The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

WEISS: South Asian anti-Americanism is a myth

There is no coming “anti-American wave”

My fellow columnist Jesse Berman recently argued “it would not be surprising for other U.S. allies to act similarly” to the Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte, who has, amidst a barrage of insults directed at President Barack Obama, taken steps to move the Philippines away from the United States and toward an alignment with China and Russia. His argument hinges on the idea that Duterte is setting a precedent other American allies might follow, citing Egypt and Pakistan as examples of countries with negative views toward the United States that could translate into deteriorating relationships. A far more likely reality is that Duterte is an idiosyncratic blip in the Asia Pacific region. His evolving stance reflects longstanding colonial grievances and anger over America’s objections to the extrajudicial anti-drug murders taking place in the Philippines, and not a wider, much less a global, anti-American trend.

In fact, as Secretary of Defense Ash Carter argues in a recent essay in Foreign Affairs magazine, there is a plethora of signs America is actually strengthening its network of alliances and partnerships in the Asia Pacific region despite the Philippines’s recent prevarication. Over the last five years, as part of Obama’s rebalance to Asia, the United States has taken affirmative steps with a range of countries to assure Asian Pacific security and the success of a rules-based international order, including freedom of the seas. Such steps comprise, as detailed by Carter, the negotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the allocation of 60 percent of naval and overseas air assets to the region, the deployment of THAAD to South Korea, the reinforcement of our military alliance with Japan, the creation of new military ties with Singapore, the designation in June of India as a “major defense partner,” the potential for U.S. military bases off the coast of Vietnam, and yes, the signing of the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement between the United States and the Philippines in 2014. The Philippines and Malaysia’s recent distancing from the United States does strike a blow to America’s rebalancing effort, but they belie an otherwise sound strategic picture.

This is because China’s extensive territorial claims in the South China Sea have forced most Asia Pacific countries to view their relationship with the United States in terms of the regional balance of power. Most Asia Pacific nations see China as an aspiring regional hegemon and the United States as a powerful offshore balancer, and they have opted to strengthen ties with the United States accordingly. In deference to America’s insistence on abiding by international law, the Philippines sued China in an international tribunal in The Hague and won in July, arguing China’s claims were in violation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, to which China is a signatory. The convention stipulates that a nation is sovereign over a 12-nautical-mile zone from its coast, and that artificial islands do not count. The United States has conducted multiple freedom-of-navigation operations in the South China Sea specifically within 12 nautical miles of artificial islands built by China to enforce this cornerstone of maritime law. China has said it will essentially ignore the ruling and continue to act as though it were sovereign over its “nine-dash-line.”

The Philippines seems to be pursuing a strategy more in line with that of small states, playing off rival great powers such as during the Cold War to extract concessions. So far, Duterte has managed to get Filipino fishermen to return to Scarborough Shoal and other disputed waters in the South China Sea and has acquired a $9 billion low-interest loan from China while maintaining an American security guarantee. This is most likely not a conscious strategy. Duterte’s motivation to distance himself from the United States stems from the colonial grievances that Berman mentions which are unique to Filipino history, and American human rights objections to his anti-drug program which have made extrajudicial killings a state policy. Malaysia, too, is bothered by specific actions that the U.S. Justice Department has taken against Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak this summer, seizing more than $1 billion in assets from a development fund he embezzled. Berman mentions concerns with U.S. imperialism are primarily causing American allies to reassess, but the truth is the moral underpinnings of American foreign policy — insisting on respect for international law, norms and institutions — is what might be causing this friction, and not the moral bankruptcy implied by the hefty and outdated charge of imperialism.

In making sweeping predictions like Berman’s, it is important to consider national foreign policies within their appropriate context. No anti-American wave is set to follow because of the cohesive glue of American leadership and American security guarantees. And if a partner nation cannot abide by a rules-based international order, then we should not be sorry to see them go. In the immortal words of President John F. Kennedy’s inaugural address, “in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.”

Olivier Weiss is a Viewpoint writer.

Editor's note: This column was written and published before the final results of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Comments

Latest Podcast

From her love of Taylor Swift to a late-night Yik Yak post, Olivia Beam describes how Swifties at U.Va. was born. In this week's episode, Olivia details the thin line Swifties at U.Va. successfully walk to share their love of Taylor Swift while also fostering an inclusive and welcoming community.