Biden’s Indo-Pacific Strategy: A Relentless Struggle for Geopolitical Dominance in Asia

Analysis by Michael Klare, Co-Chair, Committee for Sane U.S.-China Policy
February 20, 2022 

On February 11, The Biden White House released its strategic blueprint for U.S.-Asia relations, Indo-Pacific Strategy of the United States. Like earlier such documents released by the Obama and Trump administrations, the Biden strategy identified Asia as the epicenter of global geopolitics in the 21st century and emphasized America’s role as a key player in the region. It foresees a protracted contest between the U.S. and China for control of the region, and calls on Washington to mobilize all the resources at its disposal to ensure U.S. success in this epochal struggle. If this outlook prevails, the U.S. and China will be enmeshed in a perpetual struggle for regional dominance – a struggle that could easily erupt in armed conflict.  

The Biden strategy, like its predecessors, begins by emphasizing the geopolitical significance of the Indo-Pacific region and its resulting centrality in U.S. strategy. This area, it states, “is home to more than half of the world’s people, nearly two-thirds of the world’s economy, and seven of the world’s largest militaries…. In the years ahead, as the region drives as much as two-thirds of global economic growth, its influence will only grow…. In a quickly changing strategic landscape, we recognize that American interests can only be advanced if we firmly anchor the United States in the Indo-Pacific and strengthen the region itself, alongside our closest allies and partners.” 

This much largely repeats what can be found in earlier such blueprints. But more than in any of his predecessor’s statements, Biden’s strategy portrays America’s dominant role in Asia as being under assault by the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as that country seeks to expand its own influence in the region. 

“The PRC is combining its economic, diplomatic, military, and technological might as it pursues a sphere of influence in the Indo-Pacific and seeks to become the world’s most influential power,” the Biden strategy avows. PRC efforts to gain advantage, it claims, range from “the economic coercion of Australia to the conflict along the Line of Actual Control with India to the growing pressure on Taiwan and bullying of neighbors in the East and South China Seas.” 

In responding to this onslaught, the U.S. government must mobilize all its capabilities and those of its allies to compete with and overcome the Chinese in every conceivable area of contestation: economic, diplomatic, technological, scientific, and military. Given the high stakes involved, moreover, this is said to be an inexorable struggle between two incompatible systems over the governing rules of the international system – a struggle in which there can be but one winner, and it must us.  

“Our collective efforts over the next decade will determine whether the PRC succeeds in transforming the rules and norms that have benefitted the Indo-Pacific and the world,” the document avows. “For our part, the United States is investing in the foundations of our strength at home, aligning our approach with those of our allies and partners abroad, and competing with the PRC to defend the interests and vision for the future that we share with others…. Our objective is not to change the PRC but to shape the strategic environment in which it operates, building a balance of influence in the world that is maximally favorable to the United States, our allies and partners, and the interests and values we share.” (Emphasis added.) 

As the blueprint indicates, this will require an immense effort on Washington’s part. Part of this will be of an ideological nature, part of it military, and part of an economic and technological nature. 

The Biden blueprint places ideological struggle with China at the forefront of its strategy, and it is worth making note of this. Whereas the Obama administration viewed Beijing as a potential “partner” in addressing global problems and the Trump administration portrayed it largely as an unscrupulous economic competitor, the Biden team seeks to characterize China as an ideological foe – as a bastion of authoritarianism and lawlessness in comparison to the democratic and law-abiding nature of the U.S. and its allies. As China bullies its neighbors, the document states, “the PRC is also undermining human rights and international law, including freedom of navigation, as well as other principles that have brought stability and prosperity to the Indo-Pacific.” 

To counter China’s malicious behavior, the Biden blueprint calls for a concerted effort by the U.S. and its allies to uphold and protect the “rules-based order” in the Indo-Pacific. “Our vital interests and those of our closest partners require a free and open Indo-Pacific, where governments can make their own sovereign choices, consistent with their obligations under international law; and where seas, skies, and other shared domains are lawfully governed.”  

In this context, the document emphasizes the importance of defending allied nations’ claims to maritime territories in the East and South China Sea against competing claims advanced by China, which are deemed to be illegitimate. “The United States will also work closely with like-minded partners to ensure that the region remains open and accessible and that the region’s seas and skies are governed and used according to international law,” the blueprint states. “In particular, we will build support for rules-based approaches to the maritime domain, including in the South China Sea and the East China Sea.”  

To accomplish this and its other objectives in the region, the strategy calls for the construction of a “latticework” of like-minded states to join Washington in countering China’s illicit behavior. “A free and open Indo-Pacific can only be achieved if we build collective capacity for a new age; common action is now a strategic necessity…. We will pursue this through a latticework of strong and mutually reinforcing coalitions.”  

This is to include existing military linkages, such as those between the U.S. and Australia, India, Japan, and South Korea, as well as more recent arrangements, such as the “quad” (the quadrilateral alliance of Australia, India, Japan, and the U.S.) and AUKUS (the newly-forged pact between Australia, the U.K. and the U.S.). “Across the region,” the blueprint affirms, “the United States will work with allies and partners to deepen our interoperability and develop and deploy advanced warfighting capabilities as we support them in defending their citizens and their sovereign interests.” To this observer, it all looks like the groundwork for a new NATO, aimed not at Russia but at China. 

As if anticipating future conflict with China, the strategy also calls for increased investment in advanced weaponry to ensure U.S. dominance in every “domain” of warfare: air, sea, ground, space, and cyber. “We will more tightly integrate our efforts across warfighting domains and the spectrum of conflict to ensure that the United States, alongside our allies and partners, can dissuade or defeat aggression in any form or domain,” it states.  

As the U.S. builds up its military capabilities in the Asia-Pacific region, particular emphasis is being placed on Washington’s determination to help friendly nations defend their claims to offshore territories in the East and South China Sea that are also claimed by China and are regularly patrolled by Chinese combat ships and planes. “We will drive initiatives that reinforce deterrence and counter coercion, such as opposing efforts to alter territorial boundaries or undermine the rights of sovereign nations at sea,” the document avows. Looking ahead, this suggests an administration intent to employ more forceful means to counter Chinese military activities in those areas, including the use of military force. 

In support of all this, the Biden strategy proposes a wide array of non-military initiatives to counter China’s efforts to gain influence in the region. “Alongside our partners,” it states, “the United States will put forward an Indo-Pacific economic framework – a multilateral partnership for the 21st century. This economic framework will help our economies to harness rapid technological transformation, including in the digital economy, and adapt to the coming energy and climate transition.” Not much is said, however, about how this “framework” will be erected and how it will work.  

All in all, the Biden strategy for Asia foresees a time of relentless struggle with China for dominance of the Indo-Pacific region, one that will require the mobilization of America’s full economic, technological, and military capabilities – and could easily result in war. While reminiscent in some ways to the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, especially in the administration’s attempt to provide an ideological overlay to what is essentially a geopolitical contest for control of the Indo-Pacific (now the epicenter of the world economy), it better resembles the ancient contest between Rome and Carthage – a systemic struggle for control of the Mediterranean (then the epicenter of the world economy) that resulted in decades of warfare and vast human slaughter./5/

Previous
Previous

Is “Taiwan Next”? No Sign of Sino-Russian Coordination over Ukraine or Preparations for an Invasion of Taiwan

Next
Next

Bucking the Anti-China Trend