Analysis of the reasons for focusing the US strategy towards Asia-Pacific

Document Type : Original Article


1 Associate Professor of Political Geography, Faculty of Earth Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran.

2 Ph.D. student of political geography, Faculty of Geography, Kharazmi University, Tehran.

3 Ph.D. student of political geography, Faculty of Geographical Sciences, Kharazmi University, Tehran.


Extended Abstract     
The impact of the Asia-Pacific region on regional and international security equations, especially the emergence of emerging powers in the region, has increased its importance in the security equations and strategic strategies of other actors, especially the United States. This policy of focusing the United States on East and West Asia is more than a military and economic leverage. Developing economies and acquiring markets, and especially long-term economic benefits, is the first word in US policy and its rivals in the region. Therefore, the present study is based on the assumption that the position of the Asia-Pacific region in the future of the global system and the interests of the United States has changed its strategy towards the Pacific.
This research is an applied research, which is done using the descriptive-analytical research method.
According to the nature of the subject, the method of collecting information is in the library and Internet. In this way, the required information for books and articles is extracted and classified and then analyzed in a qualitative way.
By analyzing and analyzing the developments in the Pacific, the most important reasons for changing the US approach towards Asia-Pacific can be summarized as follows:
(1). Increasing China's economic and military strength:
Americans believe China is looking for excellence in Asia, and that excellence can endanger the interests of the United States and its allies. Therefore, if the United States wants to maintain its supremacy in Asia-Pacific, it should seek to prevent China's hegemony in Asia. While the US will compete with China, it will reject the opposition. Concern is that in the end, China will try to expel the US forces from the region and dominate the East Asian political and economic situation.
(2). Confronting the development of long-range missiles in North Korea:
 The geopolitical roots of the crisis in North Korea are largely attributable to the behavioral patterns of geostrategic actors in the Asia-Pacific region, although the kind of political system ruling this country, its lack of legitimacy, economic poverty, ruling ideology, and the lack of natural resources, are exacerbating the crisis.
North Korea's nuclear disarmament will be the two main issues exchanged in the new Washington-Pyongyang diplomacy to provide security guarantees that the North Korean Communist government will accept the legitimacy of the United States and the international community.
(3). Ensuring Free Access to Maritime Lines:
 About 90% of global shipping is transported through sea transport. Since US interests have always been through the transfer of energy supplies through the sea, the country has always been struggling to protect the freedom of the seas.
(4). Enhancing US Security Alliance with Equal Forces:
The United States is deepening its defense ties with partners in the Pacific, such as Australia, Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines and Vietnam. These engagements, treaties and partnerships also focus on strengthening the capacity of its partners to monitor growing regional challenges in areas such as missile defense, cybersecurity, space, maritime security, and disaster prevention.
(5). Development of American Liberalism in the Pacific:
Another logic that shapes US foreign policy is liberalism. America's main doctrines of the logic of free trade or the market-based economy, the spread of democracy in the world, the protection of human rights and the achievement of nations have set the fate of their foreign policy instruments after World War II and pursued their policies in the world. Although liberal democracy has become more instrumental in American politics and liberal democracy doctrines have been pursued in countries that have failed to comply with US interests.
(6). The interests of US industrial complexes:
The military economy in America is now three times larger than other sectors. This situation has created the perception in the United States that the military industrial complex is a stimulus to the US economy. Threat of China were among the inventions that were created to increase the huge Pentagon budget.
The new US policy, clearly outlined in its defense strategies, is based on the growing influence of the East Asian region and its efforts to transfer its naval and air forces to the region in recent years. Enhancing China's economic and military strength, ensuring free access to common interests, securing maritime shipping lines, tackling the development of North Korea's long-range missiles, strengthening US security alliance with neighboring countries, and developing liberalism in the region are among the most important reasons for changing US strategy to On the Asian-Pacific side.
The Asia Pacific region has become one of the most important geopolitical centers in the world, with its important and growing role in global equations and competitions. Based on it’s economic, political and security characteristics, the region has been the site of a great deal of power politics, such as the United States and China.
Therefore, the strategy of returning to Asia and the Pacific has been raised from the standpoint of China's economic and military growth, and from a macro perspective a multidimensional policy that emanates from the economic, political and strategic implications of the United States in the region. The main purpose of the United States to balance and balance in East and Southeast Asia is to strengthen and renew its security, economic, and diplomatic relations with its allies to undermine China's growing power.


  1. Ahmadvand, Ali Mohammad and others. (2013). the Pattern of Strategy Selection in Defense of the Islamic Revolution, Quarterly Journal of Defense Strategy, Year 11, No 43.[In Persian]
  2. Araqchi, Abbas and Sobhani, Mehdi. (2012). Cold Conflict in Asia; the Consequences of a New American Military Approach in Asia Pacific, Foreign Relations Quarterly, Fourth Edition, No. 4 [In Persian].
  3. Ariyager, Harry. (2006). Strategic Theory of the 21st Century, Publisher's Translation, Tehran, IRGC Strategic Center [In Persian].
  4. Arth Lykke, J. (1989). Toward an Understanding of Military Strategy, chap. In: Military Strategy: Theory and Application, Carlisle Barracks, PA, U.S. Army War College.
  5. .Asia Pacific Group. (2013). Geopolitical roots of the crisis in North Korea, International Relations Studies Institute Research Center,[In Persian].
  6. Berteau, Michael J. Green, David J. (2014). U.S. Force Posture Strategy in the Asia Paci Region: An Independent Assessment, publisher by Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
  7. Bjorn, Hettne and others. (2012). Comparison of regionalism, translation by Alireza Tayeb, Ministry of Foreign Affairs publication.
  8. Boulevard, Wilson. (2013). The U.S. Army in the Pacific: Assuring Security and Stability, Institute of Land Warfare Association of the United States Army,
  9. Blumenthal, Daniel. (2010). The China-U.S.A Security rivalry, American Enterprise,
  10. BP(2014) Statistical Review of World Energy June review.
  11. Callahan, Patrick. (2008). American Foreign Policy Logic: Theories of the Global Role of America, Translated by: Davood Gh. Zandi, Mahmoud Yazdan FAM and Naderpour Akhundi, Tehran, Strategic Studies Research Center [In Persian].
  12. Cohen, Saul Bernard. (1999). Geopolitics of the Universal System, translation by Abbas Kardan, [In Persian], First Edition, Tehran, Contemporary Abrar publication.
  13. Clark Bryan.(2014)Commanding the seas, CSBA) The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments,
  14. CRS (Congressional Research Service). (2012). Pivot to the Pacific? The Obama Administration’s “Rebalancing” Toward Asia,
  15. Congressional Research Service. (2015). China-U.S. Trade Issues,
  16. Darvishi, Farhad and Fardi Tazkand, Mohammad (2008), National Interest Concept in Islamic Republic of Iran's Foreign Policy, Geopolitics Quarterly, Vol 4 No 3 [InPersian].
  17. .Dadandesh, Parvin (2007), Geopolitical Discourse in Central Asia: Interaction Area Between Iran & Russia, Geopolitics Quarterly, Vol 3, No 1 [In Persian].
  18. Dehghani Firoozabadi, jalal. (2009). The evolution of regionalization theories,
    Central Eurasia Studies, Faculty of Law and Political Science, Second Year, No5. [In Persian].
  19. Don, Team (2004), Liberalism, In Globalization of Politics: International Relations in the New Age , Translated by Abolghasem Road, Chamani and others , Tehran, Abrar Contemporary publication [In Persian].
  20. Dobbins, James. (2016). US Strategic Options in the Chaotic World, Translated by Seyyed Abdul Majid Zawari, Ehsan Alaeipour and Fereshteh Kandi Dani, Think tank International Relations Publications, Tehran, First Edition [In Persian].
  21. Hossein zadeh, Hossein. (2010). Political Economy of American Militarism, translation of Parviz Omidvar, Tehran, publication of Ney [In Persian].
  22. Karimipour, yadollah. (2015). Geography; first in the service of peace (Attitude toward relations between Iran and its neighbors), Tehran, First edition, Selection publication, [In Persian].
  23. Khadem, fazaleh. (2012). Geopolitics of emerging powers and the prospect of 2050), Geopolitics Quarterly, Vol 8, No 2 [In Persian].
  24. Khezri, roya. (2013). US and China Strategy in the Asia-Pacific Region (Collaboration and Conflict), Foreign Policy Quarterly, 12th and 5th, No. 3 [In Persian].
  25. IMF (International Monetary Fund) (2017), World economic outlook, uneven Growth-Short- and Long-Term Factors. Washington,
  26. Iranian-American Institute of Eurasia. (2016), the policy of rotation to East Asia and its impact on the Middle East, at [In Persian].
  27. IMF (International Monetary Fund(2015)Regional Economic Outlook, Asia and Pacify Sustaining the Momentum: Vigilance and Reforms,
  28. Kollai ellahe and sazmand, bahaerh.(2013).lobalization and New Regionalism in East Asia, Geopolitics Quarterly, Vol 10 No 3 [In Persian].
  29. Lake, David A and Morgan, Patrick M. (2002). Regional Order; Security in the New World; Translated by Seyyed Jalal Dehghani Firoozabadi, First Edition, Tehran, Research Institute for Strategic Studies [In Persian].
  30. Peterson, Peter.G. (2012). New US Defense Strategy for a New Era: Military Superiority, Agility, and Efficiency, November, Washington, DC,
  31. Safarzadeh, Mahmoud and others. (2009). Marine Transportation, Second Edition, Tehran, Danesh Esar [In Persian].
  32. S. Gary, Colin. (2006). Strategic Structures Alireza Farshchi Translation, Sepah Command and Headquarters Press, First Edition [In Persian].
  33. Stacey, Ralph. (2001). Strategic Management, N.Y, McGraw Hill.
  34. Qasemi, farhad and Salehi sayed javad. (2008).Theoretical Approach to the Persian Gulf and Its Issues, First Edition, Tehran, Center for Scientific Research in Middle East Strategic Studies [InPersian].
  35. Qasemi, Farhad. (2008). Principles of International RelationsTehran, First Edition, Publishing [In Persian].
  36. USA DOD. (2014). States Department of Defense T, FY 2015 Budget Request- Overview Book,
  37. . USA. (2015). Nation Security Strategy, Washington.
  38. QDR Quadrennial Defense Review (2014). States Department of Defense.
  39. U.S. census Bureau. (2017). The Chinese-American Trade Balance,
  40. WTO (The World Trade Organization). (2016). International Trade Statistics 2016,