Indo-Pacific Challenge, Part 5

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its presentation of the U.S. Department of Defenses’ report on threats in the Indo-Pacific region.

BURDEN SHARING

America’s National Security Strategy calls on the United States to pursue cooperation and reciprocity together with our allies, partners, and aspiring partners. Cooperation means sharing responsibilities and burdens. The United States expects our allies and partners to shoulder a fair share of the burden of responsibility to protect against common threats. When we pool resources and share responsibility for our common defense, our security burden becomes lighter and more cost-effective.

THE STATE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM IN THE INDO-PACIFIC

The State Partnership Program began in 1993 with partnerships between the National Guard of designated U.S. States and newly independent Eastern European countries.

The State Partnership Program has since expanded to other regions, including the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, Western Europe, and the Indo-Pacific. By the end of FY 2019, the United States will have 79 partnerships with 86 nations, 12 of which are in the Indo-Pacific:

Bangladesh / Oregon (2008)
Cambodia / Idaho (2009)
Indonesia / Hawaii (2006)
Malaysia / Washington (2017)
Mongolia / Alaska (2003)
Philippines / Hawaii, Guam (2000)
Thailand / Washington (2002)
Tonga and Fiji / Nevada (2014 & 2018)
Vietnam / Oregon (2012)
Recently Added: Nepal (2019) 4Sri Lanka

The tiny erectile arteries of penile organ fail to receive view for more info online cialis canada sufficient proportion of blood to function in the paramount means. The Malaysian government has spent super active cialis millions of dollars on new equipment and improvements to the manufacturing process. We also cleanse/detoxify to rest or viagra 100mg for sale heal our overloaded digestive organs and allow them to catch up on past work. So, if you levitra 20 mg continue reading here have this concern, then consult the expert. 2.

UPHOLDING FREEDOM AND ACCESS TO GLOBAL COMMONS

Throughout our history, the United States has asserted a key national interest in preserving the freedom of the seas, and has often relied on the U.S. military forces to protect that interest. As President Ronald Reagan said in releasing the U.S. Oceans Policy in 1983, “we will not acquiesce in unilateral actions of other states designed to restrict the rights and freedoms of the international community in navigation and overflight.”

Today, in places like the South China Sea, excessive maritime claims are attempts by coastal States to unlawfully restrict the exercise of freedoms afforded to all seafaring nations to operate in waters beyond territorial limits. The United States will continue to fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows, and encourage our allies and partners to do the same.

Excessive maritime claims inconsistent with international law, if left unchallenged, threaten the international rulesbased order and U.S. interests and those of our regional allies and partners. Freedom of the seas is essential to ensuring the global mobility of U.S. forces in the event of a crisis and the worldwide security of civilian shipping on a daily basis.

DoD, therefore, is committed to ensuring free and open maritime access, including through freedom of navigation (FON) assertions (commonly called Freedom of Navigation Operations, or FONOPs), to protect the stable economic order and to maintain the ability of U.S. forces to respond, as needed. U.S. forces routinely challenge excessive maritime claims asserted by allies and partners, as well as those made by potential adversaries and competitors.

Conclusion

For more than 70 years the United States, along with our like-minded allies and partners, has helped underwrite a stable security environment that allowed the people, economies, and nations in the Indo-Pacific to rise and prosper. Our vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific encompasses values shared by our allies and partners in the region – one that emphasizes upholding a foundation of mutual respect, responsibility, transparency, and accountability.

As great power competition returns, we will continue to invest, act, and orient ourselves to ensure that the principled international order from which all countries in the region benefit endures.

The United States will uphold our commitments and will act to defend our interests and those of our allies and partners.

The United States, along with our like-minded allies and partners, will continue to be engaged in this dynamic and rapidly growing region. The Department of Defense, in conjunction with other U.S. Government Departments and Agencies, regional institutions, and regional allies and partners, will continue to ensure that the rule of law – not coercion and force – dictates the future of the IndoPacific.

Photo taken on May 4, 2019 shows Chinese naval forces participating the “Joint Sea-2019” exercise. A six-day joint naval exercise held by Chinese and Russian navies .in Qingdao, east China’s Shandong Province. Two submarines, 13 surface ships, as well as fixed-wing airplanes, helicopters and marines participated in the exercise. (Xinhua/Li Ziheng)

Quick Analysis

Putin’s Saber Rattling

Earlier this week, President Biden reversed his 2022 decision, authorizing the provision of antipersonnel land mines to the Ukrainian government. It follows an earlier Administration authorization to allow the use of an advanced American missile system capable of striking as deep as 100 miles inside Russian territory. The US election season may be ending, but both Russia and the West show no indication of stepping down the conflict. Russian propaganda continues to swell as the Kremlin increases its threats to use nuclear weapons against the West. Last week Andrey Sushentsov, program director of the pro-Kremlin think tank Valdai Discussion Club (VDC), published an article on growing nuclear tensions in the region. Official Russian language in the last few years has been threatening. Since the US election, rhetoric like that in the Sushentsov article, has approached the level of nuclear blackmail. The VDC article’s main theme centers on Russia’s intent to directly confront the West militarily if the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) becomes involved in Russia’s conflict with Ukraine. “On the one hand, these threats are intended to frighten the West, but on the other, Russian propagandists themselves are starting to believe in the inevitability of escalation,” according to Ksenia Kirillova of the Jamestown Foundation. On November 11, Sushentsov wrote that “The conflict will reach a completely new level, with unpredictable consequences for Europe and the entire world.” Kirillova points out that Putin’s distorted image of the world is divorced from reality and is causing the Kremlin to issue demands that are impossible to fulfill. Financial and other Russian resources needed to support Putin’s war are growing scarcer at the same time. This week the Kremlin announced a reduction of payments to its soldiers. Recently North Korea acknowledged it was sending soldiers to fight in Ukraine as Putin is running out of bodies to use as cannon fire. The war is not going well for Russia. One question floating around the Washington intelligence community is whether Putin will act out of desperation before President-elect Trump assumes office. In recent months the Russian propaganda machine is spewing out materials from fairly reputable analytical platforms inside the country. Kirillova says that “Kremlin ‘experts’ do not conceal that such threats are only intended to break the West psychologically, as they themselves are not prepared for full-scale nuclear war.” Despite Russia’s lack of preparation for an all-out war with the West, the expanding nuclear rhetoric carries with it an increase in the threat of a full-scale war in multiple theaters of operation. In June 2023 a founder of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, Sergey Karaganov, called for “delivering a pre-emptive strike of retaliation” on Poland to force the West to surrender. In the previous month, Dmitry Suslov, a direct of research programs at the policy center proposed organizing “a demonstration nuclear explosion” aimed at intimidating the West. In September, President Putin announced a reappraisal of Russian nuclear doctrine after speaking earlier in the year at the plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum and jokingly calling Suslov a “scary person.” Pavel Baev, writing in the European Daily Monitor, says “Putin intends his announcement to mark an escalation of nuclear brinkmanship and influence the proceedings of future Ukrainian peace efforts.” Putin is expanding the list of environmental conditions that are acceptable for using a nuclear weapon and incorporating it into Russian military doctrine. Baev adds that “The ups and downs of Russian brinkmanship are disconnected from the kinetic battles of the war, correlating instead with Ukrainian peace offensives, such as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s first peace summit in Bürgenstock, Switzerland.” Despite the increase in vitriolic language, in a You Tube video published a week before the US presidential election, Karaganov openly assured the West the primary goal of the escalation is to break the American spirit and that of the West, not outright nuclear war. By Election Day in the US, with political prognosticators predicting a win for former president Trump, Karaganov changed his tune and called for an increased role in nuclear deterrence. Kirillova points out that Western concessions to Russia are unlikely to reduce the risk of nuclear escalation. The distorted reality inside the Kremlin continues to push that President-elect Trump is an adherent of “world government,” that Ukraine will create a nuclear weapon, and Russia must prepare for a nuclear conflagration to achieve its ambitions for a new world order. President-elect Trump has indicated he will not agree to concessions that destabilize Europe, the Middle East or other regions. Going forward a strong US foreign policy may be the most stabilizing course the West can count on to restrain Putin and his intent to rebuild the Russian empire. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept. Illustration: Pixabay

Our Latest Television Program

War, Diplomacy and Human Relations

Have humans become less or more “tribal” in recent years? What are the implications for war, peace, and diplomacy? Watch our discussion with Professor John M. Ellis, author of “A Short history of Relations Between Peoples.” The stay tuned for a fascinating debate on the Ukraine crisis with Douglas Ernest, author of The Spirit of a True Patriot: The Inspiring story of Ret. Captain Douglas Ernest.” If you missed the program on your local station, watch it here: https://rumble.com/v5reraw-the-american-political-zone-november-19-2024.html