After the 'pivot', clarity of US policy towards Asia remains elusive

FORMER US president Barack Obama's so-called "pivot" to Asia was an admission on the part of US policymakers that they were too preoccupied, and for too long, with responding to the security threats facing the United States' Atlantic alliance and, in particular, to the crises engulfing the Middle East.

The Obama administration's "pivot" or "rebalancing" to Asia was supposed to mark a change in US strategic and economic alignments. After years of fighting wars in the Middle East, Washington would shift its attention to the military and economic challenges it was facing in East Asia, including a more assertive China.

In reality, the "pivot" didn't amount to a dramatic transformation of American foreign policy. The Obama administration did strengthen US military presence in Asia while highlighting its growing trade and investment engagement there. But the continuing instability in the Middle East and the security threats emanating from there - including Iran's nuclear military programme, the civil war in Syria, the rise of the Islamic State and more terrorist acts inspired by radical Islamist groups - forced the Obama administration to continue shifting diplomatic and military resources to that part of the world. At the same time, a more self-confident Russia under President Vladimir Putin was defying Western interests in Eastern Europe and is seen now by many in Washington as threat to American interests and values following the allegations that the Russians interfered in last year's presidential election campaign.