Paper
Douglas H. Paal
{
"authors": [
"Douglas H. Paal"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie China"
],
"collections": [
"China’s Foreign Relations"
],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Military",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
Impact of the U.S. Pivot on the Asia Pacific Region
The Obama administration’s pivot to Asia has not emboldened America’s regional partners, nor has U.S. reluctance to directly intervene in territorial disputes signaled waning support for U.S. allies.
Published on May 16, 2014
Source: CCTV America
Douglas Paal appeared on CCTV America to dismiss the myth that the Obama administration’s “pivot to Asia” has emboldened countries in the region. He asserted that such claims get the chronology wrong and that tensions in the region began to heat up following the 2008 Beijing Olympics, which led U.S. partners in the region to call for the pivot, which began in 2011. Similarly, he rejected the idea that the administration’s reluctance to intervene in the territorial disputes indicates an unwillingness to support American partners in the region, pointing out that the United States seems to be increasingly willing to transfer military equipment to Hanoi and Manila, to step up military-to-military cooperation, and to strengthen their technical capabilities.About the Author
Douglas H. Paal
Distinguished Fellow, Asia Program
Paal previously served as vice chairman of JPMorgan Chase International and as unofficial U.S. representative to Taiwan as director of the American Institute in Taiwan.
- America’s Future in a Dynamic Asia
- U.S.-China Relations at the Forty-Year MarkQ&A
- +1
Douglas H. Paal, Tong Zhao, Chen Qi, …
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- The Shadow of the Military in Modern South AsiaArticle
Military rule is now a defining political factor in South Asia. Here’s how analysts can understand and account for it.
Paul Staniland
- Will Hungary’s New Leader Really Change EU Policy on Russia and Ukraine?Commentary
Orbán created an image for himself as virtually the only opponent of aid to Ukraine in the entire EU. But in reality, he was simply willing to use his veto to absorb all the backlash, allowing other opponents to remain in the shadows.
Maksim Samorukov
- Realism and the Lebanon-Israel TalksCommentary
Beirut’s desire to break free from Iranian hegemony may push it into a situation where it has to accept Israel’s hegemony.
Michael Young
- How to Join the EU in Three Easy StepsCommentary
Montenegro and Albania are frontrunners for EU enlargement in the Western Balkans, but they can’t just sit back and wait. To meet their 2030 accession ambitions, they must make a strong positive case.
Dimitar Bechev, Iliriana Gjoni
- The United States Has an Internal Displacement ProblemArticle
By reorganizing federal disaster policy around the rights of displaced people, the United States could unlock additional federal resources, accelerate the rebuilding of lives and livelihoods, and reduce suffering and economic disruption.
Kayly Ober
