The 2023 defensive arrangement with Papua fresh Guinea is the United States' consequence to China's increasing influence in Oceania.Source: Wikimedia Commons. licence – Public Domain. Author – U.S. Department of State
The region of Oceania, a immense patch of Western Pacific islands, is simply a key field for the rivalry of the leading powers of the 21st century. Both the United States and China are seeking to bring many countries of the region to their side. The winner of this competition can take control of valuable resources and key trade routes. How do the countries of the region view the fight against power? Are they powerless toward her? Will the destiny of the planet be settled in the Pacific?
The countries of the regions of Micronesia, Melanesia and Polynesia have been the subject of interest to abroad powers since the large Geographical Discoveries erstwhile the Spanish Empire dominated the Western Pacific trade routes. In the 19th century, the fresh powers, Britain, Germany, France and Japan imposed their colonial government on the island nations of the region. After planet War I, a crucial part of this area was dominated by Japan at the expense of the defeated German Empire. In turn Japan itself was defeated and pushed from Oceania by the United States, which to this day stay the most powerful Pacific country.
But the planet is changing. In fresh decades, a fresh large power has grown, the fleet of which grows year by year, challenging the power of the United States. We're talking about China, the second power of the economical world. Due to their expanding global importance, the focus of global policy has moved from the Atlantic to the Pacific, forcing America to focus its attention on the countries of Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia. They are located close key trade routes, and their territorial waters may contain the large mineral wealth needed to further make the large economies of the leading powers of the present. In the coming years, the countries of Oceania may be forced to make clear choices: America or China?
Due to the key function of the region of Oceania in the play of geopolitical powers, we asked for comment on Karol Starowicz's fog from the Department of Non-European Political Studies of the UAM. Starowicz is an expert in global relations in the Asia-Pacific region. Here we present all the expert commentary, which you could read in the article “Among the Waves of large Politics”, which has already appeared in our paper edition and on the website.
Good morning! Thank you very much for your willingness to share with our readers the cognition of the seldom discussed region of Oceania in our country. Let's decision on to the first question. How dependent are the countries of Micronesia, Melanesia and Polynesia? Given the US's simplification in abroad aid spending and the scepticism of the US authorities in the fight against climate change, can the PRC take over the function of a humanitarian patron of the region?
U.S. abroad aid has always been granted in unequal proportions between the countries of Micronesia, Melanesia and Polynesia. It is worth noting that they are mostly tiny countries, sometimes covering respective areas, specified as the Republic of Kiribati, which consists of 33 islands. In addition, these countries are geographically distant from each another and face various social, economical or political problems which they cannot solve alone without abroad aid. In the light of the latest information, it appears that the Trump administration does not intend to finance climate change activities or another actions in the left-wing agenda. In the long term, it does not seem that the US will full retreat from the aid. There are many indications that Washington simply wants to rethink any of its future decisions. Hence Donald Trump suspended for 90 days all U.S. abroad aid programs to verify in item what American taxpayers' money had been going on so far.
However, let us not forget that in this part of the planet it is not the US that is the main donor. According to data provided by the Australian think tank The Lowy Institute Australia plays a leading function in providing assistance, which only spent $11.8 billion in 2008-2022, representing 38 percent of the full aid. In comparison, in the same period, the U.S. only allocated $3.4 billion, or 7 percent. Of course, the People's Republic of China besides expands its influence (the sum of its aid for the period above was 9 percent), but it does so gradually. It is possible that if the US completely withdraws, China will effort to fill this gap. However, Australia (supported by fresh Zealand and Japan) will stand on their way, which does not intend to abdicate as a local leader.
Are any countries of the region (e.g. the Solomon Islands with China and Papua fresh Guinea from the USA) to be understood as dividing the region into 2 hostile camps or alternatively as an extension of the field of manoeuvre of regional players in the face of the decline of American hegemony in the world?
As 1 of the top ancient thinkers of the Far East said, author of Sun Tzu's war art: "The highest accomplishment is to defeat the enemy without a fight." Currently, the Asia-Pacific region resembles a chessboard, where the 2 largest powers, i.e. the US and the People's Republic of China compete for or effort to keep influence. Nor can we overlook another countries of the region specified as the Russian Federation, India, the Republic of Korea, Japan or Australia, which besides have their own ambitions and pretend to play an increasingly crucial role. If we look at the map, the Solomon Islands and Papua fresh Guinea remind us of 2 towers on our chess board, which, given their strategical location and their resources, are desirable partners. In 2023, Biden's administration decided to strengthen their relations by signing a series of agreements with PNG, including a defence cooperation agreement to combat illegal global maritime activities.
Beijing, on the another hand, expands its presence through economical influences. It should be stressed that Papua fresh Guinea has immense unused mineral resources specified as copper, oil, gas, gold, etc. As a result, China has already surpassed Australia in its investments. The next step may be to force the government in Port Moresby to break off economical cooperation with Taiwan, which has maintained its active commercial office since 1980 in the capital of Papua fresh Guinea. This was the case for the Solomon Islands. Under the influence of Chinese economical investments in 2019, they broke diplomatic relations with Taiwan to recognise the People's Republic of China. Then, 3 years later, they signed a safety pact with Beijing, which faced US disapproval. There are many indications that China yet wants to have its own model of having a chain of military bases in the region, as do the Americans. The difference is that Asia and the Pacific are expected to be a natural Chinese sphere of influence. If Washington wants to keep a leadership function in the region, he needs to get more active due to the fact that time is playing against the US.
What function can countries like Australia and fresh Zealand play in the region? Will they be able to set an independent course, will they stay in a strict alliance with the US despite ideological differences, or will they be dominated economically by China?
There is no uncertainty that the Asia-Pacific region will be a precedence for the Trump administration, especially in the context of the simplification of Chinese influence. Of course, the People's Republic of China can effort to influence the attitudes of any countries economically, but it should be remembered that the main pillar of relations between the US and Australia and fresh Zealand is the 1951 Treaty on Defence and safety Cooperation. In this respect, strong formal cooperation structures between the US and Australia covering abroad policy, defence and security, intelligence, development, energy, environment, but besides education, law, trade and investment are a fact. Nor is fresh Zealand, with which the US has strong political, economical and social ties. This is confirmed by the 2010 Wellington Declaration and the 2024 Joint Declaration adopted as Biden. Consequently, Australia and fresh Zealand will play an crucial function in US abroad policy. The fundamental question is how this cooperation will proceed and what strategy the current administration will apply to Australia and fresh Zealand. Taking into account Trump's fresh statements on minerals and uncommon earth metals to Ukraine, it is expected that the American-Australian partnership on critical minerals and supply chain safety on the Washington-Sydney-Wellington line will be deepened.
Can overseas properties of abroad powers located in the region (mainly French fresh Caledonia and American Guam) become an inflame of the future geopolitical confrontation in the region?
During planet War II, Pacific fleet commander Admiral Chester Nimitz wrote that “our current sea control is so absolute that it is sometimes taken for granted.” Both French fresh Caledonia and Guam Island are strategically crucial to Washington. During planet War II, the capital of fresh Caledonia – Numea was not only the most crucial port of transhipment for supplies of the American Navy in Pacific waters, but besides the main naval base in the region. It was from here that the American warships set out to the Solomon Islands to end the nipponese business of the islands. In this optics, it is no different with Guam Island, which besides turned out to be a supply point, first for the Japanese, then for the Americans.
Admiral Nimitz, mentioned by me, moved the office to Guam for a reason. The strategical location of the island allowed him to run the fleet more efficiently and plan further actions against Japan. Guam is presently a key strategical point for the projection of the U.S. naval and aviation forces in the region. The islands specified as Okinawa, Iwo Jima, where the Americans are besides stationed, service as proverbial sea carriers for the American war machine. No uncertainty the dream script for the People's Republic of China would be the 1 in which American forces simply do not be here. However, allied commitments, including maintaining a powerful function in this part of the world, make the US not so easy to retreat from the Pacific. Depending on the level of competition on the Washington-Pekin line, the overseas estates of Western states, and especially the US, can become an incendiary point, especially as Communist China perceives the American presence as a "sword hanging above the border".
How should the designation by the island countries of the region (sometimes after respective changes in position) of the PRC or the Republic of China in Taiwan be interpreted as legitimate authorities of any China? This is simply a manifestation of the pragmatic approach of local leaders or the force of 2 Pacific powers (PRC and US), limiting the sovereignty of local states?
The People's Republic of China considers Taiwan to be a separatist state which must return to mainland China's control. Taiwan, on the another hand, does not officially recognise the People's Republic and its constitution continues to guarantee full sovereignty over mainland China. Consequently, common relations on the Beijing-Taipei line are translated into island countries of the Asia-Pacific region. Today, only 12 countries in the planet have full diplomatic relations with Taiwan, including any Pacific countries specified as Palau, Tuvalu and Marshall Islands. It is no secret that the alleged ‘one China’ rule is enforced in countries where Beijing engages economically, e.g. the previously mentioned case of the 2019 Solomon Islands and another island country in the Pacific – Nauru, which not long ago, as in 2024 it stated that it no longer recognises Taiwan ‘as a separate state’.
Insular countries of Asia and the Pacific are eager to usage the economical umbrella of the People's Republic of China. If we look more closely, the balance between Beijing and Taipei has been very beneficial for many of them. However, in the end, it is Communist China that has a greater advantage and possible for impact in the region. As a result, the pressures of the PRC will increase each year and with it the force on another countries remaining in diplomatic relations with Taiwan. The U.S. does not seem to have adequate force to encourage local leaders to maintain, much little renew diplomatic relations with Taipei. In addition, it is hard to measure how the Trump administration will behave. There are voices among Republicans to abandon the "one China" policy at all and recognise "free" Taiwan. A clear confirmation of this is the last motion for a resolution of February this year, which included a provision on the designation of Taiwan as an independent state. But will Washington take specified a bold step? There is no uncertainty that the U.S. is facing a immense challenge, but whether, in the Taiwanese issue, they decide to cooperate with another countries of the region, e.g. allies, in order to guarantee the "island" of security, or whether Trump will approach this purely by transactional means, we do not yet know. The US will surely want to usage its alliances in this region to defend its interests. Thus the dispute over Taiwan and its future will enter a fresh level of rivalry of powers.
Oskar Kmak spoke
