Introduction: Rebalancing of power is a crucial study of strategic geography which helps the policy makers to shape mental map for the formulation of grand strategy on the basis their states interests, commitments and vulnerabilities within an imagined space. In the response of strategic position of a country within the strategic geography, a country has to rebalance its foreign and defense policy depending on different strategic important bloc. In the early 2011, United States (US) formulated its foreign and defense policy emphasizing on the Iraq and Afghanistan. But in the late 2011 and early 2012, a raising geopolitical importance of Asia gave, American administration, a signal that American policy had become imbalanced by its heavy dependency on Iraq and Afghanistan, and that it required to recalibrate its approach to better expose the long-term character of America’s interests and seismic geopolitical changes occurring in Asia. Besides because of the rising of India and China as hegemonic and economic power in Asia and Asia pacific region, the America has been rethinking about its foreign, security and defense policy focusing on the ‘Indo-Asia-pacific’ without confining in Iraq and Afghanistan. This assignment is divided into five parts. In the first part defining the concept I want to outline the origination USA’s rebalancing policy. The second part of the assignment tries to mention some rational aspects in favor of it and the third part tries to sketch out a framework for USA’s rebalancing Asia policy. The fourth part of this assignment critically evaluated the rebalancing Asia policy of USA and the fifth part of this assignment concluded with the concluding remark. Conceptual framework and Origins of the USA’s rebalancing Asia policy: Beginning in the fall of 2011, the Obama administration has issued a series of announcements and taken a series of steps to expand and intensify the already significant role of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region. Explicitly identifying the Asia-Pacific region as a geostrategic priority for the United States, the Obama administration is paying a higher level of attention to the region across a wide range of issue areas. This represents a significant shift in U.S. policy. However, the story of the rebalance is not a story of U.S. disengagement and then re-engagement in Asia. Instead, it is a matter of emphasis and priority, building on an elaborate foundation of U.S.-Asia relations that was already in place. The United States has had powerful national interests in the Asia-Pacific region since World War II and was deeply engaged in the region – militarily, economically, and diplomatically – throughout the Cold War. The post-Cold War administrations of presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush were actively engaged in Asia. The Obama administration’s policy toward the Asia-Pacific region has evolved over time and has gone through two distinct phases. When the policy was first rolled out in 2011-12, much of the emphasis was placed on military initiatives in the region. China disapproved of these initiatives, and Beijing took steps to demonstrate its power in maritime territorial disputes with U.S. allies. The Obama administration adjusted its approach in late 2012, playing down the significance of military initiatives, emphasizing economic and diplomatic elements, and calling for closer U.S. engagement with China. USA’s rebalancing Asia policy at a glance: The main aspects of the rebalancing Asia policy are in the following. The rebalance demonstrates that the Obama administration is giving priority attention to the Asia-Pacific region following U.S. pullbacks from Iraq and Afghanistan. The military elements of the new policy signal the administration’s determination to maintain force levels and military capabilities in the Asia-Pacific region despite substantial cutbacks in overall U.S. defense spending. The administration’s military steps will generate more...
References: 1. Bisley, Nick and Phillips, Andrew; A Rebalance to Where?: US Strategic Geography in Asia, December 11, 2013
2. Panetta, Leon; America’s Pacific Rebalance; Project Syndicate; December 31, 2012.
3. Sumihiko Kawamura, ' 'Shipping and Regional Trade: Regional Security Interests ' ', in Sam Bateman and Stephen Bates ed., Shipping and Regional Security, Canberra Papers on Strategy and Defense No.129, Australian National University, 1998
4. Sutter, Robert G. & Brown, Michael E.; Balancing Acts: The U.S. Rebalance and Asia-Pacific Stability; August 2013
5. Mearsheimer, John J.; The Gathering Storm: China’s Challenge to US Power in Asia, 2010
6. Professor Ji Guoxing; SLOC Security in the Asia Pacific
7. Gordon, Bernard, “Trading Up in Asia: Why the United States Needs the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 91, No. 4, (July/August 2012)
8. Carter, Ashton, “The U.S. Defense Rebalance to Asia,” Speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C., April 8, 2013.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document