America’s Pacific Century!!

General Mirza Aslam Beg

Former COAS, Pakistan

   During the 1970’s, Brzezinski, the US strategist, forecasting the break-up of the Soviet Union, expounded the concept of US Unipolarity: “How America manages Eurasia is critical, Eurasia is the globe’s largest continent and is geopolitically axial. A power that dominates Eurasia would almost automatically gain Africa’s subordination, rendering the western Hemisphere and Ocean, geopolitically peripheral to the world’s central continent. Pre-eminence in Eurasia – and America’s Global Primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained,” and suggested the use of military power in the Euro-Asian region to establish the “Western Front” in Europe, and the “Southern Front” in Asia. The Western Front was established, by assimilating the Eastern European countries into the European Union. NATO was retained, to maintain the integrity of the Western Front, and to support the establishment of the Southern Front – Iraq, Afghanistan.

      The 2001, 9/11 episode provided the excuse to occupy Afghanistan, followed by Iraq in 2003. The ‘Southern Front,” thus was established supported by NATO and India also ventured beyond their borders to join the Great Game of Global Primacy. For the consolidation of the Southern Front, a “scorched earth policy, rather a scorched soul policy” was followed which, now has recoiled back and Iraq is falling apart. In Afghanistan, America went full-circle seeking different options but failed to obtain guarantee for a safe exit. The Afghan front is also collapsing while ‘the American economy is suffering $16 trillion in debt and $ 14 trillion wiped-out in household wealth. There is mass unemployment, foreclosures and increasing poverty, causing a ‘criminal culture.’ The ambitions of unipolarity now have turned into the decline of the American empire. “The emperor and the empire have no clothes.” – Kirkpatric Sole.

      The collapse of the Southern Front, has forced the US to shift the Strategic Pivot to the South East, as conceptualized by Henry Kissinger: “Tectonic international upheavals mark our period. The center of gravity of world affairs is moving to the Pacific and almost all major actors on the international stage are defining new roles for themselves. That transformation is about concept as much as about power.”Therefore, Obama defined the need for this shift in his Defense Strategic Guidance intending to establish the “Strategic Pivot” in the Asia Pacific region, because “US economic and security interests are inextricably linked to developments in the arc extending from the Western Pacific and East Asia into the Indian Ocean region and South Asia, creating a mix of evolving challenges and opportunities.” It is not difficult to draw the inference from this concept, that, Asia-Pacific is the main theatre and the US military is going to equip itself for an Ocean war over there. The United States thus has decided to strengthen its naval presence over the long term by “building towards a 346-ship fleet rather than retreating to 250-ship mark that the US faces due to budget cuts and the decommissioning of aging warships in the next decade. Diplomatic and economic engagement with China and others will work better when backed by a credible military posture.” Hillary Clinton calls this major shift as triumph of US diplomacy – “American Pacific Century”, as the best bet, after “disengaging from two futile, polarizing and massively expensive land wars.” Obama, therefore is busy forming the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ – India, Japan, South Korea and Australia, to herald the onset of the “American Pacific Century”, against rising China.

      Obama’s Defence Strategic Guidance, envisages about 15% cut in the defense budget, and a two track mode of employment of the military power. One. There will be no direct intervention, like Iraq and Afghanistan. Allies and coalition partners will do the needful, as in Somalia, Libya, Bahrain, Syria and elsewhere. The regional surrogates, like Israel and India, would help project American power and interests. Two. A number of Combat Groups comprising heliborne Special Forces, supported by strike aircrafts, will be deployed around the world to carryout surgical operations, similar to the one launched in Abbottabad in May 2011. Drones will be used extensively for intelligence gathering and engagement of opportunity targets.

      The strategic shift from Euro-Asia to the Asia-Pacific is very significant for Pakistan and the countries in the region. Afghanistan would be the main beneficiary, as the “mother of all evil – foreign aggression was vacated.” Now, US has no choice, but to knock on Taliban doorsteps, seeking help for a safe exit, which is also a challenge for Barack Obama “to concede for the Afghan people the very minimum privileges of an Arab Spring, so that Islamism could reconcile with democracy – quintessentially, expecting the US to be on the right side of history.” M.K. Bhadra Kumar. “Islamism, there, is winning out because, it is the deepest and widest channel into which discontent can flow.” John M. Oven. The world has to reconcile with Taliban rule in Afghanistan, and their broad-based government, to ensure peace and stability. There is no other viable option.

      Iran’s Strategic Defiance since 1979 has added new dimensions of resilience and self-reliance to the nation. Iranians have developed “an asymmetric hybrid strategy, supported by advanced technology weapons.” Iran also “has levers, exploiting their interior lines of operation. Their anti-access and anti-denial capabilities are proven. We (America) would have a difficult time” Cronin. Therefore, war is not the option any more. The recent sanctions imposed on Iran, restricting sale of oil has been blown into the faces of the European importers. China, India and Pakistan would benefit and continue to trade with Iran, at a premium, while Saudi Arabia and Russia will sell oil to the European buyers at $ 130-150 a barrel, putting greater burden on the fledging European economy. Geo-strategically, “Iran lies between Mesopotamia, Anatolia, the Caucasus the Caspian Sea, Central and South Asia, the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea, a broader network of trade is nearly impossible without it.” In particular it has the potential to reshape Afghanistan’s strategic future. It’s not possible to build a new security and economic structure in South and Central Asia, without Iran. Sanctions would serve no purpose.

      Pakistan has suffered immensely since 1979, due to foreign invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. Now its woes and sufferings would gradually wane, with the departure of the occupation forces from Afghanistan. Geo-strategically, Pakistan is as important if not more, than Iran, for a broader network of trade and commerce, between South and Central Asia, East and West Asia. Pakistan can contribute significantly, reshaping lives in a free and independent Afghanistan and build a new security paradigm in the region. However, it carries the burden of “American bear hug” – demanding a foot-hold in Pakistan after exit from Afghanistan. Therefore, Pakistan has to adopt skillful diplomacy to shake-off this burden without jeopardizing national security interests.


      The shifting of the ‘Strategic Pivot’ to the Asia-Pacific is of special interest to Pakistan, as the geo-political play begins between the Emerging Regional Centres of Power. China, Russia, Pakistan and Iran, constitute the first regional power base. The second is Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan triangle, emerging as the power base of the Muslim world, meeting the much needed ‘Strategic Depth’ of security. And the third is China – India – Japan, Korea and Australia, to ensure balance, under the American umbrella, in the Asia Pacific region. In this complex geo-political game, America’s role would be important, as the dominating power and would become more meaningful if it draws on the interests and wisdom of ascending Asia and engages constructively with them.

      This is a period of great opportunity for Pakistan, as the geo-strategic shift is taking place, defining new contours of balance between the Emerging Centres of Power, from Euro-Asia to Asia-Pacific. Pakistan has to find its rightful place, playing the role of a ‘facilitator, i.e., consolidating a regional cooperative relationship regime, based on the Chinese principles of Peace, Cooperation and Engagement.

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  • K. Hussan Zia  On February 4, 2012 at 7:56 am

    There a couple of points —- it would not be prudent to assume that the US aims towards Pakistan and the latter woes will evaporate after NATO troops have departed from Afghanistan.

    Secondly, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan may form a goegraphic block but there are serious political issues that will come in the way of a strategic alliance. Aside from the US concern, Iran and Afghanistan have differences over Herat and the situation of Persian-speaking minorities while there remains the thorny issue of the Durrand Line between Pakistan and Afghan. These can and will be exploited by the ionterested parties.

  • Faisal Imam  On February 5, 2012 at 6:01 am

    said it a along time back I stated this thinking.

    it is not only af-pak-iran as an axis but shoukl include Iraq and Turkey. it would become the hub of western, central and southern Asia. it would be difficult to operate outside it.

    Israel and India is an unholy marriage. it will never add up.

    Aslam Beg is a product of post 1965 era. his vision stops at the environs of Pakistan.

    ‘Cannot the perfumes of Arabia clean his thinking'(macbeth)?

  • Shaheen  On February 5, 2012 at 6:02 am

    Fasial…… a former CEATO !

  • Viqar Ahmed Abdi  On February 6, 2012 at 12:37 pm

    Very well said but would Talibans who have been fed on the food of Wahabism ever reconcile to a shia Iran? The India China, Australia, Japan and Korean block looks like a wishful thinking, why would China like to be under US umbrella, does Gen. Beg see the Chinese same small time player?

    • a m malik  On February 6, 2012 at 5:55 pm

      I have oft heard comments on wahbism but despite that I wanted to know what they believe in – even the strongest of critics of whabis have not replied!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: