The US military commitment to Asia is undergoing a profound change which will have a direct impact on the security of the entire region, analysts and diplomats say.
In the coming years, tens of thousands of US troops will be withdrawn from Europe and Asia as part of the biggest realignment of US military might since the end of the Korean War 51 years ago.
The reduced troop numbers will make US military power in the region smaller but deadlier, relying on rapid deployment and sophisticated air and naval power, analysts say.
"The days of big armies are over," said Renato de Castro, who teaches international studies at Manila's De La Salle University.
"US thinking today is less on massive troop deployment but rather on extending its military clout via the forward basing of air and sea power and logistics facilities for the rapid deployment of small numbers of highly trained troops.
"The new thinking will rely heavily on strong alliances with allies, access to facilities and training," de Castro said.
The US has yet to reveal full details of its realignment of troops in Asia, although it has announced plans to reduce the 37,500-strong force in South Korea by a third. It is thought 47,000 US troops will remain at bases in Japan.
De Castro said the new US strategy calls for what US defense planners call "lily pads" or "warm bases" -- small, lightly-staffed facilities which can be used as jumping-off points in a crisis.
These facilities will be linked to a few large, strategically located, heavy infrastructure bases likely to be in Japan, Australia and Singapore.
"In Asia these heavy infrastructure bases would include the naval base in Yokosuka in Japan and the airbase in Misawa," de Castro said.
"Singapore is already being used as a heavy infrastructure base as it has a major ship-repair facility which can handle aircraft carriers. At the southern end, you have Australia which is
considered as one of America's closest allies in Asia and has, over the years, developed a number of military bases in the north west of the country," de Castro said.
The US has been developing a series of logistic facilities in the Philippines following the closure of its bases, notably the airbase at Clark in central Luzon and the deep water naval facility at Subic Bay northwest of Manila.
In General Santos City in southern Mindanao island, the US, through air programs, has developed a deepwater port and a modern airport which are connected by one of the best roads in the Philippines.
At Fort Magsaysay in central Luzon the airport has been upgraded and the runway strengthened to accommodate
C-130 transport aircraft.
"What military planners want is to be able to deploy small units at short notice to attack terrorist groups or rogue states that pose a threat to US security," de Castro said.
Regional security analysts say technological advances are the biggest factors allowing the US to undertake military reforms while retaining the same effective presence in Asia.
As a result the US Pacific island of Guam will play an increasingly important role in projecting US military power in Asia. Strike bombers, cruise-missile submarines and a new aircraft carrier group based at the island would be capable of striking across the region.
In a recent report in Foreign Affairs magazine, analysts said the new US policy may also include access to naval and air bases in Vietnam and India.
The changes announced by US President George W. Bush this week have been expected for some time. The theme of both the 2002 National Security Strategy and the Quadrennial Defense Review in 2001 was the need for military forces that can strike quickly anywhere in the world.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
RSS