In recent years, the trend of multi-polarizing the global security architecture in general, that of Asia-Pacific region in particular has shifted from orientation to formation. Bilateral alliances led by the U.S. still exist; ASEAN region’s multilateral institutions keep developing; China keeps rising; Japan’s role as a military power; all of which have dominated the formation and development of Asia-Pacific region’s security architecture.
 |
|
Illustrative photo |
In international experts’ opinion, security relations in the Asia-Pacific region are impacted by various factors, such as disputes over territorial sovereignty in the East China Sea and the East Sea; influence rivalry among major powers in the region; global non-traditional security threats, particularly terrorism and maritime safety, and so on. All of those frequently change, develop, and impact one another to shape the region’s security architecture in specific manifestations.
Shaping the Asia-Pacific region’s security architecture
One of the clearest manifestations of regional security architecture formation is that the US-Japanese alliance (established by the U.S.) continues to develop and play the key role in regional security architecture. This alliance is still being strengthened by the two countries to cope with the issues such as North Korea’s nuclear program, China’s rise and so on. Recently, Japan’s preparation to make amendments to its 1947 Constitution with a view to supporting the US rebalance strategy in the Asia-Pacific region is regarded as one of the activities to consolidate the alliance. The coexistence of bilateral alliances and multilateral security institutions is seen as a specific feature in regional security architecture. All of those institutions coexist and compete with, develop, supplement and promote one another in regional security architecture. However, as the multilateral institutions are intertwined, unclear, low-binding, their potential and strength are not yet promoted to the utmost in the whole regional security architecture. Thus, alliance and alignment in multilateral security are conceived and clearly manifested in the three aspects. First, traditional alliances led by the U.S. no longer maintain the form of “spokes axle”; there have been enhancements and closer coordination among them, leading to the formation of multilateral alignment network in the Asia-Pacific region. Second, the triangle of Japan, the Philippines, and Australia has been increasingly strengthened to support the US “rebalance” strategy in the Asia-Pacific region and serve their own national strategy. Third, being concerned about a compromise between the U.S. and China, a number of regional countries, typically India, Japan, Australia, have engaged in multilateral security alignments (excluding the US and China) to protect their national interests. The above-mentioned shifts have had a huge impact on the shaping of the Asia-Pacific region’s security architecture.
Trends in the Asia-Pacific region’s security architecture
According to observers, with its rise and assertive behaviors, China will still be the core factor of the Asia-Pacific region’s security architecture in the upcoming time. Since 2010, China has surpassed Japan to be the world’s second largest economy. With its economic strength, China has continuously increased defence potential, modernizing its armed forces, considerably narrowing the military gap between China and the U.S. China has, for many times, demonstrated its unwillingness to be bound by the contemporary international system’s rules of the game set and controlled by Western countries, though it is benefiting from the system. Since the end of 2012, China has strengthened the ASEAN+1 mechanism and introduced a series of initiatives to cement its relationship with ASEAN. By the initiatives such as the establishment of Free Trade Area of Asia Pacific (FTAAP), Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and “Maritime Silk Road” of the 21st century (with a view to funding regional infrastructure and promoting intra-regional trade connection), China wishes to improve its image, reassuring its neighbouring countries. China’s proposals are said to have a multidimensional impact on the Asia-Pacific region’s security structure.
The US “rebalance” strategy pivoting to the Asia-Pacific region has promoted the building of a security architecture whose US role in the region is indispensable. The U.S aims to maintain its status as a world super power, preventing any country or force from challenging its world leadership; at the same time, maintaining the current world order based on a system of values painstakingly built by the U.S and its allies for the past decades. However, the U.S. now is faced with a number of challenges, such as its unceasingly decrease of strength; the long-lasting conflicts in the Middle East, Ukraine, and the nuclear programs of Korea and Iran; the increase of economic dependence between the U.S. and China. In that context, on the one hand, the U.S. is accelerating the implementation of its “rebalance” to Asia-Pacific region; on the other hand, it has made certain adjustments after the President Barack Obama’s first term. Accordingly, the U.S. has persuaded and urged its allies to be more active in “sharing responsibility” with it, boosting the building of a regional security architecture in which the US role is confirmed to be indispensable.
Moreover, the rise of Japan, especially in terms of defence, has made the Japanese-US relationship’ role more important to regional security architecture. Exercising the right of collective self-defence to strengthen its relations with Australia and India; promoting its relationship with ASEAN; encouraging multilateral mechanisms with the participation of the U.S. and other countries outside the region, such as EAS, APEC, Tokyo has taken new steps, demonstrating its increasingly important role in the regional security architecture. Thus, the US-Japanese alliance is still viewed as the backbone of Asia-Pacific region’s security architecture in the near future.
As for ASEAN, with its objective to build an Asia-Pacific structure based on the Association’s fundamental principles, ASEAN has always supported a multi-tiered regional structure which is based on the existing process of regional cooperation to supplement and support one another; in which ASEAN is the driving force and plays a central role. In ASEAN states’ opinion, its centrality in the region’s structure is a necessity to guarantee regional countries’ independence, sovereignty, maintained peaceful and sustainable environment, and development. To fulfil its objective of building an ASEAN Community by 2015, ASEAN backs harmonious relations between powers, and facilitates their settlement over the issues regarding regional peace and sustainability.
To conclude, dynamics from countries and organizations in the Asia-Pacific region has shown that in the region’s security architecture, there appears a mixture of existing structures and the structures that are being formed. That mixture is multi-tiered, complex, supplementary, both maintaining and potentially threatening regional and global peace, sustainability, and development.
Major General Assoc Prof, PhD Tran Minh Son
Director of B70 Institute, General Department No.2