the vital role of presence

to win, you really do have to play

News that President Biden cancelled his visits to Papua New Guinea and Australia to address the debt ceiling mess was deja vu from the Obama administration. In October 2013, President Obama similarly cancelled a stop in Jakarta to negotiate with the opposition on the government shutdown resulting from a budget impasse. Sadly, these last second negotiations proliferate at precisely the time both Dems and republicans seem to forget the importance of ‘being’ somewhere in the post-COVID world. Other nations won’t forget us not sending Biden to his entire initial itinerary.

I was highly critical in twenty years ago of the Bush 43 officials who prioritised many things over visits to Asia. I was not naive that the president himself could be in two places at one time and there were a confluence of events with conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as other domestic events but it seemed at the time that Asia always fell to the bottom of priorities at a time China’s leaders were ‘going out’ more than ever. But could there be a cause and effect now manifested in China’s increased prestige and power there?

In the past two decades, China’s role as the single biggest trading partner with each nation around the Pacific Rim (except the United States) elevated economic and trade ties as a means of interaction. PRC diplomats, able to attend various multilateral confabs across the region, became fixtures at the ever increasing number of organisations regional states create to avoid conflict. Meetings including ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), the ARF (ASEAN’s Regional Forum), ADM (ASEAN Defense Ministers), ADMM (ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting), ADMM+ (ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Meeting + specified add on countries) and so forth are all venues for PRC diplomats and—when authorised—People’s Liberation Army Office of International Engagement personnel to discuss policies, complain about American containment, lecture about ‘known facts’ regarding China’s ‘impeccable’ actions, and the like, often with only a modest U.S. contingent to counter the rhetoric. Indeed, in an increasing number of organisations, China specifically attempts to preclude U.S. invitation or involvement.

There is actually a Heads of Defense Universities, Colleges and Institutes Meeting, under the auspices of the ARF, to allow presidents of national defense universities from Pakistan to the United States and China (and all nations in between) to discuss on an annual basis the lessons of professional military education. That meeting moves throughout the member states, focusing on a topic like how to improve on virtual education, the role of critical thinking, the importance of faculty and student research, and the need for shared curriculum on issues such as counter-terrorism. Sounds boring but is a method for the U.S. leadership to shine while also build rapport with militaries with whom we might see the need for coordination under less favourable conditions. You have no idea how hard it was to get some U.S. personnel to see the value of travelling that far to talk with others.

But, Asia is a place built on relationships. Those relationships are personal conversations which begin as small talk but grow slowly into more trusting, fulsome and meaty chats. Finally, they become real bonds where one general may pick up the phone to call another in a crisis. Chatting is generally preferable to fighting. These meetings across the Pacific Rim play a minor but sustained role in establishing and continuing those ties.

U.S. leaders always highlight small agreements they can cite after bilateral meetings (known in the parlance as ‘sidebars’) on the margins of grand events. These smaller beneficial accords are just that—small. But show that the United States seeks to appreciate, laud, and reinforce our ties with the countries. The President’s time is his (eventually her) most precious commodity so who it is spent with is a symbol of importance here and in the other country he’s meeting. Who he does not meet is equally important.

No U.S. voice at meetings hurts the our position by allowing silence regarding, if not flat our distortion of, our positions. More importantly, each time it occurs our allies, partners, and potential friends doubt our true commitment to the issues important to them. We are also farming out responsiblility to articulate our positions to same countries, a position we can never feel confident will meet our needs.

I first charged loudly in January that the raising debt ceiling was an absolutely unavoidable issue which could become a major crisis. There is no way around doing it, though our political ‘leaders’ are choosing—apparently with our quiescence— to make it hardest and pretty painful for us all (allowing a debt-driven financial collapse would of course be even worse yet President Trump advocates it if I hear him correctly). I am not blaming the President for negotatiating with Speaker McCarthy but think it should have long preceded the G-7 meeting Biden will attend in Hiroshima this week since we have known this was coming since the last time we did it. Nothing new here.

I am, however, saying that we are giving lie to our refrain that Asia is our most important foreign policy when we do not send senior representation—read: the President in this particular case—to rub shoulders with his counterparts. It surrenders our high ground to China by default. Biden won’t be telling the people of Australia why we are so keen on AUKUS or why Taiwan is worth their blood. The Papuans won’t hear him discuss historic appreciation of the region’s shifts over the past 40 years to indicate why the United States cares about what occurs in that remote island nation.

The Vice President should represent him instead as she is first in line of succession. It should be an elected official—period. But we just never seem to realise this is how the game is played.

Biden’s decision is understandable and it’s not. If we—Republican, Independent, and Democrat voters and non-voters alike—really think we can compete with China for influence and attention, then we have to compete for influence and attention. It’s pretty simple. Funny how the world looks for actions rather than just our words.FIN