SASC Puts Meat On Pacific Pivot’s Bones: $100M Annually For Partners

By on May 18, 2015 at 3:50 PM

Chinese artificial island landing strip

UPDATE: CSIS’ Mira Rapp-Hooper Praises Move

CAPITOL HILL: The Pentagon wants to help our friends in the Pacific. It’s a core mission given America’s pivot back to the Pacific. But it’s hard to do.

You can help their forces train with Foreign Military Financing, but it takes two years or so to get something going, and who gets what is really decided by the State Department. Senior Pentagon officials want to be able to act more quickly for the simple reason that China has greatly increased the tempo of its activities in the region and is acting much more aggressively.

So the Senate Armed Services Committee is proposing in its version of the annual defense policy bill that the Pentagon have $50 million this year and rising to $100 million over the next five years to provide to five of our partners and allies, with an eye especially on the Philippines.

The plan met with strong approval from one of the top experts on China’s provocative actions in the region. But Mira Rapp-Hooper at the Center for Strategic and International Studies notes it will take years for the effort to really gain momentum.

“With tensions running high in the South China Sea and US policymakers looking for options, the proposed South East Asia Assurance fund has an important role to play. The administration has emphasized partner capacity building as a tenet of the rebalance, and the SASC proposal would significantly increase assistance and training,” Rapp-Hooper writes in an email.

At the same time, she recommends that we send clear messages of “reassurance” to Beijing so they don’t misinterpret these actions.

“It would be particularly valuable as South East Asian countries develop their maritime domain awareness capabilities, which may in turn reduce the risk of accidental and inadvertent escalation. Partner capacity building efforts will necessarily take years to bear fruit, however,” she says. “So while this Assurance fund may signal an enduring US commitment to partners, it should also be coupled with messages of reassurance to Beijing to reinforce regional stability in the near term.”

The list of countries is in the Senate’s 2016 National Defense Authorization Act language: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines,Thailand, and Vietnam. Basically, this is designed to ensure we can help these countries quickly and in ways that can immediately improve their ability to respond to China and to improve coordination with US forces in Pacific Command.

http://eng.mod.gov.cn/HomePicture/2013-11/24/content_4476198.htm

China’s self-proclaimed “Air Defense Identification Zone” covers the Japanese-controlled Senkaku Islands.

“This will provide those new authorities and put some money behind it. for both assistance and training,” a congressional aide told me in an email. The areas most likely to get spent on, I understand, are logistics, intelligence and command and control so these local forces can operate with us or by themselves. For example, I hear that the Philippines can field patrol boats but lacks a good command and control network to make them as effective as they could be.

For those who wonder where this may be coming from, just think back to Sen. John McCain’s repeated comments since February about China’s aggressive actions building islands from which it may soon be able to operate military ships and aircraft.

After that hearing we heard from a Senate staffer who said the US appeared, “to just be watching all of this unfold while sending soft messages of our disapproval to Beijing and calculating that the costs of preventing further expansion are just too high. In another six months we could wake up to a far different operational and diplomatic situation in this maritime highway, where the Philippines and Vietnam are left with tangible reasons to question the resolve of our ‘rebalance’ and the field goal for America’s commitment to preserving the status quo continues to be pushed down the field.”

This fund will allow the US to respond rapidly to specific maritime threats in specific ways in the Pacific theater. No one in the Pentagon wants our friends in the region to question our resolve.

Comments

  • Curtis Conway

    “It would be particularly valuable as South East Asian countries develop their maritime domain awareness capabilities, which may in turn reduce the risk of accidental and inadvertent escalation.”

    International Maritime Operations Center (IMOC)?

    “So while this Assurance fund may signal an enduring US commitment to partners, it should also be coupled with messages of reassurance to Beijing to reinforce regional stability in the near term.”

    We are going to tell the Chinese they can continue to break the Letter and the Intent of United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) by continuing to explore for oil in Vietnam’s Economic Exclusion Zone (EEZ), and continue to make artificial islands in the Philippine’s EEZ?

    Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam . . . all ASEAN members. How about that Standing ASEAN Forces South China Sea policing group like Standing Naval Force Atlantic (STANAVFORLANT)? An option to stand up two groups with one for the East China Sea too, with participation from South Korea, Japan, and perhaps Taiwan may be in order. US Navy participation should be a given in both areas.

    Given the US’s response in the Pacific Rim, particularly in the Western Pacific, one cannot blame our Pacific neighbors from ‘questioning our resolve.’ This is one crisis this administration has NOT taken advantage of. Sad state of affairs. Some of us have been ringing this bell for the better part of a year . . . and those Oliver Hazard Perry FFG-7 Class Frigates are sorely missed. Sending a DDG-51 Arleigh Burke Class Aegis Destroyer is a lot more expensive to operate.

    • Foton

      I’d prefer the region to be more stable. I suppose from the Chinese perspective their ends justify their means. The actions occurring right now are spelling out what type of super power China intends to be.

      • Curtis Conway

        Yes . . . and this has not gone well from a HiStorical perspective. We have let this get almost clean out of hand. The little neighbors are beginning to wonder if they truly have self determination over their own territory, and their own destiny, with the Robber Barron [bully] right next door claiming their property with the huge machine bearing down on them, which the bully already signed an agreement (UNCLOS) giving up this claim. Hummmmmm.

        • John King

          Curtis, You talking about the bully on the eastern side of the Pacific that hasn’t signed UNCLOS because it may not be in the U.S. best interests? Otherwise, I agree. A joint SE Asian standing naval force might help. It’s their turf, not ours.

          • Curtis Conway

            We have made a fine referee over the decades (since WWII). UNCLOS was developed to try to hem in the US with its COCOM, as much as it was to help protect the less fortunate on the planet. WE WILL NOT PLAY INTO THEIR HAND, and have not until this administration supported so many pieces of legislation, and joined in supporting the UN Small Arms Treaty (thank G-d for the Senate).

            In China’s case, they refuse to abide by the treaty which ‘they are a signatory’, ignore international norms of conduct, will not go to arbitration . . so they can preserve their overwhelming, and intrusive power over their smaller neighbors. They destroy ocean habitat with abandon . . . where is Green Peace when you need them? It’s just ‘living rock’ . . .right?

            I guess that is what happens when you stop being ‘A Christian Nation’. People cutting folks heads off overseas is SO MUCH BETTER?!

            I am ashamed of what apparent US policy has become!!! I didn’t spend 21 years defending that. We have to return to our roots in order to restore the faith. Even the very reason for our sacrificial service of others (most we don’t even know) . . . following the perfect and righteous example of our LORD and Savior is held in disdain ? ! . . . so others can feel better about themselves ? !

            this administration has walked away from the sacrifice of thousands, with no shame, or regret (expressed). Celebrates a new Twitter Account and Hash-tag in the presents of a crumbling society in the larger cities, of which his policies and those who think like him created them in the first place, were of their own making, and they will not own it.

          • Curtis Conway

            Here is the Chinese intentions from a previous post.

            CHINESE INTENTIONS IN THE SOUTH CHINA
            SEA

            “America is the one who had upset the status quo by declaring that it would “pivot” 60% of its naval assets to the West Pacific. America is obviously taking sides against China by inciting false claims by its Filipino and Japanese client states on historical Chinese sovereign territories. America is now unhappy because China has risen up to the challenge and began to exercise its big economic muscle by manufacturing more ships, planes, missiles, etc. China has also started the process of creating islands
            in the S. China Sea which will ultimately be turned into powerful military bases that will give China the edge in terms of proximity over the aggressors. So the US is now attempting to get China to unilaterally back down in militarization. With Hu-Wen rabbits gone from the Chinese government, hopefully the new Xi government will have a little stiffer backbone and continue the rightful defense of the Chinese sovereignty over the South Sea.

            China’s sovereignty over the South Sea is indisputable. China must now declare that it withdraws the offer of joint development. Henceforth China will defend its sovereignty with military power and not with bribes.

            ASEAN was created by America during the Vietnam War era to
            contain China. But times has changed. ASEAN is now just a relic of the past. America certainly does not control ASEAN. Of the 10 ASEAN members, Laos, Cambodia and Thailand are good friends with China and understand that their future lies with China. Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia understand they cannot challenge China with impunity. They are also Muslim countries who do not like
            America. As China’s power and wealth increases and as America’s technologies and economy falls further back relative to China, they will lean toward China. They understand that America can leave South Sea but they cannot leave and so must seek accommodation with China. Singapore is mostly ethnic Chinese. Singapore is now pro-America because it needs the protection of the US against
            its biggest threats who are Malaysia and Indonesia. But once China can control Malaysia and Indonesia, then Singapore will naturally pivot toward China for its own survival. Burma is now falling apart and cannot be of any use to the US militarily or economically. The Burma government and people think they can get limitless help from America like decades ago. But they are only being ignorant not realizing that America now relies on Chinese trade and Chinese purchase of American national debt to survive. After a few more years these ignorant Burmese will wake up to the realization that they will not be getting any help
            from America. Then they will crawl meekly back to China begging for help. So that leaves only Vietnam and Philippines. But who cares about these deadbeats? They are the poorest of the ASEAN countries. If China ignored them they will simply sink and disappear. China can leave them to America who will quickly them into the equivalent of Haiti and Liberia.

            The article of this thread is about the American Secdef haranguing the Chinese not to militarize the South Sea. But Conway here is voicing the opposite of wanting the US to militarize the South Sea. This exposes the real “dog in the fight” to be the US.

            All territories in the South Sea within the 9-Dotted Line are China’s sovereign territories. No aggressors can give any of these islands or atolls to anybody. Therefore, even if Vietnam or Philippines gave any islands to the US it is baseless. Such an act will only accelerate the militarization of the South Sea. China’s island building has already progressed to a significant extent with Yongshu Island now reaching an area of some 3 square kilometers and big enough for a powerful airbase. A runway of some 3 km in length is already under construction and could be expected
            to be completed within a year. Several other islands already have permanent housings, factories, etc. constructed and will begin production to manufacture materials for the construction of bases on the principle islands. Within 3 years by the end of 2017, China will have several indestructible military bases
            with hundreds of 4th and even 5th generation fighters, bombers, missiles, etc. Not even if America deployed all its 11 carrier battle groups against these island bases can it succeed in establishing control of the South Sea.

            Lastly, America simply does not have the money to build very expensive island bases in the South Sea. American economy is still very fragile and ironically relies on the Chinese purchase of American national debts to get by. Rand Paul has proposed cutting the education, food stamp and many other things. So obviously America does not have the money to build very expensive military bases in the South Sea against China. All it will do is initiate an arms race that the US cannot win. And ultimately, America will go down like the USSR. Times has changed. America’s day of unchallenged military power is now gone. Those Americans who still think of America only needs to send in its carrier battle groups to dominate a region is now out of touch with reality.

            China has indeed become very powerful compared to its puny
            neighbors. But it is not China who has aggressed against its puny neighbors. On the contrary, it is the puny neighbors of China who have been emboldened by America to commit aggressions against China’s sovereign territories. China has
            not expanded its territories into the sovereign territories of its puny
            neighbors. Therefore, it is a lie to say China has “intrusively” “intimidated” its neighbors. It is the puny neighbors who had erroneously underestimated China’s military power thinking it is still weak like it was decades ago and can be invaded with impunity.”

            Well . . . The Dragon Has Spoken. Better pay attention!

  • Clausewitz

    This is just adding more chemicals to what is already a barrel of acid, diplomatically speaking. China on one side and America on the other and inbetween all these minor powers who hate each other.

  • originalone

    So what will this added tax on the American taxpayer buy? Since Viet Nam, the U.S.Military footprint has shrunk, though not in Japan or Korea. Of course, in the case of Japan/Okinawa, I wouldn’t say the relations are top tier, as the “ugly American in the U.S.Military attests too. Aside from what those who believe the U.S. has the right and the law on its side to police the world, the big question remains: “why did they pull out in the first place after all the $$$$$ spent, the blood spilled, yet now want to go back, because China is pouring money/influence in their own back yard. The continual use of the U.S.Military in combat, has aged its infrastructure, to the point of becoming critical toward replacement, not to mention the drag of the “white elephants the DoD seems to spawn on a continual basis too. !8 $Trillion and counting?

    • http://www.breakingdefense.com/ Colin Clark

      It’s not clear whether this will require new money or not. Authorizers (SASC and HASC) can only approve a policy or restrict how money is spent. Only appropriators can actually create money for something.

      • John King

        While that is technically accurate, Colin, the appropriators have all that extra play money in the OCO which needs a home. You surely didn’t believe the Congress wouldn’t earmark it for pet rocks did you?