The Curious Case of Obama's Routine Trip to Asia
Although Barack Obama's trip to four countries in Asia lasted only one short week, it has left behind a deep impression, with many peculiarities presenting themselves on what was to be a seemingly routine tour.
The first oddity is that China was a central topic of discussion at each stop along the way, despite China itself being passed over as a destination. Obama wished to boost morale among those U.S. allies that are at odds with China, but also feared offending China. His apprehensive and unsure steps entirely lacked the confidence and poise typical of a U.S. president. For example, in Japan, he publicly claimed that Diaoyu falls under the bounds of the U.S.-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, expressed support for Japan lifting the limitations on its exercise of collective self-defense, and obliquely chastised China for its establishment of the East China Sea air defense identification zone. In the Philippines, he supported sending that country's reef and island disputes with China to be reviewed by international courts, and strongly backed the recently-signed "Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement," the terms of which effectively allow the U.S. to establish military bases anywhere in the Philippines, make use of Philippine bases at any time, and station troops (dubbed a "rotational presence") in the Philippines for extended periods of time, thereby extending its military reach to the very border of China's nine-dash line. At the same time, he also repeatedly praised China in brown-nosing fashion, stating that the U.S. welcomes the peaceful rise of China, that China's development is beneficial for the Asia-Pacific region and the world, the U.S. and China are maintaining a constructive relationship and the U.S. does not oppose or seek to contain China, etc.
One can see that Obama is making every effort to toe a fine line between China and its opponents. However, his qualifications as an acrobat are clearly not up to snuff, as the general appraisal of his performance has been that "he failed to please anyone." As U.S. presidential trips go, these sorts of scenes are few and far between.
The second oddity is that the U.S. president was overly humble and ingratiating toward his smaller partners, in a fashion that was almost self-abasing. He originally sought to use a bevy of items in support of Japan to gain the green light from Shinzo Abe for the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement. But even with this generous gift shipped and paid for, Abe's hands remained planted firmly in his pockets, unwilling to return the favor. Obama even took on a pleading tone as he told Abe, "If the TPP talks do not generate results, Washington will regard this visit to Japan as a failure. This will make it extremely difficult to issue a joint statement."*
With Abe unmoved, Obama still signed the statement, however, leaving Tokyo with empty hands. The relationship between the U.S. and Japan is one of master and servant. In the past, the word of the U.S. was law, and it took what it pleased. This time around, the bizarre swapping of master and servant could be called a total humiliation.
It is no wonder, then, that the U.S. media has pelted Obama with such phrasing as "failure" and "embarrassment."
The third oddity is that along the entire trip, Obama also continued to admonish Russia, warning China not to follow the example of Russia in Ukraine. Fighting a war on two fronts is a violation of one of the major tenets of war. Just as has been suggested by some media analysts, the triangular relationship between the U.S., China and Russia is the key factor deciding the modern geopolitical landscape. What is important is the balance of power within this triangle. Is it an equilateral triangle, or has the U.S. set itself against China and Russia, those opposed to an "American world?" Obama's tour of Asia demonstrates that he has chosen the latter. The U.S. seeks to contain China in the Asia-Pacific region and Russia in Asia and Europe, giving itself a mission that it cannot hope to accomplish.
Obama's trip can be thought of as a promotional event for the U.S. "return to Asia." With the land mines he left behind, it is easy to predict that the disruptive activities of the newly encouraged Japan and the Philippines will only intensify. If the U.S. "return to Asia" strategy continues to play out in this manner, it is destined for an unhappy end, and Obama will be further mocked by the U.S. press as an incapable president lacking a strategic mind.
*Editor’s Note: This quote, accurately translated, could not be verified. It appears as though the author may be paraphrasing.
The first oddity is that China was a central topic of discussion at each stop along the way, despite China itself being passed over as a destination. Obama wished to boost morale among those U.S. allies that are at odds with China, but also feared offending China. His apprehensive and unsure steps entirely lacked the confidence and poise typical of a U.S. president. For example, in Japan, he publicly claimed that Diaoyu falls under the bounds of the U.S.-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, expressed support for Japan lifting the limitations on its exercise of collective self-defense, and obliquely chastised China for its establishment of the East China Sea air defense identification zone. In the Philippines, he supported sending that country's reef and island disputes with China to be reviewed by international courts, and strongly backed the recently-signed "Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement," the terms of which effectively allow the U.S. to establish military bases anywhere in the Philippines, make use of Philippine bases at any time, and station troops (dubbed a "rotational presence") in the Philippines for extended periods of time, thereby extending its military reach to the very border of China's nine-dash line. At the same time, he also repeatedly praised China in brown-nosing fashion, stating that the U.S. welcomes the peaceful rise of China, that China's development is beneficial for the Asia-Pacific region and the world, the U.S. and China are maintaining a constructive relationship and the U.S. does not oppose or seek to contain China, etc.
One can see that Obama is making every effort to toe a fine line between China and its opponents. However, his qualifications as an acrobat are clearly not up to snuff, as the general appraisal of his performance has been that "he failed to please anyone." As U.S. presidential trips go, these sorts of scenes are few and far between.
The second oddity is that the U.S. president was overly humble and ingratiating toward his smaller partners, in a fashion that was almost self-abasing. He originally sought to use a bevy of items in support of Japan to gain the green light from Shinzo Abe for the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement. But even with this generous gift shipped and paid for, Abe's hands remained planted firmly in his pockets, unwilling to return the favor. Obama even took on a pleading tone as he told Abe, "If the TPP talks do not generate results, Washington will regard this visit to Japan as a failure. This will make it extremely difficult to issue a joint statement."*
With Abe unmoved, Obama still signed the statement, however, leaving Tokyo with empty hands. The relationship between the U.S. and Japan is one of master and servant. In the past, the word of the U.S. was law, and it took what it pleased. This time around, the bizarre swapping of master and servant could be called a total humiliation.
It is no wonder, then, that the U.S. media has pelted Obama with such phrasing as "failure" and "embarrassment."
The third oddity is that along the entire trip, Obama also continued to admonish Russia, warning China not to follow the example of Russia in Ukraine. Fighting a war on two fronts is a violation of one of the major tenets of war. Just as has been suggested by some media analysts, the triangular relationship between the U.S., China and Russia is the key factor deciding the modern geopolitical landscape. What is important is the balance of power within this triangle. Is it an equilateral triangle, or has the U.S. set itself against China and Russia, those opposed to an "American world?" Obama's tour of Asia demonstrates that he has chosen the latter. The U.S. seeks to contain China in the Asia-Pacific region and Russia in Asia and Europe, giving itself a mission that it cannot hope to accomplish.
Obama's trip can be thought of as a promotional event for the U.S. "return to Asia." With the land mines he left behind, it is easy to predict that the disruptive activities of the newly encouraged Japan and the Philippines will only intensify. If the U.S. "return to Asia" strategy continues to play out in this manner, it is destined for an unhappy end, and Obama will be further mocked by the U.S. press as an incapable president lacking a strategic mind.
*Editor’s Note: This quote, accurately translated, could not be verified. It appears as though the author may be paraphrasing.