Abstract
It might be jarring to the people of some Asian states—particularly the Chinese—to learn that the U.S. military claims “responsibility” over their country. However, it is uncontroversial to Americans to describe themselves as having a “global cop” role for which they are uniquely qualified. The question that arises is why the United States maintains a large military command devoted to the Asia–Pacific region and why this command keeps large numbers of personnel and military units “forward deployed.” Answering this question requires an understanding of what I term the deep rationale for INDOPACOM: the strategic logic that makes this huge investment on the other side of the world’s largest ocean appealing to Americans. In common with all regional great powers of the past, including premodern China and fascist Japan, the United States purports to uphold a particular regional order—a specific and historically unique set of principles, rules and institutions governing the conduct of international affairs—that supports not only the self-interests of the sponsoring great power but also the interests of the other states in the region. Washington has reiterated countless times the argument that the U.S. military presence preserves the “stability” necessary for regional states to prosper.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Adm. Harry B. Harris (2015).
- 2.
“Hegemon” is a term used by international relations scholars to describe a country that is much stronger than the other countries in its region and consequently holds near-dominant influence over regional international affairs. In such a situation a “hegemony” prevails.
- 3.
Many US officials have used this term. An example is then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, “Remarks on Principles for Prosperity in the Asia-Pacific,” July 25, Hong Kong, http://www.state.gov/secretary/20092013clinton/rm/2011/07/169012.htm (accessed on Mar. 1, 2016).
- 4.
Derek E. Mix (2015).
- 5.
Walter LaFeber (1998), p. 54.
- 6.
New York Times, Feb. 10, 1904, p. 8.
- 7.
Akira Iriye (1981), pp. 2-3; LaFeber, The Clash, 154; Stephen R. Shalom, “VJ Day: Remembering the Pacific War,” Critical Asian Studies 37, no. 2 (June 2005), http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/july95shalom.htm (accessed on June 12, 2006).
- 8.
Victor Cha (2009).
- 9.
- 10.
Patrick E. Tyler, “U.S. Strategy Plan Calls for Insuring No Rivals Develop,” New York Times, Mar. 8, 1992, http://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/08/world/us-strategy-plan-calls-for-insuring-no-rivals-develop.html?pagewanted=all (accessed on Feb. 26, 2016).
- 11.
See, for example, John Mueller, “America Is Spending Too Much on Defense,” Slate, Oct. 3, 2013, http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/american_prosperity_consensus/2013/10/american_prosperity_consensus_is_excessive_defense_spending_the_most_important.html (accessed on June 13, 2022).
- 12.
Kimberly Amadeo, “U.S. Military Budget: Components, Challenges, Growth,” About.com, Feb. 23, 2016, http://useconomy.about.com/od/usfederalbudget/p/military_budget.htm (accessed on Mar. 1, 2016).
- 13.
Christopher Layne and Benjamin Schwarz, “A New Grand Strategy,” The Atlantic, June 2002.
- 14.
Hugh White (2012).
- 15.
An example is Mark J. Valencia (2010).
- 16.
Charles L. Glaser (2015).
- 17.
An example is Donald Gross (2013).
- 18.
Ashley J. Tellis (2014).
- 19.
John J. Mearsheimer, “Can China Rise Peacefully?” The National Interest, Oct. 25, 2014, http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/can-china-rise-peacefully-10204 (accessed on Nov. 24, 2014).
- 20.
Michael McDevitt, “Options for US policy toward the South China Sea,” PacNet #81, Nov. 20, 2014, Pacific Forum CSIS.
- 21.
Robert Sutter, “Asia’s Importance, China’s Expansion and U.S. Strategy: What Should Be Done?” Asia-Pacific Bulletin no. 283, East–West Center-Washington, Oct. 28, 2014.
References
Ashley Tellis, J. 2014. Balancing Without Containment: An American Strategy for Managing China. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Cha, Victor. 2009. Powerplay: Origins of the U.S. Alliance System in Asia. International Security, 34(3).
Curtis, Gerald. 2000. U.S. Policy Toward Japan, 1972–2000. In New Perspectives on US.-Japan Relations, ed. Gerald Curtis, 10. Tokyo: Japan Center for International Exchange.
Glaser, Charles L. 2015. A U.S.–China Grand Bargain? The Hard Choice between Military Competition and Accommodation. International Security, Spring, 39(4)
Gross, Donald. 2013. The China Fallacy. New York: Bloomsbury.
Harris, Harry B. 2015. Remarks as Delivered, November 3. Bei**g, China: Stanford Center–Peking University. http://www.pacom.mil/Media/SpeechesTestimony/tabid/6706/Article/627100/admiral-harris-speech-at-stanford-center-peking-university-bei**g-China.aspx.
Iriye, Akira. 1981. Power and Culture: The Japanese-American War 1941–1945, 2–3. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
LaFeber, Walter. 1998. The New Empire: An Interpretation of American Expansion, 1860–1898, 54. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Mix, Derek E. 2015. The United Kingdom: Background and Relations with the United States Analyst in European Affairs, April 29. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33105.pdf. Accessed on 24 Feb 2016.
Schaller, Michael. 1997. Altered States: The United States and Japan Since the Occupation. UK: Oxford University Press.
White, Hugh. 2012. The China Choice: Why America Should Share Power. Carlton, VIC, Australia: Black Inc.
Valencia, Mark J. 2010. The South China Sea: Back to the Future? Global Asia, 5(4)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Keio University
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Roy, D. (2022). America’s Deep Rationale for INDOPACOM. In: Tsuchiya, M., Roy, D. (eds) U.S. Indo-Pacific Command. Evidence-Based Approaches to Peace and Conflict Studies, vol 12. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5268-5_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5268-5_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-5267-8
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-5268-5
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)