United States showing its staunch commitment in the Ukrainian-Russian conflict.As a conflict between Ukraine and Russia seems imminent,the U.S. has unwaveringly bolstered Ukraine and threatened Russia with ominous consequences for its aggression. The stakes has heightened for United States in the Ukraine –Russia conflict,as U.S. deem that the inability to make a persuasive commitment will embolden U.S. adversaries. Therefore ,the Ukraine crisis has been attached paramount importance in recent U.S. diplomatic history which far outweighs U.S. commitment in other significant geopolitical region.This obsession with the Russian-Ukraine crisis can embroil United States in a protracted war with far-reaching on the security and economy of the United States.
Russia has been increasingly considered as a grave threat to the U.S.’s global clout and ambition. Buoyed with a revisionist tendency ,Russian president has strived to reconfigure Europe’s balance of power in Russia’s favor.This ambition of Russia has been manifested in its muscular diplomacy and heightening bellicosity. The Crimean invasion in 2014 embodies this increasingly hostile attitude of Russia and Putin has been spearheading the country in order to reclaim its historical grandeur.
Russia’s ambition is unpalatable for the United States .The U.S. consider itself as the custodian of European order and stability and deem that any malicious intentions by Russia need to be confronted in order to safeguard Europe from tyranny. This has deepened the rift between two countries and has sharpened animosity between them.Therefore,United States,with the aid of NATO, always remain vigilant in thwarting any diabolical designs of the Russian revisionist regime.This attitude of United States explains its readiness in counteracting Russia’s hostile actions aimed at Ukraine .United States has ratcheted up rhetoric in order to testify its resolve in resolutely counter Russia.
Consequently,the Russia-Ukraine crisis has garnered disproportionate attention in the United States,which is prejudicial to the U.S. commitment in other regions.The previous decade has marked a drastic shift in U.S. foreign policy.American foreign policy in the 20th century had been dictated by the its fixation on Europe.United States propped up Europe in the wake of second world war and salvaged European security from the encroachment of Russia and fashioned a diverse array of institutions in cementing its influence in Europe.Policymakers in the United States invariably hinged U.S. foreign policy success on its efficacy in maintaining order and stability in Europe.
However, the strategic calculation has altered considerably with the advent of the 21st century.The dismemberment of the Soviet Union has meant that ,the most pressing threat that sustained U.S. obsession in Europe , has evaporated. Therefore, this new landscape in Europe has evoked speculations among analysts about the demise of NATO. However ,this hadn’t transpired as the menace of Russia had perpetually intimidated the United States and sustained NATO and other similar defense commitments in Europe.
The economic influence of Asian countries has burgeoned considerably in the 21st century as China has increasingly attained staggering economic clout in the new century underpinned by the China’s liberalization and forces of neoliberalism and globalization.This has unsettled unchallenged great power United States as China sought to assert its economic clout and jolted U.S.-led world order in the Asia.Moreover,China’s increasing economic clout has undergirded its geopolitical aims.China has floated several flagship plans in order to resuscitate its economic dominance .However,China’s efforts at upending the global order has enraged United States.Therefore,United States foreign policy agenda has substantially changed in order to counteract China’s rise.
U.S. has mobilized all of its efforts in order to confront China and its revisionist intentions in destabilizing South China Sea.Therefore,subsequent U.S. presidents has shaped their foreign policy agenda with mottos such as “Pivot to Asia”,”Indo-Pacific Strategy”,”Asia Rebalancing”.There has been bipartisan consensus among U.S. policymakers on the fact that China constitutes gravest threat to U.S. led global order as China’s aims in monopolizing its spheres of influence runs counter to U.S.’s consecrated foreign policy goal aiming at a liberal and free world.
While the U.S. had accorded paramount importance to China, however failed to comprehensively fashion a coherent agenda in countering China’s rise and coordinating with allies. The shared trepidation of China’s destabilizing attitude binds U.S. with its allies in the Indo-Pacific Strategy ,however Indo-Pacific strategy hasn’t yet received proportionate importance in concrete actions and much of the U.S.’s overtures in the region has been limited to the realm of rhetoric without allaying the allies’ fright of China or offering a viable alternative to China’s formidable and indispensable economic might.
QUAD and other security pacts has taken shape in previous years .However, the efficacy of such security arrangements are in question due to the lack of coherent plans undergirding these arrangements. Besides,U.S. allies are rather cautious in engaging categorically with these security arrangements as they fear that these might communicate hostile intentions to China and in turn will invoke China’s ire which is detrimental to the economy of these countries as these countries have indispensable economic ties with China and hostile relationship with China renders them vulnerable to unsolicited supply chain disruption.
Moreover,an overarching Indo-Pacific focus has taken shape in U.S.’s foreign policy priorities.However,U.S.’s Indo pacific plan is still acutely lacking in substance.While U.S. has cooperated with this countries in the security realm,however the viable substitution of the China’s economy and supply chain hasn’t been provided.The trade arrangements in the ASEAN region,which constitutes the bedrock of Indo-Pacific region,is dominated by China .Therefore,China’s hegemony in the region runs deep into the economic survival of these countries.United States’ failure lies in inability of erecting alternative trade block to erode China’s unrivaled economic prominence in the region.
While there are an array of loopholes in U.S.’s much-vaunted Indo-Pacific strategy,United States has instead foregrounding Europe again in the center of its foreign policy by providing increasing importance to Ukraine-Russia issue.The hostile rhetoric of U.S. against Russia runs the risk of antagonizing Russia and in the event of any future conflict between US-Russia,the United States’ will be debilitated and will be distracted from much more pressing issues of Indo-Pacific region.While some maintain that ,the resolute posture in the Ukraine question testifies to the U.S.’s unwavering resolve and send forbidding signs for future transgressor, it is however ineffectual method of sending signals whereas U.S. is vulnerable in entangling itself.Instead,a viable policy will be to challenge China’s rise and stifling its hostile dominance ,rather than getting mired in peripheral issues.