Geopolitics of USA Indo-Pacific Strategy.Geopolitical rivalry Between China and USA

The administration of US President Joe Biden unveiled the much-awaited new Indo-Pacific Strategy on February 11. Many are questioning the date of publication of the policy. Just hours before the release of the policy on Friday afternoon, just before the start of the weekend, US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan spoke to reporters about Ukraine. He warned China that if Russia invaded Ukraine and then China supported Russia, they would have to pay the price. The policy says that without trying to change China, the realities of the region will be brought to the interests of the United States. The United States has called for stronger ties with allies and allies, particularly the EU, ASEAN, NATO, Britain, France and the Quad Alliance. The South China Morning Post quoted a senior US official as saying that this was not US policy towards China; However, China's aggressive policy has been described as a problem there. It is now clear that China cannot be controlled by the United States alone. Christopher Preble, director of The Atlantic Council, a US-based think tank, said in an online discussion hosted by the University of Texas at Austin that the policy was published at a time when Europe was embroiled in a controversy surrounding Ukraine; Which is pretty weird. At a time like this, it is difficult to understand why the Biden administration did not disclose its national security strategy and published policies on a part of the world. There are very few Chinese names in the whole policy; Basically, the only thing that has been said is that China has violated international law. But the importance of China in the region is not mentioned at all. Reading this, he said that in the Indo-Pacific, the issue of China seems like a "black hole". In other words, there is no existence of China in Indo-Pacific! The policy states that Indo-Pacific is a major trading partner of the United States; However, trade with China is the most important factor. He says that the point of view of this policy can be understood through R. When the Trump administration was in power, they said that as long as the Chinese Communist Party was in power, the United States would not accept China's demands in the region. But now what is the policy of Biden administration? Do they want to ignore the importance of China in the Indo-Pacific? the Biden administration may be trying to remind everyone that their Asia policy is the most important. But nothing new has come out of this policy in the last ten years; Rather, the question is, what has the United States done to counter this policy? The first of the three pillars of US national security is security. What is called "integrated deterrence" as part of security is not really new. On the contrary, the issue of military security has been downplayed as "integrated". Even as part of the second pillar economy, the United States has so far failed to give Indo-Pacific a new trade agreement. None of the things being discussed have worked. And it is certain that the third pillar is not working in this area. While the US government is calling China the biggest challenge of the 21st century, there should have been some stronger steps in the policy. The policy is the weakest, especially in the case of economic pillars. While China seeks to strengthen its trade ties with regional countries, the United States seems to be standing out of bounds. Cooper says many in Asia say the United States should take a stronger position on Ukraine so that it can serve as a lesson to China. But none of them want the United States to be too busy with Europe and away from Asia. In fact, the United States is not able to give more importance to any part of the world. Andrew Karibko, a Moscow-based U.S. political analyst, says in an article in the Chinese media CGTN that the new policy is a reflection of some will. It is doubtful how many of these can be implemented before the 2024 elections. Basically, the defense aspect of this policy may get more priority. An article in the Lowe's Institute, an Australian think tank, says that much is said in the policy; However, it is more important to show what kind of benefits the countries of the region will have in implementing these. the American people do not agree with the price and suffering that Americans will have to endure in a conflict thousands of miles away from the country in order to put into practice what is stated in the policy. Can US universities bar Chinese students as part of "integrated deterrence"? Can the US subsidize the Australian government to protect it from Chinese economic aggression? As much as the policy says it will be done, he is questioning how it can be funded in the US political realities. It is clear from any Cooper or Karibko's denial that the United States' power as a world power is dwindling #geopolitics #Indo-pacifics #Superpower #america