The US government has just released its new National Security Strategy which stresses four main features, namely national security, economic development, American values, and the international order. There is nothing dramatically new in the first three, as US presidents always emphasize security, the economy, and democracy, the only difference is the priority given them depending on the circumstances at different times.

However, this time, the White House has added the fourth element to this document, the international order. It is good that the US seems more willing to accommodate the United Nations and other multilateral organizations to promote world peace and security, as well as global economic prosperity. In the face of the US' domestic situation, the Obama administration has to focus more on partnerships and cooperation for his remaining two years in the White House.

The new National Security Strategy, however, has not forgotten the US' "rebalancing to Asia and the Pacific". The Obama administration's first National Security Strategy of May 2010 used the term "rebalancing" four times, but none of them applied to the Asia-Pacific region. Indeed, Obama first raised the notion of rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific in 2011. However, given the opportunity presented by drawing up a new National Security Strategy, the White House national security team has reaffirmed the US' commitment to rebalancing to the region.

According to the latest National Security Strategy, the US will employ a combination of tools in its rebalancing, including "increased diplomacy, stronger alliances and partnerships, expanded trade and investment, and a diverse security posture". In this context, the US National Security Advisor Susan Rice has announced that the Chinese, Japanese, South Korean and Indonesian leaders have been invited to visit the US this year, when she inaugurated the release of the new National Security Strategy. This was a clear signal that the US is diplomatically committed to its rebalancing to East Asia.

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)