In short, the time has come to rethink the rebalance.

This world will be more complex and dangerous. But American strategists must accept the world they have created and craft realistic approaches to protect US interests in this evolving region.

rsis.edu.sg/rsis-publica...

Implication 4: These shifting regional dynamics suggest that nuclear proliferation in Asia is a real and growing risk.

If Washington's position in Asia erodes, how would the United States react if some of its allies and partners were to pursue independent nuclear options?

Implication 3: As China’s influence in continental Asia grows, the US might embrace an offshore balancing role.

If the United States adopts an maritime balancing strategy, what would this imply for US allies and partners (like Thailand and South Korea) on the Asian continent?

Implication 2: As Northeast Asian security dominates US engagement, Taiwan will become a litmus test.

But if the US disengages outside Northeast Asia and then stands aside on Taiwan, would this effectively erode what is left of the US position across the entire Asian region?

Implication 1: As security dominates the economic and governance pillars of US strategy, Northeast Asia is once again dominating Washington’s thinking.

Will US leaders support or oppose Asian powers (especially India and Indonesia) playing bigger roles in their sub-regions?

What does this mean going forward?

Rather than asking whether these constraints can be reversed, observers should start thinking about how US policy and the Indo-Pacific region will adapt.

I see four basic implications that raise hard questions for American strategists:

Americans must recognize that these three constraints are not primarily about foreign views of Donald Trump.

They are more fundamental. They are due to shifting US views and foreign perceptions of America.

Constraint 3: Regional trust in the US has eroded, limiting US options and influence.

Even close allies are reshaping their engagement with Washington to protect their independence in the face of US pressure and unpredictability.

Constraint 2: Washington will not develop and implement a positive economic agenda towards Asia.

Both parties abandoned the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Now the United States will be sidelined as regional economic integration accelerates.

Constraint 1: Asia will not receive the resources that Asia experts desire (barring a conflict with China).

This is due to both America's global responsibilities and the American people’s waning appetite for additional overseas spending/engagement.

This is a fundamental change, but it started before Trump.

Going forward, US strategy in Asia will face three constraints, which will require us to rethink our whole approach to the region.

Now, the Trump administration appears to be refocusing its attention on security in Northeast Asia, boiling US strategy down to:

Pillars:
✅ Security
❌ Prosperity
❌ Good governance

Sub-regions:
✅ Northeast Asia
❌ Southeast Asia
❌ South Asia
❌ Oceania/Pacific Islands

But the rebalance stumbled because Washington was:

1) Distracted and failed to devote sufficient resources to Asia

2) Unable to implement a positive regional trade agenda

3) Too often viewed the rest of the region through the lens of competition with China

When it was announced, the rebalance included 3 pillars across 4 sub-regions:

Pillars:
- Security
- Prosperity
- Good Governance

Sub-Regions:
- Northeast Asia
- Southeast Asia
- South Asia
- Oceania/Pacific Islands

There will be many remembrances, but if you don’t already know what Rich did in the last days of the Vietnam War, then you should watch this.

Wise. Fierce. Courageous. And always a lover of gossip.

He was larger than life. Hard to believe he’s gone.

www.pbs.org/wgbh/america...