/km and enjoys a bulk of oil and as reserves somewhere underneath the oceans. Furthermore, it is also significant to international shipping since about one-third (almost 41 ,OHO ships) of the global shipping passes through it each year.
It is also known for
The US presence in the Asia-Pacific proves the point as almost half of the US Naval forces are deployed along the region while, the development of Chinese military capabilities within the area demonstrates the aggressive posture of the key players. The detection of the hydrocarbon and the presence of marine resources, on the other hand, have intensified the competition towards seizing the natural resources to such an extent that a small tension could even prompt a war in the region.
The sea also enjoys the idiosyncratic feature of bio-diversity having more than 1,000 fish, 200 shrimp and 50 chopped species thereby, contributing its major share in terms of food and revenuer. Moreover, much of the exports and economies of the adjacent States are dependent on the fishery goods. These incentives, thus, spur the key stakeholders to lock their horns with each other. The Core Interests of the Major Actors in Asia- pacific: Asia-Pacific enjoys a special position not only as being an emblem of national prestige, ego and identity but also because of its strategic and geographic worth.
The key actors involve US, China and Japan. US Interests: The geopolitical and strategic significance of the Asia-Pacific places the United States as the most enthusiastic, keen and yet most powerful competitor in the region. The regional markets have attracted the US by providing exceptional opportunities for trade, business, investment and above all the possibility to get access to the latest and advanced technology. Keeping in view the recent global recession and American economic slump, the US economic recovery heavily relies on exports and its approach to the Asian consumer markets.
The region is strategically, economically and politically vital for the US since the CSS region is in its central interests not only to counteract China but also North Korea. The US stakes in the region are not new but dates back to almost two centuries ago starting off with its independence and continues since then. The ultimate defeat of Japan in World War-II introduced America as the only decisive global power, thereby authorizing it to further its leslies and interests throughout the world and especially in Asia-Pacific.
With the passage of time, its interests grew deeper and stronger while engaging all possible Washington reckons that the region holds superseding importance while the progressive future of US largely depends on boosting its trade, diplomatic or armed intervention and its presence is vital to guarantee a serene Asia. On strategic grounds, one of the core intentions of the US, particularly after 9/1 1, is to ensure absolute security for its citizens from extremism. For this very purpose, its defended ores are positioned all-across the region to deal with the menace and to curb the terrorists threatening the very existence of the land.
Most importantly, it is also eager to “balance the power” against the possible rising regional hegemony, China, which is both financially and diplomatically capable of defying the only global hegemony. Such a possible scenario has forced US to strengthen its alliances with Korea, Australia, Japan, Thailand and Philippines to tackle the very concerns 1 . Washington seems to be very active since the furthering of US interests within the region largely depends n Beam’s engaged leadership and administration.
On political grounds, US have always been a staunch proponent of democracy. Its democratic commitment has forced the government to get engaged into the domestic issues of smaller regional states like Philippines. United States is also interested to uphold the status-quo through its continuous diplomatic and armed presence and also through adopting diverse multilateral approaches to advance its agenda of curbing China and also the prevention of WIND proliferation of North-Korea since Washington perceives itself and its allies being threatened by its nuclear capability.
China: Claims and Interests China, being a maritime, air and land power, is keen to acquire certain islands within the South-China Sea. Keeping in view China’s mounting dependency on fuel, oil and other natural commodities, it has eyes not only on the CSS region but also has established brotherly ties with the states of Central Asia, Middle East and Africa which are rich in mineral and oil resources. Economic boost and internal stability are two core ambitions of China that have led the country to alter the political scenario not only within Asia but beyond.
China claims its right on almost the entire CSS egging where its claims rests on the historical nine-dash line. The claimed areas include “Sparely Islands”, “Gulf of Trotting”, “Hanna Islands” and “Parcel Islands”13. The rapidly growing food and oil demands have placed China as one of the key stakeholders of Asia-Pacific, thereby making the rest anxious and concerned. Moreover, being the claimant of broad sovereignty over the region, it has drawn a maritime boundary that extends from Taiwan to Philippines, from Malaysia to Brunet while passing along the Shore of Vietnam.
Being an emerging power, it has already established its bases possessing a wide array of advanced equipments both in Parcel and Sparely arrears. The international observers view China’s historical claims over sovereignty as highly rigid, invalid and rather self-indulgent, while China incessantly insists on simply following the path that was pursued by the West since US has its shares in certain islands of North-Pacific and France controlling few areas in South- Pacific. On historical grounds, China reckons that the Hans, Mongols, Munches and Tibetan were Chinese and the areas conquered or ruled by them, thus, belong to he very land.
The historical manipulation has been cashed by the Chinese authorities very efficiently and has provoked patriotic and nationalistic sentiments throughout the country, thereby complicating the issue and making it an emblem of of the majestic legacy of China but also the state-owned media and textbooks promote such a reality. History holds a very unique and significant position within the country which could be witnessed through education, media, myths, folklore and research institutions and has been exploited to strengthen China’s territorial and maritime assertiveness.
Ever since World War-II has ended, China has actively engaged itself in reshaping and restructuring its borders, refining its territorial integrity by using coercion and historical manipulation, renaming certain islands and imposing its viewpoint on the rest of the stakeholders. The decade of sass’s saw several unpleasant clashes amongst China, Vietnam and Philippines while continuous Chinese maritime inspection has led to escalation of tensions and differences. Furthermore, China has been criticized for violating and disrespecting asses law of sea which the country ratified in 1996.
China is keen to pursue at least three core objectives in South-East Asia and CSS region. First is the regional integration which is central to its strategy of “peaceful rise”. The second incorporates the resource competition and control which is not vital to China but also to other claimants. The growing population and demands of the Chinese have fiercely contributed in China’s efforts towards guaranteeing resource security. The third includes China’s ensured grip and augmented security within the entire region which has made the US septic over its military intentions.
Japan’s Role: Japan, an Asian power, is highly septic and concerned about China’s galloping power and, therefore, is keen to contribute in US refinancing strategy. The history of Sino- Japanese ties is not encouraging since Tokyo has remained a dominant US ally against communism during Cold-War. The disintegration of USSR put Us-Japan coalition into a more strong partnership and their friendship has longed for over 60 years. Tokyo is interested to play a foremost role in US refinancing against China and enjoys a significant position in the eyes of America thinkers.
Emerging China and US Apprehensions: The turning of US to Asia is based on the hypothesis that its eventual competitor would emerge from the States. Ever since then, the policy makers have drawn-out few possible competitors which could become a threat to the US. Amongst the potential regional powers China, Russia, India and Japan took the lead. The policy and defended analysts, then, objectively analyzed their intentions, military and economic goals and deterrence capability against US.
Amongst certain defended analysts of early asses, Marshall was the first one to predict China’s military and economic boost in the upcoming thirty years. The most probable scenario, according to him, was that rising China and revived Russia would become key challengers to US hegemony. The dramatic emergence of China has not only confronted American imperative interests but also is capable to defy the US global preponderance. Considering this picture, India, being China’s immediate neighbor, has been the most rational choice for the US to incorporate it into a worthy alliance.
The China’s AD (defended, deterrence and development) stratagem has contributed a bunch in its expansion, development and transformation over the past three decades. Its average GAP growth since 1979 has been measured up to 9. 82%. Being the second largest economic might and third largest commodity exporter, it enjoys a significant position both within and beyond its phenomenal military and economic boost has made a number of world economies dependent on Chinese products and services, thus challenging US economic superiority.
The military edge of China over other Asian states allows it to have a diplomatic dominance and coercive capability against its perceived peer competitors. Washington is concerned not only over the China’s galloping power but also fears its rear denial potential, thereby allowing it to utilize coercion against its neighboring states and gradually shifting the US dominance from the region. The only choice left for US, therefore, is to deter and dissuade China from expanding its might globally, amongst which “Pivot or refinancing” is one such strategy.
China’s rising might spawns intersecting interests, contradictory ideologies and dissenting worldviews. Beijing, not only, is advancing its naval capability but also structuring its military on modern grounds which make the other entrants anxious and agitated. Theoretical Framework: The US strategy of refinancing remains a hot topic thus, involving the most crucial theories of International Relations (R) including “Power Transition Theory’ and “Balance of Power Theory’ Power Transition Theory: The hegemonic theory of power transition focuses on a rising power that poses challenges to the dominant power.
The idea is that the emerging challenger, being disgruntled with the status-quo, starts approaching the potential of the dominant state thereby threatening to transgress it in terms of power. It means that the leading power is facing a decline n its capacity while the rising state takes full advantage of the situation. Moreover, the emerging state is motivated to topple the prevailing system established by the leading state when it was enjoying its global dominance.
Such a situation triggers instability and war becomes inevitable for the challenger to hasten the course of power transition. Such a scenario can be witnessed amongst America and China where America is the dominant state facing tremendous challenges and China as the emerging one. Balance of Power: The theory highlights the significance of power- haring in an anarchic system where an effort is put forward to avoid any possible hegemonic.
The hegemonic designs of the aggressor are challenged by those states that believe in “balance of power” in-order to secure peace and stability. Such a situation can be seen amongst China, US and its allies where China is perceived as possessing hegemonic designs while US and its partner states struggling to balance the power within Asia-Pacific. Pivot to Asia or US Refinancing: “The future of politics will be decided in Asia, not Afghanistan or Iraq, and the United States will be right at the centre of the action”26.
Hillary Clinton While Afghanistan and Iraq were Bush’s focal targets, Asia-Pacific remains a central objective of Barack Beam’s regime and administration. Though the region has been a tacit target for so long, but was acknowledged in November, 2011 during Beam’s visit to Australians. He announced the region as US top priority thereby, associating a strategic, deliberate, diplomatic and premeditated stance to it thus, demonstrating that the US would remain there as an influential player for a much longer time.
Since then, the high profile authorities and government officials eve openly been voicing their President’s political ambitions, thus showing the level “pivot to Asia” but later was renamed to “refinancing” since the word “pivot” shows impermanence and rather implies that there has been a sudden shift in American strategic thinking while before that the region was not too important for the country. The enduring interests of United States have engaged it with the region for over two centuries.
The non-governmental players including media, traders, and academics e. T. C. Have boosted the regions significance for the country and have been belly engaged in obstructing powerful positive and rather productive US-Asian liaison. Since US possesses a notable majority of immigrants, millions of settlers from Asia-Pacific can be found within the country, thereby getting benefited from American capitalist society while remaining attached to their mother homelands. The regimes of both former presidents G. W.
Bush and Bill Clinton were largely focused on the crisis situation of Spooks, Iraq, Bosnia, Somalia and later Afghanistan. President Clinton, however, took a few steps towards normalizing the US ties with the other Asian actors including Vietnam, but he was more interested in deterring and also engaging China. At least four core reasons have been provided regarding US turn to Asia-Pacific; the first acknowledges the most palpable transition period where the country has to line-up its future strategic and diplomatic priorities while considering the US departure from Iraq and Afghanistan.
Secondly, the recent budgetary cuts call for the urgency to lay before the table the country apex concerns in-order to eschew those policies which could transgress the budget. The hired motive encounters the ascending economic and military significance of Asia- Pacific since the region has been marked as a defining feature of the century ahead, thereby deciding the fate of human kind. The fourth impetus, which is perhaps the mother of all, underlies the China’s rising might and its “perceived threat” to US.
Curtailing or countering China is the fundamental objective that has prompt America to adopt such a policy. The US worries about China’s phenomenal growth both militarily and economical, its anti-denial and anti-access (AH/AD) potential and its growing ties with regional peers. It has been keenly involved in strengthening its strategic alliances including Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, Australia, Singapore and Indonesia thus, enclosing China from all angles. The allies are being supported and defended by US forces whenever they anticipate any danger from China.
For example, in 1996, President Clinton sent two battle groups aircrafts to Taiwan when it was provoked against a serious Chinese threat. International observers have argued that the Washington’s aggressive posture and continuous presence in the region demonstrates the approaching new era of assertiveness and “containment” against China. Serious concerns have been raised throughout China in opposition to the refinancing strategy of US. To many defended and political analysts, the strategy is aimed against Beijing to contain its “peaceful rise” and to trigger insecurity within the region.
Washington is interested to strengthen its influence and to maintain its global dominance; therefore, it refers the “pivot or refinancing” approach as a general strategy targeting the entire globe and not specifically China. Towards Refinancing: It has been acknowledged that the refinancing strategy is actually refinancing the ruder of security in Asia since the policy holds a burden-sharing feature aimed at budgetary cut and being stuck in other global crisis, Washington is persuading its alliances to do the utmost to protect their lands while assuring them support in case of any assault from the Chinese side.
In fact, refinancing is a deliberate shift from wars of Africa and Middle East to maritime disputes in East-Asia. US have decided to keep itself focused while deploying an enormous amount of its assets and resources in CSS and Asia-Pacific. A lot of American combat ships, destroyers, submarines and raisers can be found while having military bases in almost all allied states. Washington is keen to have its influence in Hawaii and Guam and also to conduct a training program of over 2000 marines in Australia, its trustworthy ally.
It would not only permit the US to enjoy “freedom-of-navigation” but would also enable it to counter Chinese (AH/AD) capabilities within the region. However, the budgetary cuts have imposed restrictions on engaging more troops and weaponry. Amongst the other ambitions of Beam’s regime lies extensive investment in Asia to line-up the country resources with long-term financial interests. The attraction is the Asian markets which could produce Jobs in the US and could help recover the slumped economy. The key is the regional stability where Washington’s continuous role is required to tackle any aggression.
A lot of time is being spent by the US government, armed and naval officials in Asia that demonstrates how much focused they are on the very region. The engagement of Washington with SEAN countries and its eagerness to participate in SEAN summits each year signal its enthusiasm of being a decisive player of the region. It is interested both in assuring its military resent and cooperation not only amongst its allies but also with China since the latter’s assistance is much needed to uphold the status-quo.
Moreover, the SEAN countries require “balance of power” within the region while their alliance with US is a major step towards refinancing against China’s might. Towards Refinancing: Elements and Objectives The rebalanced remains a multi-faceted, extensive and rather much celebrated policy initiative. Politically speaking, three elements of US refinancing strategy have been figured out that includes defended, financial and diplomatic aspects. L. Security Aspect: The recent adjustments in the US defensive posture reveal the importance of the element of security for the only global hegemony.
Washington is aggressively shifting its extensive military potentials from other targets to one platform that encompasses the entire Asia-Pacific region thus, reshuffling its defensive arrangements to ensure a much broader presence of the US armed forces to counter any possible belligerence. This incorporates the highly sophisticated military dispersion in Philippines and Australia and also to other regional allies, thereby guaranteeing an enhanced coercive amalgamation within the region. II.
Financial Aspect: The refinancing strategy also involves an intention to enhance trade and economic schemes amongst the US and its partners in-order to foster a trustworthy environment. For this purpose, an idea of Trans-Pacific Partnership (TAP), a free-trade accord, has been put forward that currently contains US and eleven other players but excludes China. Moreover, the financial aid to Asia-Pacific allies has also been doubled. Ill. Diplomatic Aspect: The pivot has witnessed heightened diplomatic and military engagement of US high-profile officials in Asia-Pacific.
The agenda involves monitoring US-China hostility and promoting trust-building cooperation amongst the two global giants. Keeping into account the US stakes in the region, a number of objectives compliant with American strategic concerns have been drawn out. The central intention, as discussed earlier, is balancing and countering China while the other objectives revolve around it. L. Constructing a Sense of Justification: Since Washington is currently preoccupied in War-on-Terror, it requires a good reason to pull out its resources from the other regions to Asia-Pacific.
The recent phenomenal mom of China has provided US that Justification where it feels itself bound to balance and to defend the land from any aggression. II. Strengthening Alliances: Another objective places the strengthening and reinforcing the strategic alliances as the foremost goal of the US. The idea is to reassure the Asian partners its presence whenever they feel threatened especially by China. Ill. Peaceful Resolution of Regional Disputes: The non-violent resolution of Asian disputes is in the American core interests.
The US is very much concerned regarding the solution of China- Taiwan tension and Korean Peninsula. It is keen to imply diplomatic efforts to ensure regional securities. Another objective involves the denationalization and non- proliferation of North-Korea in-order to guarantee peace and protection. ‘V. Incorporating Rising Powers: Another objective involves the integration of emerging China into contemporary global order. Keeping into consideration China’s economic and military boost, it is vital for the US to make Beijing act as a mature and responsible regional stakeholder. V.
Multilateral Commitment and Tackling Non- Traditional Dangers: The strategic alliances are the building-blocks for collaboration against security threats faced by the region whether it be extremism, dangers from climate change, infectious diseases, nuclear proliferation or natural calamities. Such an alliance provides a basis for trust-building and cooperation to tackle Chinese rise. US Refinancing: “Hub-and-spoke” Vs. “Spoke-to-spoke” Strategy Washington perceives itself as a decisive and dominant Pacific might where the major part of its foreign policy revolves around shielding and protecting Eurasia from any possible aggressor.
The Beam’s “pivot to Asia” is merely a reflection of American obsession with the region. Moreover, the resultant upshot of World War-II paved way for an undeviating armed presence of US within and around the Asia-Pacific. The US grand strategy involves two options I. E. Over tactics and over posture. These strategic options enable the US to either espouse a forward military posture by having its global premeditated bases or to engage selectively with discerning partner states in pursuit of its national interests.
The desertion of Soviet Union had placed China as the only adverse competitor for Washington, a military giant against which America evaluates itself both economically and militarily. In fact, Beijing is powerful enough to give a considerably tough time to the only super power over the upcoming couple of decades since its defended budget and GAP is likely to surpass those of Americana. Moreover, assessments confirm that as compared to Nazi Germany or Soviet Union, China is a more challenging and highly capable antagonist having the potential to compete US economic boost.
Though Beijing believes in “peaceful rise” but the threat of a serious clash amongst the two strategic giants remains high as Washington is much concerned over China’s growing strengths. The upcoming 30 to confront the Chinese interests. US, therefore, crave to curb China before such a scenario occurs. For the very purpose, US is eager to conduct Air-Sea battle possessing the potential to hit deep inside the Chinese terrain in-order to perturb China’s AH/AD aptitude. It is not only politically acrid but also militarily precarious. Hub-and-spoke” Strategy: Containing Soviet Union and Defeating Communism The cessation of World War-II had witnessed some crucial changes within the political environment especially the metallization of “hub-and-spoke strategy’, a US grand sign to assemble alliances throughout the globe to guard its immediate interests against any challenger. The only perceptible contender at that time was Soviet Union, former USSR. The “hub-and-spoke design” acquiesced America to create close bilateral diplomatic and military links with core allies to offer effective deterrence against Soviet rise in Asia.
The strategy involved a chain of Joint defended agreements devised at the peak of Cold War with allied states. Three of such treaties were signed in 1951, where the first one involved Philippines while the second incorporated a relater agreement amongst US, New Zealand and Australians. The third entailed a bilateral agreement between US and Japan that enabled America to have its military bases for defensive measures within Japanese territory. Thailand, South Korea and Taiwan also followed the suit. These defended treaties provided security assurance by America against Soviet’s threat.
The “hub-and-spoke” strategy, also known as San- Francisco system, had defined the US presence in Asia-Pacific since sass’s. The salient characteristics of this system included Intense network of mutual alliances Nonexistence of multilateral defended structures A strong lop-sidedness in alliance relation both in economy and security Special preference to Japan Easy access to US markets Similar to “pivot to Asia”, the alliances were framed to balance the perceived risk against the then US competitor, USSR.
The formulation of SEATS (South-East Asia Treaty Organization) back in 1954 was an evident demonstration of the said strategy where eight states signed the agreement for mutual defended against communist states of USSR and China. The member states incorporated Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand, Australia, New Zealand, France, United States and United Kingdom. The ore focus during the entire Cold War rested on shared defended against global communism, particularly against Soviet Union since the political upshot of World War-II reinforced the competition between East versus West.
The obvious differences in the strategic thinking and contradictory interests brought the US and Soviet Union at the verge of war. Being a capitalist society, America felt itself threatened by communist expansion and the growing capability of USSR. However, as compared to today’s mighty China, Soviet Union despite of its broad presence in Asia was militarily lesser a Pacific power than the ISSUE. The USSR-China rivalry, on the other hand, provided further political advantage to Washington and its strategic allies to overpower the Soviet Union in Cold War.
Consequently, the “hub-and-spoke” strategy, by having America as the leading hub while the rest of the allied state as the Spokes, remained the key aspect of security design within Asia-Pacific. Similar to what the world has witnessed during the Cold War, American strategic thinking has yet again turned towards another Asian competitor, China. However, the Washington’s containment policy has altered to some extent since the approach is Ewing transposed into a more disbursed alliance system marked as “Spoke-to-spoke” strategy.
Keeping in view its financial condition, America is encouraging its partners to share its burden of safeguarding Asia. Increased global military trade, armed exercises and training with different stakeholders could be seen within the region to build the ability to challenge Chinese might. US is not only facilitating its regional allies to develop their own defensive system but also provoking them to cooperate with each other in an effort towards opposing China.
The term “Spoke-to-spoke” refers to the new strategy that focuses on “Spokes” and to the “Hub”; America, being the facilitator and inciter, leads its alliances to cooperate with itself and amongst each other in-order to share the load of balancing China’s rise. Being highly anxious over China’s power, Tokyo is playing the dominant role in furthering this containment policy and has established closer ties with various states. Moreover, Japan is enthusiastically involved in developing strategic links especially with Philippines and Vietnam, two extreme regional opponents of China.
Similarly, Vietnam is also building good strategic ties with Washington to offset Chinese might. Australia, in 2012, has conducted military exercises with Japan thus, collaborating in maritime affairs. South-Korea, on the other hand, is strongly committed to Join hands with US to contribute a leading role in criticizing the region. Though American leaders often reject it, but US military has maintained an aggressive posture devised with an intention to bring China’s maritime commerce at jeopardy. Its armed forces are placed in such a way that could intimidate Beijing supply lines in CSS region thus threatening Chinese economy.
Keeping into count China’s reliance on sea-lines, Washington is keen to exploit this dependency by provoking its alliances while Beijing historical territorial tensions with its neighboring states has put China on a relative disadvantage. America has its strategic bases in almost every partner state. As more as 100,000 US military personnel are deployed in both South-Korea and Japan while 2500 submarines are present in Australia. Likewise India, China’s genuine Asian competitor, has also partnered with Washington in-order to challenge Chinese rise. US is interested in containing China from all dimensions through alliance structure.
Having the most powerful Navy, America enjoys good working ties with regional opponents of China thus maintaining defended pacts with five Asia-Pacific powers. However, the alliances are not only formulated to contain China but also are helpful in curbing global terrorism. The significant aspects of the containment strategy include; a symmetrical network aimed at refinancing the defended burden in Asia-Pacific, introduction of multilateral defended structures like SEAN e. T. C, broadening the scope of defended relations between Washington and allied partners and Preference to each regional ally .