Expert: US strategy in Asean region likely to be maintained

US President Barack Obama

PETALING JAYA: Since United States President Barack Obama will leave office in early 2017, it is important to analyse his contribution to South-East Asia, and to question just how much the regional security landscape will change following his departure.

Obama's “pivot” or rebalancing towards Asia was a key highlight of his foreign policy and his administration invested more than any other US president in South-East Asia.

Obama tried to be more multilateral in his approach to US policy in South-East Asia which gave more importance to Asean, says Malaysian Association for American Studies (MAAS) president Prof Dr K.S. Nathan.

“Asean was able to create a very good multilateral platform for them (the US) to engage in South-East Asia on a positive basis,” said Prof Nathan, who added that the organisation was already known to be very successful in terms of providing security and stability to the region and in working with external powers.

One of the first important developments came during the 42nd Asean Foreign Ministers Meeting in Phuket in 2009 when then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed the Asean Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC).

Obama was also responsible for opening up relations with Myanmar and for investing in “capacity building arrangements” for lesser developed countries such as Laos, Myanmar and Cambodia, says Prof Nathan.

Malaysian Association for American Studies (MAAS) president Prof Dr K.S. Nathan during an interview with The Star Online.

“So, it was a move away from the one-directional effort of the United States to make policy towards South-East Asia purely from Washington and to get cooperation of the regional powers,” he said.

Meanwhile, Prof Nathan also talked about how the US has been an important factor in the region when it comes to creating a power balance against Chinese military build-up in the South China Sea.

China claims the entire South China Sea as part of its “nine-dash line” – a claim which overlaps with the Philippines’ 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

In June, an arbitral tribunal in the Hague invalidated China’s claim of “historic rights” over the South China Sea.

“The nine-dash line nationalises the South China Sea to the extent of 90% that it belongs to China, so that only 10% is up for negotiation,” said Prof Nathan.

In October, 2015, the US Navy sent the guided missile destroyer USS Lassen to travel within the 12-nautical mile boundary of one of China’s claimant islands in the Spratly archipelago.

According to Prof Nathan, the act was not only to uphold the US’ strong support for the principle of freedom of navigation but was also to test if China would react and if it was creating an Air Defence Identification Zone similar to the one in the East China Sea.

“The military dimension is clearly focused on ensuring that China doesn’t grow too powerful in the region and become a threat to smaller states,” he said.

Commenting on trade liberalisation, Prof Nathan said that although it was started by former president George W. Bush, Obama gave more momentum to it through the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) which ensured a high standard of trade liberalisation and more transparency in the exchange of goods and services.

On the current US presidential election campaign and what it could mean for security dynamics in South-East Asia, Prof Nathan said that US commitment to the region would not likely undergo a significant change.

“I think the institutions in the US are stronger than individuals,” said Prof Nathan.

He said that even if the next US President did not have in-depth knowledge of the region, it does not mean that the he or she would not be able to benefit from advisers.

He said that the institutions in the US would prevent Obama’s successor from doing whatever he or she wanted in South-East Asia. such as the dismantling the US-Japan alliance or changing counter terrorism strategies significantly.

“The rebalance to Asia is an institutionalised foreign policy approach to South-East Asia since 2010, and I think those things will continue,” he said.

Prof Nathan also dismissed the idea that the US would try to pursue a more isolationist strategy in the future.

He said that internationalism was important to the United States in order to prevent their influence from declining due to not being internally engaged.

He said that regardless of whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton takes over the White House next year, they would have an international strategy specific to different parts of the world.

Prof Nathan also expressed his belief that bilateral security relations, especially with US allies such as Thailand and the Philippines in South-East Asia, will be further strengthened in the coming years.

He said that the US would still have its own national interest to advance and promote in this region and whenever multilateralism does not work, they will engage bilaterally.

Prof Nathan also noted the importance of US-Malaysia relations.

“I think our relations (with the US) are quite institutionalised,” he said.

Prof Nathan pointed out that the US is one of the largest customers for Malaysian products and is a very important trade partner.

“The bilateral trade is worth about US$50bil (RM207.1bil) between Malaysia and the United States,” he said.

Prof Nathan said that Malaysia is also America’s 16th largest trade partner, while US direct investments in the country are over US$13bil (RM53.85bil).

“I think we (Malaysia) are quite sophisticated in pursuing our foreign policy with all countries and I think it is based on very realistic calculations on how Malaysia’s national interest can be advanced,” he said.