For more than 50 years, countries around the world have looked to the United States for international leadership. Most Asian governments welcome a U.S. presence in the region to help preserve security and stability. They know that an American presence does not mean an occupying force since, if asked, the United States leaves. These countries are reassured by a more or less continuous presence of U.S. forces in a way that the temporary passage or intervention of expeditionary forces will not accomplish. The credibility and deterrent effect of a soldier (sailor, airman, or marine) on the ground represents commitment and stability. Face-to-face contact and "boots on the ground" are the only ways to defeat the "tyranny of distance" and really effect events on land in support of U.S. interests. The nexus of vital U.S. interests in Asia is in Northeast Asia because of the presence of five traditionally warring powers there: North and South Korea, Japan, Russia, and China.

As the U.S. military presence in the Middle East winds down, Asia and the Pacific are receiving increased attention from the American national security community. The Obama administration has announced a “rebalancing” of the U.S. military posture in the region, in reaction primarily to the startling improvement in Chinese air and naval capabilities over the last decade or so. This timely study sets out to assess the implications of this shift for the long-established U.S. military presence in Asia and the Pacific. This presence is anchored in a complex basing infrastructure that scholars—and Americans generally—too often take for granted. In remedying this state of affairs, this volume offers a detailed survey and analysis of this infrastructure, its history, the political complications it has frequently given rise to, and its recent and likely future evolution. American seapower requires a robust constellation of bases to support global power projection. Given the rise of China and the emergence of the Asia-Pacific as the center of global economic growth and strategic contention, nowhere is American basing access more important than in this region. Yet manifold political and military challenges, stemming not least of which from rapidly-improving Chinese long-range precision strike capabilities, complicate the future of American access and security here. This book addresses what will be needed to maintain the fundaments of U.S. seapower and force projection in the Asia-Pacific, and where the key trend lines are headed in that regard. This book demonstrates that U.S. Asia-Pacific basing and access is increasingly vital, yet increasingly vulnerable. It demands far more attention than the limited coverage it has received to date, and cannot be taken for granted. More must be done to preserve capabilities and access upon which American and allied security and prosperity depend.

U.S. military forces stationed abroad play vital roles. This study offers eight options that can be used to help guide thinking and planning for the coming era of change.

The role of the United States and its global military presence are under debate in the face of changing strategic and economic realities. The authors present a menu of global postures and compare them in terms of the U.S. Air Force bases, combat forces, active-duty personnel, and base operating costs. Ultimately, the choice will depend on perspectives on the role overseas military presence can play in achieving U.S. global security interests.

Since the end of World War II, protests against U.S. military base and related policies have occurred in several Asian host countries. How much influence have these protests had on the p;olicy regarding U.S. military bases? What conditions make protests more likely to influence policy? Protests Against U.S. Military Base Policy in Asia answers these questions by examining state response to twelve major protests in Asia since the end of World War II—in the Philippines, Okinawa, and South Korea. Yuko Kawato lays out the conditions under which protesters' normative arguments can and cannot persuade policy-makers to change base policy, and how protests can still generate some political or military incentives for policy-makers to adjust policy when persuasion fails. Kawato also shows that when policy-makers decide not to change policy, they can offer symbolic concessions to appear norm-abiding and to secure a smoother implementation of policies that protesters oppose. While the findings will be of considerable interest to academics and students, perhaps their largest impact will be on policy makers and activists, for whom Kawato offers recommendations for their future decision-making and actions.