Sino-American Rivalry in the Region

balance of powers and interests, which would allow to retain maximum freedom and independence. And consequently there is not right to say that Americans lose or have already lost the East Asia and the Chinese are not stopped. The fact is that the general weakening of the USA in this region is clearly offset by the increasingly hot desire of the ruling elites of most countries. By all means keeping the American influence on regional affairs is the dream of an independent region that is isolated from the influence of external forces and managed exclusively for the benefit of its components is becoming a phantom, which hinders rather than helps the ASEAN countries actually navigate the world around them. Americans feel that interest and they are ready to use it. Thus, in the regional ASEAN summit in Phuket former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the United States intended to increase its presence in Southeast Asia.

And openly declared that the USA was returning to the region by signing a treaty of friendship and cooperation between the United States and ASEAN, on which work was carried out over the past 17 years (“Press Availability,” 2009). In this regard, at the first bilateral US-ASEAN summit which held in Singapore at the end of 2009, US President Barack Obama solemnly told that this meant the raising of status of the US presence in the region (Bower, 2009).

Table 1.6 Top ten export markets and import origins of ASEAN, 2012 value in US$ million; share in percent

Export market Import origin

Country of destination

Value of exports

Share to total

Country of origin

Value of Imports

Share to total

ASEAN 323,535.6 25.8 ASEAN 277,425.1 22.7

China 141,554.3 11.3 China 177,002.7 14.5

Japan 126,305.4 10.1 Japan 136,116.6 11.2

EU-28 125,015.9 10.0 EU-28 117,850.2 9.7

USA 108,114.1 8.6 USA 92,076.2 7.5

Hong Kong 80,661.6 6.4 Republic of Korea

76,006.3 6.2

Republic of Korea

54,992.4 4.4 Taiwan 61,101.2 5.0

Australia 45,777.5 3.7 United Arab

Emirates

39,435.4 3.2

India 43,840.3 3.5 Saudi Arabia 37,560.5 3.1

Taiwan 35,263.0 2.8 India 27,724.4 2.3

Total top ten destination countries

1,085,060.2 86.5 Total top ten origin countries

1,042,298.5 85.4

Others 168,943.4 13.5 Others 178,372.2 14.6

Total 1,254,003.6 100.0 Total 1,220,670.7 100.0

Source: ASEAN Merchandise Trade Statistics Database, as of July 2013

Thirdly, the theme of US-China relations in Asia should be put into a broader context, which will be part of the European missile defense system, and the “Arab spring”, gradually developed into the “Arab autumn”, and other events of a similar scale.

Sino-American relations are the number one problem in current world policy. The resolution of this problem will depend on the answer to the key question of history – the

question of war and peace, about the possibility of a large and serious war. Previous geopolitical game, which was known as the Cold War, was ended. Today there is founded the basis of such a new game – mainly in the Asia Pacific region. Its main content is a complex set of Sino-American relations. The general thrust of this relationship is influenced by two effects. The first of these, relating to a beneficial effect of trade, is associated with the name of the great Enlightenment philosopher Charles Montesquieu: in the middle of the 18th century he offered for Europeans, weary continuous wars, to make more trade and then nobody can find a time for war (“Baron de Montesquieu,” 2003). The second effect is called the Thucydides effect. It is expressed in the fact that strengthening the position of one state entails the hostility of the other (Kemos, 1994). The impact of these effects has Japanese-Chinese and Sino-Indian relations, and relations between the other countries for centuries.

The thesis of the economic interdependence between the USA and China is justified.

For each other each of these countries is the second largest (after the EU) trade partner.

China is the major holder of U.S. debt and has a huge foreign exchange reserves in dollars (Amadeo, 2013). However, there are serious problems in the sphere of economic relations. Foremost among them United States considers the manipulation of the exchange rate of yuan by China against the US dollar, with which allegedly linked giant bilateral trade deficit for the United States. To US demands for increase the rate of yuan, China responds that its export-oriented economy, and so works on the verge of profitability (a few percent) (Amadeo, 2013). In general, the economic interdependence of the USA and China is the guarantee of competitive and complex coexistence, but a long peaceful coexistence.

Against this background, there emerge more and more signs that there starts the Thucydides effect. Much of the American establishment is anxious about comprehensive and rapid development of China. On the one hand, the USA seeks to encourage China to embedding in the existing world order as a responsible party, on the other hand – to stick to the strategy of risk insurance almost all the way around the Chinese border. This is evidenced the program article of Hillary Clinton in the journal Foreign Policy (Clinton, 2011). The negative reaction of China to such behavior is not only verbal character. When, after the mysterious sinking of the corvette Cheonan (Cha, 2010), the USA launched a series of military exercises on the Korean peninsula and in

the surrounding of water area. China has carried out its own large-scale military exercise involving all branches of the armed forces (Hemmings, 2010).

The United States during the first Bush administration tried to increase their participation in a variety of economic integration formats in Asia-Pacific, but just little had happened. Therefore, the current administration had to urgently push through the signing of a free trade agreement with South Korea. Idea of a Trans-Pacific Partnership (which occurred without the participation of the United States, but which the United States has recently begun to pay close attention) is connected with the fact that China has initially surprised to Japan to conclude a free trade agreement with ASEAN, and then moved in quickly than Japan. This was followed by a proposal to create a financial pool in East Asia, which can be considered a response to the financial crisis of 1997-1998.

Promotion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is an attempt to regain the initiative by the United States. In the past few years there has accelerated policy of alliances, particularly US relations with India, Japan and South Korea, as well as Australia. The deployment of troops in Australia (2500 military persons) is the continuation of the course regrouping of U.S. forces in the Pacific (Grudgings, 2013). It is a long-term strategy to create an infrastructure that would allow U.S. forces to more quickly and flexibly react to different situations, which occurring in the region (up to natural disasters). All of these steps are the response to the intensification of China, to increasing the share of China in economy and regional affairs, and to a gradual transition of China to a more active foreign policy and foreign trade. The relationship of the United States and China is more matter of strategic cooperation than confrontation.

It is much more profitable than any confrontation between the two countries.

Confrontation is uninteresting to other partners of the USA and China in the region.

Japan, like most other countries in the region, is not interested in an escalation of conflict and confrontation between the USA and China. Japan is not ready to take either side. Japanese see the guarantor of their security in the United States. But providing a major tranche to ASEAN, Japan also reaffirms its interest in good relations with its neighbors in the region (Revere, 2013). The USA will not resort to any increase in troops in South Korea or Japan, they choose Australia. In my opinion, this indicates that

Asian partners and allies did not accept the United States. This is a sign of weakness of the USA in this region.