Yet as Mr. Obama’s time in office comes to an end, Asian nations are deeply skeptical about how much they can rely on Washington’s commitment and staying power in the region. They sense that for the first time in memory, Americans are questioning whether their economic and defense interests in Asia are really that vital.
At the core, the policy has been building on the two-decade-old opening to Vietnam; the establishment of a new relationship with Myanmar as it lurches toward democracy; closer relations with the two largest treaty allies in the region, Japan and South Korea; and renewed military ties with the Philippines. The administration has also pushed the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which would set new terms for trade and business investment among the United States and 11 other Pacific Rim nations.
The biggest challenge, however, is on the home front. Donald J. Trump’s threat to withdraw American forces from South Korea and Japan unless they pay far more of the cost — and they already pay much of it — may just be a negotiating position. But it suggests that the United States has no independent national interests in the Pacific. That would be a rejection of a post-World War II order that goes back to the Truman administration.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/24/world/asia/vietnam-arms-embargo-obama.html
As mentioned in the article, each Asian country views this issue from different perspective, and even within one nation, there are very disparate views. I personally appreciate the US army residing in South Korea because South and North Korea are still in a truce, in that war can always happen any time. But there are many Koreans who are against the US army residence in South Korea at the same time.
What do you guys think? Do you agree with Trump?
Should the US continue its spending on military for the global stability and security?
I disagree that there are many Koreans who are against the U.S. army stationing in Korea. It is true that residents in a certain region disagree with having U.S. army facilities in their regions, but it does not mean that the residents do not want the U.S. army to station in South Korea. Those who disagree are online propaganda from North Korean cyber team or people who are following North Korean's belief & socialist followers.
ReplyDeleteEven if Trump does not truly think that U.S. does not have any benefit, Trump will still insist 100% cost burden from South Korea to increase the ratio of Korean government's payment towards U.S. army station. His strategy is to insist extreme amount of Korean government budget for the U.S. army station, so that South Korean government is willing to pay more than what it originally intended to pay.
U.S. government does not spend on abroad military for the global stability. That is just a surface reason. The major reason is to protect its interest in foreign countries, and protect themselves by forming pacific safe shield line in Japan, South Korea, Guam, and Philippines.
I think Edward brings up some good points, and he probably has better insights than the rest of us into the matter. These are the types of things that worry me with Trump as president. This type of brash behavior could threaten to destabilize the region, and put unnecessary pressure on some of our key allies like South Korea and Japan. To withdraw our presence from South Korea would be dangerous and foolish in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteAre there any other methods of ensuring stability in the region? I feel like it might be a good thing to see fewer troops around the world.
ReplyDelete