As the US media fudge the medal count of the Olympics to stay on top by counting the total of medals, not those of GOLD as it's usually done, one can only see fudge to counter despair... Meanwhile:

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) - China is using all instruments of power to achieve its goals while the United States lags behind, US Air Force Chief of Staff General Charles Q. Brown Jr. said on Friday.

"I would say that China, the People's Republic of China is using all instruments of power to achieve their goal, and we are behind," Brown said during a speech at the National Press Club.

China has also transformed itself into a “strategic peer with world-leading, anti-access, area-denial capabilities” that is custom-designed to beat the US, Brown said.

Brown, who served as the Air Component Commander for the US Indo-Pacific Command prior to becoming Air Force Chief of Staff, emphasized that without change, the US risks losing its competitive edge in the highly-contested global environment, its credibility with allies and partners, and its ability to defend the national interest.

Read more:

https://sputniknews.com/military/202108061083546341--china-using-all-instruments-of-power-to-achieve-goals-us-behind-air-force-chief-says/

free

Two decades ago, it seemed utterly impossible to have a ceremonial reception of the US Secretary of Defense in Hanoi, as he visited Vietnam in late July.

Once again, illustrating the radical changes that have taken place in the world affairs since the end of the Cold War. In particular, for Vietnam, one of the main components of these changes was the complication of political relations with China (which, however, emerged in the late 1970s), that is, with one of its main allies in the long war on the Indochinese Peninsula. The other component was the gradual establishment of relations with the United States, that is, with the recent sworn enemy.

The defining motive of problems in Sino-Vietnamese relations today is the territorial issues in the South China Sea, and in Sino-US relations, the fact that China has become the main opponent of Washington’s global claims. The perception of China as a potential source of trouble helps to bring Washington and Hanoi closer together.

Noted, both of the world’s leading powers are among Vietnam’s top trading partners. Its trade with the PRC and the USA in 2019 was $131 billion and $78 billion, respectively. At the end of the “COVID” year of 2020, the volume of Vietnamese-Chinese trade increased (compared to 2019) by a “staggering” 19%.

But, as always, all sorts of political problems are a challenge to build mutually beneficial cooperation. The current US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin aims to solve such problems during his tour of the Southeast Asian region, which is becoming increasingly important in American global politics. Naturally, he is guided by the interests of his own country.

In Hanoi, where Lloyd Austin was received by the president and prime minister; he was quite comfortable with this arrangement for the reasons noted above. During talks with his colleague Fang Wang Zhang, the American guest made the remarkable remark that since the normalization of bilateral diplomatic relations (in 1995) Washington made no claims about Vietnam’s policy and did not ask it to make a political choice between the world’s leading powers.

Which is correct if guided by the strategy of attracting to its side a country with problems in relations with the primary geopolitical opponent of the United States. To achieve such a goal, one may not be very (or not at all) principled about, for example, “human rights violations” in the territory of a potential ally. But who are invariably positioned in the front line against Washington’s main opponents?

In Hanoi, negotiations such as the US Secretary of Defense tend to have both an outwardly public shell and hidden real content. The first was Covid-19 and the search for the remains of American servicemen who died during the Vietnam War and those of the Vietnamese who went missing at the time. Lloyd Austin, in particular, “proudly” recalled the fact that the US government had allocated 5 million doses of Moderna vaccine to Vietnam and said he was ready to discuss further measures to cooperate in the fight against the coronavirus pandemic.

From the official report released after the talks, we learn that the topic of “dioxin cleanup” of the territory of Vietnam, which has, in the author’s opinion, not a small destructive potential, was also touched upon. Both sides try to avoid the public-media “undermining” of the problem associated with this topic by mixing up the scale of the situation in every possible way.

There are all kinds of stuff written on this subject. Often, entirely speculative. But there is little doubt that millions of Vietnamese have suffered in one way or another from the use of Agent Orange by US aircraft. It has been claimed that the effects of the substance are also affecting the children now being born. At one time, the author came across reports about the futile attempts of American mechanics who were preparing planes carrying Agent Orange canisters for flight to get compensation for lost health. Most likely, not because of the greed of the Pentagon, but because of the need to conceal the problem itself.

The Pentagon, as mentioned above announcement about the chief’s trip also reproduces a well-established meme about the “freedom and openness of the Indo-Pacific region,” the adherence to which “brings the United States and Vietnam closer together”. The defense ministers of both countries have not publicly identified a possible source of threats to both “freedom” and “openness.”

But the Pentagon spokesman, John F. Kirby was less politically correct when he bluntly said that the region the chief was visiting was “part of a world where China continues to be very aggressive. … And as you know, it’s a vital region.” Of course, we do.

From Vietnam, Lloyd Austin went to another equally important country of the same “vital region,” namely, the Philippines. But to answer the question of why it is significant to the US would also require some clarification. This is mainly due to a series of noteworthy events that occurred in 2016. In May of that year, Rodrigo Duterte took over the presidency as a result of the general elections, who allowed himself (almost for the first time in the country’s post-war history) quite harsh remarks about the United States and declared his intention to improve relations with China.

However, two months later there followed a favorable decision by the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague on the claim of Duterte’s predecessor, Benigno Aquino III, totally pro-American and anti-Chinese politician, which challenged the PRC claims to 80-90% of the South China Sea. Rodrigo Duterte refrained from commenting on this decision (obviously favorable for the Philippines), whose approval procedure fell on his foreign minister.

The new president’s “extrajudicial” (to put it mildly) methods of combating the drug trade, the country’s national disaster, have also contributed to a sharp deterioration in the image of the Philippines in the eyes of its recent overseas “guardians.” The extravagant Filipino president responded to the criticism that arose with what he called “brinkmanship” on various fronts, including such significant ones as the UN Secretary-General and the President of the United States (then Barack Obama).

Soon, however, Rodrigo Duterte made significant adjustments to the initial “anti-Americanism” and even made something akin to an apology to Barack Obama. Which, apparently, was the result of two strange incidents. First, a small armed incident in Mindanao Province that broke out immediately after his election turned into full-scale hostilities involving hitherto obscure terrorist groups. It is simply amazing how the “international terrorists” invariably manage to surface where tensions grow just on time. The operation to neutralize them dragged on for three months, and they had to rely on the same Americans to complete it.

In addition, a “space photo” of a Chinese sand barge arriving at one of the islands, subjects to a territorial dispute between the Philippines and the PRC, was published in the press.

In general, the pendulum of Philippine foreign policy swung sharply in the direction of the PRC had to be brought to a certain equilibrium position, in which it  remains to this day (weakly swaying). Which, by the way, is more or less typical of all the countries of Southeast Asia. Their balancing in the field of tensions “radiated” in the region by the leading world players provides each latter with certain opportunities to shift these “pendulums” in their direction.

That is what the US Secretary of Defense was doing in Manila (and earlier in Hanoi). And, judging by the report of the American Embassy (with a curious illustration), not without certain success. In particular, the sides expressed their intention to strengthen the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty. That is, it has not disappeared, despite all the twists and turns in bilateral relations in recent years.

In addition, Rodrigo Duterte announced the withdrawal of his own statement on the termination of the US-Philippines Visiting Forces Agreement, VFA. It seems that he was overly excited when he was making it, it happens to everyone every once in a while…

Finally, at the end of the defense secretary’s trip to three Southeast Asian countries, the spokesman’s thesis on the “vital importance” of the region was reiterated. US Secretary of State Antony John Blinken was scheduled to hold video conferences with counterparts from several ASEAN countries between August 2-6. Vice-President Kamila Harris is scheduled to visit Singapore and Vietnam in late August.

As the Chinese Global Times put it, senior US officials kick-off ‘unusually frequent’ visits to the region.

Vladimir Terekhov, expert on the issues of the Asia-Pacific region, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Read more:

https://journal-neo.org/2021/08/07/u-s-secretary-of-defense-visits-vietnam-and-the-philippines/

Read from top.

free

In his recent visit to Southeast Asia – the Philippines, Vietnam and Singapore – the US Defense Secretary, Lloyd Austin, outlined what can be called the blueprint of US re-engagement with the region after a lull of few years. One thing that becomes strikingly clear is that the US needs China to survive in Southeast Asia. However, the US does not need China as a friend and supporter, but as an enemy that Washington can demonize to advertise its military usefulness to the region. In a first speech delivered to Fullerton Lecture Series in Singapore by a US Secretary of Defense in about 20 years, Austin targeted China to justify why the region needs the US and the US needs this region to fight its global competitor. Addressing the audience, Austin said, “I’ve come to Southeast Asia to deepen America’s bonds with the allies and partners on whom our common security depends.” And, as Austin later on explained, the sole threat to the supposed ‘common security’ comes from Beijing. To quote him:

“Beijing’s claim to the vast majority of the South China Sea has no basis in international law.  That assertion treads on the sovereignty of states in the region….. Beijing’s unwillingness to resolve disputes peacefully and respect the rule of law isn’t just occurring on the water.  We’ve also seen aggression against India — destabilizing military activity and other forms of coercion against the people of Taiwan — and genocide and crimes against humanity against Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang.”

However, while Austin promised ASEAN protection from China, it remains that the region does not need this protection. Policy makers in Washington seem to have been driven by an assumption that the region is in dire need of the US help to get rid of China. This, however, is not really the case. For most countries in Southeast Asia, China is an inevitable partner, who they do not wish to antagonise unnecessarily. Even though there are territorial issues in the region, ASEAN has no appetite to confront Beijing militarily with the help of the US. While issues remain unresolved and there’s a need for resolution, for the concerned countries in Southeast Asia, their preferred means of achieving it are direct bi-lateral engagement with China (which China prefers), or recourse to legal arbitration (which it does not really mind). These options explain why no country in the ASEAN refers to China, even in their official publications and statements, as an enemy state.

It presents the US with a major dilemma i.e., the US is keen to extend military support to countries that are unlikely to use it against China. While there is no gainsaying that Southeast Asian countries want an economic engagement with the US, Washington’s options are further curtailed by the absence of a clear economic strategy. Austin, as could be expected, did not offer any credible, tangible and feasible vision of deeper economic engagement with the region. Instead, the main focus of his trip remained on reassuring the so-called US allies of Washington’s support against China, including through revitalising and even possibly expanding the QUAD. As Austin said, “As ASEAN plays its central role, we are also focusing on complementary mechanisms in the region.  I know how pleased President Biden was to host the first Quad Leaders’ Summit in March.  And structures like the Quad make the region’s security architecture even more durable.”

Lack of a program offering deeper economic engagement to the region is conspicuously absent. The US continues to fail to understand that the strongest pull of China in the region is not its supposed “authoritarianism” but its economic engagement, which is one crucial reason for why the ASEAN neither wants to confront China militarily, nor aims to rescind its economic ties with Beijing. While Washington’s ability to compete more effectively on the economic front was hurt by former President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal, the Biden administration has not announced, or even possibly conceived, a long-term and multilateral trade and economic connectivity regime. Instead, unlike China, the US also excused itself out of the world’s largest trade pact proposed by the Southeast Asia: the Regional Comprehensive Partnership.

Washington, obsessed as it is with military competition with roots in its Cold War mentality, is unable to offer a kind of geography of trade that China has already developed enough in the region. The US offers and reassurances, therefore, have little to no chance of successfully weaning the ASEAN away from China. For instance, ASEAN, despite the COVID-19 pandemic, became China’s largest trading partner in 2020, with the trade volume hitting $731.9 billion, a 7 percent growth year-on-year. In 2019, by contrast, the US exports to ASEAN stood merely at US$86.1 billion.

That regional countries prefer trade and economy over confrontation explains why regional leaders do not criticise China. For instance, President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines, during his recent State of the Nation address, called himself a “good friend of President Xi.” “When the pandemic struck, the first country I called for help was China,” Mr. Duterte said. He recalled how he had told Mr. Xi that the Philippines had no vaccines and was unable to develop one. Mr. Xi responded by immediately sending 1.5 million doses.

ASEAN countries, unlike policy makers in Washington, have been able to develop ties with Beijing that can accommodate differences and disputes without jeopardizing and destabilizing areas of cooperation. While Austin said that the US does not want ASEAN to choose between the US and China, this stance only proves the US doesn’t have any credible alternative to offer to the region to make them reconsider the extent and depth of their engagement with China. As Austin concluded: “We want to make sure we deter conflict in every case and every opportunity.” It means, the US itself does not see any potential opening available in the region to push ahead and penetrate the region economically. All it can do and is doing is to inflate the ‘China threat’ to sell its military resources to ASEAN to help its own military industrial complex.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Read more:

https://journal-neo.org/2021/08/16/the-us-has-little-to-offer-to-southeast-asia/

Read from top.

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE