Wolf at the door [By Jiao Haiyang/China.org.cn]

The recently concluded Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) East Asia Summit, which this year took place in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, once again highlighted the maritime tensions that have blighted the East Asian region over the course of the past year. And in a similar fashion to how previous maritime dispute storylines have played out, the United States of America remained on the periphery throughout, overlooking discussions while quietly reasserting its regional presence.

The summit was overshadowed by talks of territorial disputes, much to the chagrin of Chinese officials. The summit, which brings together the 10 ASEAN nations along with other regional and international leaders, is intended to strengthen political and economic ties. This year, the United States participated in the summit; a forum originally regarded as belonging to East Asia. ASEAN nations are attempting to strengthen economic ties with the goal of achieving an economic bloc similar to that of the EU over the next three years. However, dialogue between ASEAN nations and their surrounding neighbors has repeatedly hit a stumbling block due to an inability to resolve or shelve security issues in favor of economic ones.

At the summit this year, US President Barack Obama urged his Asian counterparts to decrease the level of tension that has slowly been mounting within the region. Ultimately, Obama is attempting to be all things to all people; trying not to contradict the claims and expectations of its allies, and trying not to antagonize Chinese officials. Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao expressed frustration over the direction of talks during the summit, stating, "We do not want to bring disputes to an occasion like this". Premier Wen further noted, "We do not want to give over emphasis to the territorial disputes and differences."

Against such a backdrop, President Obama is attempting to frame his role as that of peacekeeper for the Southeast Asian region; preventing tempers from flaring up and safeguarding economic ties. However, the reality is the US cannot influence the way that their involvement in the East Asia summit, or in East Asia in general, is being interpreted within China, despite the fact that Obama managed to appear neutral while still calling for China to "establish clear rules of the road" on trade and investment. Ultimately, US involvement within a traditionally East Asian forum may be regarded by some as yet more proof of a US expansionist policy.

The so-called "pivot" of the Obama administration has been painted by the US a part of a broader security platform which it helped to create and maintain over the past several decades. As US National Security Advisor Thomas E. Donilon recently stated at a talk prior to the President's Southeast Asian visit, "The United States function of providing the security platform has been absolutely essential for the social development and economic development of Asia."

However, as Robert S. Ross, one of the foremost US specialists on Chinese foreign and defense policy, pointed out in Foreign Affairs, "the Obama administration's pivot has not contributed to stability in Asia. Quite the opposite: it has made the region more tense and conflict-prone." Ross notes that the irony of the pivot is that, "a strategy that was meant to check a rising China has sparked its combativeness and damaged its faith in cooperation." To some extent, this is almost certainly true, as the pivot has at the very least provided China's state media with more material to analyze, rightly or wrongly, US motives and thus influence nationalistic opinion.

In terms of how the US views China, and vice versa, underestimating the capabilities or overestimating the intentions of the other party breeds insecurity and has served to increase instability within the region. The traditional view within China of Western strategic culture as militaristic and expansionist is being confirmed, in the eyes of many Chinese analysts, by the pivot. Yet, the policy itself has so far delivered very little other than long-term promises of resource allocation and US claims of neutrality in territorial disputes. Unfortunately, such promises have spooked officials within China's People's Liberation Army. Despite the axiom that prosperity requires stability, it is difficult to say whether US military hedging can truly deflate regional tensions or whether US officials will be able to truly convince Beijing that the pivot is not intended as a form of containment.

Following the summit, news that trade ministers from China, South Korea and Japan agreed to begin negotiations in 2013 to create a trilateral free trade area (FTA) came as a welcome sign of the possibility of economic cooperation away from the issue of regional disputes. Results are obviously not guaranteed, but the desire from each country to maintain stable economic ties is evident. One would assume that a trilateral FTA would play into the US wishes for peace and stability throughout Asia. However, if the creation of an FTA is possible, it will be interesting to see whether US policymakers will interpret this as evidence of its traditional allies moving closer to China and, ultimately, whether it will have an impact upon the pivot.