Does Obama Want a ‘Pivot’ to Europe?

Since November 2011, the Obama administration’s “pivot to Asia” strategy has remained a topic of much debate and the administration has indeed been busy ensuring that there has never been a shortage of news to discuss. There have been concerns in the Middle East that the U.S. would withdraw from the region, which the U.S. has repeatedly ruled out as a possibility. But while those fears have not been realized, neither has any ground been gained in Israeli-Palestinian peace talks over the course of 10 trips to the Middle East by Secretary of State John Kerry.

Europe similarly worries about being neglected by the U.S. The region was the strategic focus of the U.S. during the Cold War, but in the past few years, many countries in Europe have once more become engulfed by financial crises that some have yet to extricate themselves from. And the secession of Crimea and ongoing separatist crisis in Ukraine have indeed presented new challenges to U.S. policy in Europe. Furthermore, a recent uptick in U.S. activity in Asia was immediately followed by another situation flaring up in Europe. This suggests that the resources of the U.S. in terms of diplomacy and influence are being stretched quite thin.

At the end of April, Obama visited four countries in Asia in a tour largely meant to placate allies. As a result of the budgetary brouhaha at home, he did not attend last October’s East Asia Summit, raising questions in several nations as to how much credibility remained with the U.S. “pivot” strategy. On this current trip to Europe, Obama has done his utmost to mollify allies, assuring them that the U.S. will honor its promises and rallying them with support and encouragement.

Obama also stopped by Poland, a decision for which the object was clear: to reaffirm security promises made to nations in Central and Eastern Europe. These new additions to NATO lean heavily on that organization for defense, and the crisis in Ukraine has left them visibly shaken. Obama has already requested that Congress allocate $1 billion for his “European Reassurance Initiative” that would send additional troops and military equipment to Europe, especially Central and Eastern Europe, in an effort to augment military cooperation between the two sides of the Atlantic. It also aims to bolster the defensive capabilities of European allies that have been unsettled by Russia’s annexation of Crimea.

Moreover, the U.S. wishes to strengthen collaboration with its non-NATO allies such as Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense Derek Chollet announced that the U.S. will double military aid to Ukraine, bringing the total to $18 million. Obama also met with Ukraine’s newly elected President Petro Poroshenko to pledge an additional $5 million in military equipment to Ukraine.

It would seem that the U.S. is pursuing a new sort of policy in Eastern Europe.

Obama is now attending a meeting of G-7 leaders. His agenda there is also quite clear. He must further boost the morale of European allies and at the same time ask them to do more in facing Russia. The U.S. has long been dissatisfied with its European counterparts in NATO, chastising them for an over-reliance on the U.S. when it comes to European security. When Robert Gates was defense secretary, he did not shy away from openly criticizing allies in Europe. And following the outbreak of the crisis in Ukraine, the U.S. hoped that those allies would bear a larger share of the responsibility for finding a resolution.

However, as Europe holds much deeper economic ties with Russia than does the U.S., any backlash from further sanctions would cause them considerable losses. The issue became a political hot potato, with nothing more than token protestation being offered. The situation has even had U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland uttering invectives. So during this G-7 summit, Obama must lay out the position of the U.S. while also asking European allies to do more to buttress their united battlefront against Russia.

Obama has now wrapped up two wars, and the lessons learned by the U.S. from those wars have been engraved deeply in his mind. He cannot risk launching another war overseas as a means to resolve situations such as the war in Syria or the nuclear threat from Iran; neither can he opt for the use of military force in Ukraine. Obama remains insistent that the U.S. must lead the rest of the world and that the 21st century should, like the one preceding it, have the U.S. at the helm. But upon hearing him say these words now, one cannot help but feel that he lacks the wherewithal to back them up. For some time, certain detractors at home and abroad have accused Obama of being a “weak whiner.” In the two-plus years remaining in his term in office, he will make repeated shows of strength and strive to transform his soft image. But whether it is a “pivot” to Asia or Europe, diplomatic accomplishments for the Obama administration will not come easily.

The author is an honorary member of the Academic Consulting Committee at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.