United States can ill-afford transactional strategic relationships demanding "Protection Money" for US security guarantees to its long- standing military alliances or implied assurances to its valued strategic partners like India.
This issue cropped up recently when in the ongoing US Presidential campaign, the Republican candidate, Former US President Trump seeking re-election, warned Taiwan that if it wants United States to protect it against China, then Taiwan must pay for it.
The United States must guard against such rhetoric as it endangers United States recognized status as guarantor of global security.
The above not only shakes strategic trust and confidence in US Allies of long standing and time-tested Alliances but also sows doubts in Nations in process of evolving credible strategic partnerships with the United States.
Lying at the core of this issue is the simple question and that is whether US Allies need 'security alliances' with the United States "more", than the other way around?
The answer too is simple. In today's unpredictable and uncharted geopolitical scenarios when the Russia-China Axis is solidifying and drawing more adherents to its side, the United States can ill-afford to loosen or shake its 'Security Alliances' by its Presidential contenders' intention to call for 'Protection Money' for security provided.
The United States should not unlearn the bitter lessons of its 'Transactional Strategic Relationships' record. Pakistan is the prime example. Pouring in billions in military aid to Pakistan in transactional strategies failed to secure Pakistan as a 'trusted Ally' of the United States. Pakistan today lies squarely with China which is the United States prime threat and enemy.
Security of Homeland United States rests critically on United States security relationships with NATO in terms of European security against the Russian Threat and on its spider-web of bilateral Mutual Security Treaties in Western Pacific against the China Threat with Japan, South Korea, Philippines and Taiwan.
Admittedly, the point is well taken that the United States economically cannot shoulder the burden of stationing US Forces in thousands in Forward Military Presence in Jaan and South Korea or elsewhere. Japan and South Korea as economically vibrant nations pay for hosting US Forces on their soil. The quantum of Host Nations shouldering the financial burden is mutually negotiated out of glare of publicity.
However, to make outlandish statements demanding 'Protection Money' from Philippines or Taiwan even in the heat of election campaign rhetoric is demeaning for United States stature as the global predominant Power.
Concluding, it needs to be stressed that if the United States intends to retain its decades-old global strategic predominance and secure Homeland USA, its top-most priority needs to be to "Nurture" its Strategic Alliances/ Partners and not demand "Protection Money' so that the element of 'Strategic Distrust' does not creep-in and dilute these strategic relationships.
The United States needs NATO solidarity and Western Pacific US Allies solidarity more than ever before.
No comments:
Post a Comment