CHINESE "RESETTING"

US President Barack Obama made an address to Congress on the evening of 26 January ahead of the presidential elections scheduled for autumn 2012. He dedicated most of his speech to economic issues. The state of the American economy is still alarming, and the measures that are being taken, according to analysts, only delay the collapse of the economy without solving the problem.

War is not a solution

While economists are arguing about ways to restore the faltering economy, political scientists are making predictions about possible actions of Washington. Among other measures, analysts do not exclude the use of an implicit method of overcoming the crisis by provoking a war or a fear of it. For such large countries, war and its danger are a good opportunity to increase military exports. The crisis of 1929-39, for example, led to the Second World War. The Cold War differed little from a real one, because the blocs were constantly at war with each other in Third World countries by selling weapons to their allies in huge quantities. The same happened during the Iran-Iraq war, where the Western countries and the Soviet Union supported both sides in military-technical terms. Fighting continued for years in Central America, Africa, Vietnam, Korea and Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, US behaviour has seen some deviation from the "military" way of overcoming crises in recent years. This is proved, for example, by the start of the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. However, on the other hand, the current situation surrounding Iran can be described as fanning the flames of another possible war. At the same time, there are arguments that allow us to say that Washington's plans for Iran and generally for the entire eastern direction pursue completely different, far-reaching goals.

After the "lesson" in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US returned to Nicholas Spykman's strategy on the balance of power, which reads:

- In the world and in every region, countries' resources are used by creating a balance of power;

- To create this balance of power, it is necessary to encourage allies with military technology and promises of direct military intervention in the event of a threat to them;

- To use military force only when the balance of power is disrupted and if alliances fail.

A new doctrine

In the first week of 2012, US President Barack Obama, speaking at a press conference at the Pentagon, announced America's new military doctrine. The very appearance of the president at the Pentagon and his personal presentation of this strategic document testify to its importance and the president's participation in its preparation. The president dedicated his speech to a report previously published by the US Department of Defence under the title "Sustaining US Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defence".

The report covers many US interests, including "discussions" on the consequences of the growing power of China, threats from North Korea, "Arab spring", the security of Israel, the Iranian nuclear issue, the importance of allied relations with European countries and the role of NATO in Europe and elsewhere, as well as on developing Smart Defence for NATO and its allies, cooperation with Russia in the name of common good and relations with African and South American countries in the context of world security.

Probably, one of the highlights of the US foreign policy in the near future should be the strengthening of its presence in the Asia-Pacific region (APR), while reducing the military budget does not mean its weakening in key regions. It is the importance of the APR that Obama spoke about during his speech in the Australian Parliament on 17 November last year.

"After the ten years when we waged two wars that cost us dearly, the United States has turned its attention to the enormous potential of the Asia-Pacific region", said the president. It is no accident that the first concrete step in promoting the new policy of "reorientation" was the US administration's decision to deploy 2,500 troops in the Northern Territory (administrative area in Australia). In continuation of this, in November 2011, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced Washington's intention to turn the 21st century into a century of Pacific policy for the United States.

Correct the imbalance

In this case, of course, all eyes are on China with its rapid economic growth and political and military power not only in the Asia-Pacific region but worldwide. For the time being, the military power of China, the largest nuclear power in Asia, is behind US military power, but China's regional and global strategies, plans and initiatives seriously alarm the West. The United States, in particular, is concerned about the geopolitical actions of the Celestial Empire aimed at strengthening its position both in the Asia-Pacific region and in several other countries, purely due to its economic potential. American analysts are sounding the alarm that the Chinese are simply gathering around themselves the countries with which America could not or did not want to build a normal relationship.

For example, the West did not maintain contacts with Myanmar (formerly Burma) for decades, accusing the authorities of that country of trampling upon democratic freedoms. The Chinese, on the contrary, established relations bypassing the West, investing tens of billions of dollars in Myanmar's economy. The size of China's military aid to this country can be estimated at the same sum.

Myanmar attracts China because of its geopolitical importance as it has a common border with India, China, Thailand and Laos. Moreover, Myanmar can establish control over the Strait of Malacca, through which 50,000 ships are able to pass every year. The volume of oil transportation through the strait is about 11 million barrels per day. And China is a major consumer of energy reserves passing through the strait.

A similar picture is observed in relations with the small island nation of East Timor, which also has an advantageous geographical location. Australia and Indonesia are a stone's throw, and the bottom of the Timor Sea holds considerable reserves of hydrocarbons.

The US and China have been vying for influence here since 2002, when the former Portuguese colony gained independence. We can say that Beijing is gaining the upper hand. At present, China has a 378-million-dollar contract for the construction of two power plants. Among other things, the Timorese are buying certain kinds of military equipment from China, including light weapons and uniforms. In January 2011, the two countries signed an agreement under which Beijing will provide a loan of 3 billion dollars. If previously promising Timorese, who eyed top jobs in the local economy and politics, went to study in Australia and the US, today they prefer to study in Chinese universities.

Realizing that the strengthening of China's positions in all spheres and in all important regions is the main threat to US hegemony in the world, the Obama administration announced "resetting" in its policy in the Asia-Pacific region and in all countries, where the Chinese-American confrontation is noticeable in one way or another.

It is no accident that for the first time in 50 years, from late November 2011 and to January 2012, Myanmar was separately visited by the foreign ministers of the United States, Britain and France, and the schedule of the visit and the statements of the parties were virtually identical.

Both US Secretary of State Clinton, UK Foreign Secretary William Hague and French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe met with Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar's main opposition activist, during the visit and presented her with honorary awards of their countries and promised all possible assistance to opposition parties in democratic reforms in the country. In April, Suu Kyi will lead the National League for Democracy in parliamentary by-elections.

In addition, the US renewed its already firm military relations with the Philippines. During the celebrations of the 60th anniversary of the signing of the treaty on mutual defence between the US and the Philippines, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that "in 2012, the United States will give the Philippines a second Coast Guard patrol boat almost for nothing".

Due to China's growing influence, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, New Zealand and even Mongolia maintain relations with the United States. One of these countries is Vietnam - a country that fought the US for years. Vietnam's problems with China because of the violation of borders in the South China Sea force Hanoi to seek Washington's support. Incidentally, the South China Sea, where there are strategically important sea routes, and which, according to experts, is rich in energy resources, is also the subject of a dispute for other regional countries such as the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.

As we can see, the Asia-Pacific region is getting a new look with the help of the US. All countries that have certain security issues with China unite under the auspices of America. This political-military alliance may even be called "Pacific NATO".

Thus, at this point, the China-Pakistan-North Korea-Myanmar union has an alternative in the form of the US-Australia-South Korea-Philippines-Vietnam-Indonesia-Thailand alliance. In parallel with its balanced policy, India is preparing to send a fleet to the East. But the most important thing is that the growth of the US military presence in the region and the siege strategy may lead to closer Sino-Russian relations up to a strategic partnership.

Returning to Obama's latest speech in Australia and the subsequent decision to deploy 2,500 marines at a base in Darwin (Northern Territory of Australia), we can say that the US has added a ground element to its strategy.

As already noted, the line of confrontation between China and the US is almost around the world, and we now can see China's superiority in many areas. For this reason, America's new strategy is not to allow China to go beyond its own borders ("Anaconda loop"), to weaken its economy and arms race, and to try to close trade and economic markets within the reach of China. If this strategy is successful, the US can hope to capture regional markets through a policy of fear - supplying and selling military hardware to regional countries as is done in the Middle East, preventing the possibility of using US government bonds, of which China has accumulated a very large number in recent years, and strengthening the US dollar in the region. A similar strategy was successfully used against the Soviet Union in the 1970-1980s.

In addition to the Pacific region, the main non-regional economic, military, political and strategic partners of China are also covered by the US strategy. In countries such as Iran, Syria, Pakistan, North Sudan, Libya, Nigeria, which had, or still have, close ties with China, we can see signs of chaos, political instability and conflicts: a potential war in Iran is spoken about every day; a civil war is already under way in Syria; in Pakistan there is a threat of a military coup; the Gaddafi regime has fallen in Libya; the conflict between Southern and Northern Sudan is escalating, while Nigeria is gradually sinking into chaos... In China itself, violations of the rights of Uighurs and Tibetans can be manipulated.

How long can China withstand the economic, political and military siege and what can it do in response? Not only China but the US and its allies should also think about it. As a country with great economic and military potential, ancient traditions and unique social philosophy, China will never want to share the fate of the Soviet Union.

But the US does not intend to repeat the mistakes of the past either. If previously the invasion of Afghanistan and the use of military air bases and corridors of Central Asia in close proximity to China did not produce the desired results, now the US policy to contain the growing role of China has a multi-vector and a more thoughtful character.

"The most important theme of foreign policy in the 21st century will be the relationship between China and the United States," Henry Kissinger, one of the main participants in the negotiations to end the war in Vietnam, said after the United States' failed an attempt to "strengthen its presence" on the borders of China, which cost the US 60,000 lives.