FeaturesSecurityEast AsiaChinaImage Credit: U.S. Pacific Command Why U.S. Needs Airpower DiplomacyBetter use of the U.S. Air Force is the most cost-effective and flexible approach to boosting the American presence in the Asia-Pacific.
By Adam B. Lowther for The DiplomatNovember 22, 2011 0 Shares The November 15 announcement by U.S. President Barack Obama and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard that 2,500 American Marines would be stationed at Robertson Barracks near Darwin wasn't a surprise to many defense and foreign policy analysts. Signals of a change in the Obama administration's Asia-Pacific policy have been evident for some time.
They began with the Department of Defense's 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review, which suggested that the United States was preparing for a strategic shift. The 2011 National Military Strategy, the Department's strategy document, made the administration's shift clear when it said, "The Nation's strategic priorities and interests will increasingly emanate from the Asia-Pacific region." Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's recent article in Foreign Policy, meanwhile, made the president's "pivot" abundantly clear. For those who had any lingering doubts, last week's announcement should clarify where U.S. foreign policy will focus in coming years.
Admittedly, the shift is long overdue and would have occurred much sooner had the events of 9/11 and the ensuing global "War on Terror" not occurred. But, with the war in Iraq over and the war in Afghanistan winding down, it's finally possible for the United States to focus where it has long thought its long-term interest lie. There is, however, one question that remains unanswered: Can the United States afford a buildup in the Asia-Pacific?
Given the United States' current financial woes and the insatiable appetite of the American people for entitlement and welfare spending, there's good reason to question "the how" of a greater focus on the Asia-Pacific. Defense spending is already taking a 10 percent cut over the next decade, and with the congressional Super Committee failing to reach an agreement to cut $1.2 trillion from the federal deficit, sequestration will ensure that defense spending declines by 20 percent between 2012 and 2021. This makes a buildup in the region, at least on paper, appear difficult.
What makes affording a shift to the region particularly difficult is the fact that the Asia-Pacific's distances make operating in the region much more expensive than operating in the West. By contrast, Europe is a rather compact continent where the distance between Washington, DC, and Berlin is closer to half that of Los Angeles to Beijing. To make matters more challenging, existing U.S. bases in Japan and Korea, for example, are among the United States' most expensive - even with significant financial support from the host nation. And to make matters even more difficult, in some cases, local populations no longer support a permanent American presence.
These challenges impose a difficult set of requirements on a new U.S. strategy for the Asia-Pacific. Such a strategy should demonstrate that it relies on U.S. assets best able to overcome the challenges of distance; it must prove cost effective; and it is sensitive to the domestic and strategic position of partner nations. One approach is particularly well suited to overcoming these challenges. Airpower diplomacy, also known as building partnerships by the U.S. Air Force, offers some distinct advantages over any alternatives. Best thought of as the non-kinetic application of air, space, and cyber power, airpower diplomacy is a form of soft power that's useful in strengthening existing relationships and developing new ones - while protecting American interests. The U.S. Air Force has successfully employed airpower diplomacy in one iteration or another for more than six decades. Its strengths are in three distinct areas. First, airpower, broadly speaking, is able to overcome the distances that make the Asia-Pacific such a challenging region. As the single largest feature on the earth's surface, the Pacific Ocean makes it difficult for the United States to respond quickly with men and material to unexpected events in the region. With airpower, there's no place on earth that the United States can't reach in less than 24 hours.
However, aircraft must land, which is why building partnerships - of mutual interests - with countries in the region is a critical component of airpower diplomacy. For many nations in the Asia-Pacific, walking a careful line between China and the United States is the unenviable position in which they find themselves. As the most advanced air, space, and cyber force in the world, the U.S. Air Force is a desirable partner for many countries. This provides a natural advantage for the United States. However, ensuring that the U.S. doesn't overplay its hand is important if airpower diplomacy is to succeed. Pages12Next PageView as Single Page TopicsFeaturesSecurityEast AsiaChina TagsBarack ObamaChinese MilitaryHillary ClintonJapanPLAU.S. Air ForceU.S. Congress
Related StoriesDecember 14, 2011Can China Handle America's Return?The United States' decision to "pivot" back to the Asia-Pacific is welcome among its allies. But what about its most assertive rising power?
Read StoryWhy US Keeps Hedging Over ChinaPivot Out, Rebalance InEU Should Keep China Arms EmbargoHow the F-35 May Hurt U.S.-Japan TiesDo U.S. Cuts Threaten its Allies?Latest BlogsMay 28, 2016G7 Falters on Growth TestThe summit failed to endorse coordinated action, but did make progress on trade and tax.Read PostA Good Taliban, Bad Taliban Strategy for the US and Afghanistan? Prospects for Russia-Japan Rapprochement Awash With Cash: The Duterte Government's Inheritance From AquinoBeef and Boat People: New Trouble in Australia-Indonesia RelationsIndia and Iran: Changing the Great Game Latest FeaturesMay 24, 2016China's Emerging Cyberspace StrategyA closer look at China's cyber strategy, and what it means for the world. Read FeatureTaiwan's 'New Era' and the Legislative YuanChina's Halal ConstitutionThe Diplomat Is HiringUS-Vietnam Defense Relations: Problems and ProspectsIndonesia-Australia Relations: A Year After the Executions