By Zaldy Dandan – Variety Editor
“[T]he more fully one understands something, the more complex it becomes. The more we see gray. The more we appreciate uncertainty.” — Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenthal, “The Elements of Journalism” (4th edition)
ROBERT A. Underwood chairs the Pacific Center for Island Security, a Guam-based think tank that aims, among other things, to provide “independent analysis of the foreign policy and military-strategic activities and interplay between and amongst the actors in the strategic competition in the Asia-Pacific.” Its advisory council includes the former presidents of the FSM, Palau, and Kiribati, as well as a former CNMI governor (Juan N. Babauta) and a professor of Pacific Islands Studies at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa.
Underwood served as Guam’s delegate to the U.S. Congress from 1993 to 2003 and sat on the U.S. House Armed Services Committee. A former classroom teacher and education board member, he was also president of the University of Guam from 2008 to 2018.
Last week, he was the guest speaker (via Zoom) for the CNMI Society of Professional Journalists. Agree or disagree with him, he knows what he’s talking about — especially when it comes to current military activities in the region. Listening to him, I realized he is the first public figure I’ve heard explain geopolitics without even mentioning the word.
“Most of the time,” he said, “I think, those of us, particularly in Guam and to some extent in the Northern Marianas and even in the Compact states — we’re sort of resigned to these military initiatives as if we had no role, as if we had no capacity to challenge or redirect or re-engineer the activities that are ongoing.”
He said there is a need to “analyze what is the real threat.” All military strategy, he added, “begins with threat assessment. So we have to kind of engage in threat assessment on our own and not simply accept somebody else’s view of threat assessment because their perspective obviously…may be…different….”
In the Marianas, he said, “the basic, understanding of [the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command] and how they have presented the threat in this part of the world is that China may have the opportunity to invade Taiwan. And militarily, they’re preparing for that invasion of Taiwan. And…the time period for invasion starts in 2026, [or] next year, and will go on for two or three years after that. And in order to be able to prevent that eventuality, the U.S. has to insert itself into this part of the world and prepare to engage China in case of an invasion of Taiwan.”
In this scenario, Guam’s involvement is inevitable because the island “has the largest weapons capacity in the Pacific. Guam has the largest fuel capacity. Guam’s capacity… to project power into Asian battle spaces is enormous. So…they have to develop [an] integrated air missile defense system and at the same time prepare to divert the resources that are actually in Guam, because if there was really all out war between China and the United States, Guam would be decimated. So Guam would lose that capacity to respond. So they need to then put their assets in Tinian or…Palau in order to further that conflict. [But]…is that really a viable threat? Is China actually going to invade Taiwan?”
Underwood noted that the United States “doesn’t have a treaty with Taiwan…. There is no treaty to defend Taiwan. And so in order to be able to do that, you have to kind of…convince China not to invade Taiwan so that the American response to that…is to beef up militarily in order to dissuade that possibility.”
China and the U.S. are near peers, and “it’s becoming…more and more a peer-to-peer competition. And that competition is in economics. It’s in business. It’s in trade. It’s in diplomatic initiatives. It’s in humanitarian aid. And it’s also military competition. The U.S. response is almost entirely military. It’s not really engaging in competition with China and all those other areas…. The only way that we’re going to get to compete with China is to kind of puff up our military activity, to kind of dissuade them from acting militarily,” Underwood said.
“But in the meantime, [China is] eating America’s lunch and trade. They’re eating America’s lunch in diplomacy…in foreign aid…. China is now a bigger contributor to the United Nations than the United States. So what does that look like in 10 years or 20 years?”
The “environment that we’re living in is changing. And how do we prepare to deal with that as islanders, other than just being used as a defense shield or as…a place from which to project offensive military power into a conflict between Taiwan and China that may or may not ever happen?”
That is the question.
“[A]re there other diplomatic initiatives?” Underwood further asked. “Is there a shared responsibility by the Philippines, by South Korea, by Singapore, by Japan in this arena in order to be able to dissuade [China] — if in fact China is preparing to invade Taiwan or take it by force? [S]o the question for us in the islands is how do we fit into that? [T]here’s like all kinds of possible ways to fit into that. But the [role] that is outlined for the island is simply to be a target or a place from which to project offensive power into a potential Taiwan-China conflict.”
He said islanders should “stop thinking about just their island group because, you know, … the Defense Department doesn’t think of the Marianas as being separate from what they’re doing in Guam or what they’re doing in Palau, or what they’re doing in the FSM, or their whole planning for what to do in the eventuality of a conflict.”
He wants the islands to think about their “long-term economic future and what are the bases for that economic future. Do you need more assistance in tourism? Do you need more latitude in investments? Do you need more latitude in terms of dealing with manufacturing possibilities in any of these islands? And do you need more air service? And what is the U.S. role in providing or facilitating those things? If the U.S. has a role in facilitating those things, and the U.S. wants you to do this [military projects], but they don’t want you to discuss the other things, then I think we’re missing out on an opportunity to bargain and engage.”
Underwood also noted what military investments actually mean.
“[For the] military buildup on Guam, they’re estimating or they’re saying they’re going to spend 14 billion…. Well, the reality in Guam is [that] they’re not really going to spend that money in Guam. They’re going to spend that [on] large scale contractors who are developing these missile systems somewhere else. You know, Lockheed Martin, other big companies. And they’re counting all the money that they spend on people who are on the payroll in uniform and people who are contractors, people in civil service. So at the end of the day, this is not really the economic boom that you think it might be.” Meanwhile, “we’re not thinking about something larger than that…. [W]hat is it that is keeping the island from developing…a firm economic base…upon which their society can plan fully for the future?”
He said the military is thinking strategically, and “if you’re…thinking tactically only in terms of the actual money that may be spent in your island, then you’re not really going to find out [the] benefit because [they] could change their mind three years from now…”
He added, “The whole strategic picture may change. They may do another threat analysis…. [T]his is a big if, but a lot of people feel that this is what’s coming down — that national defense strategy might decide all of a sudden, well, the Western Hemisphere is our area of most concern. And…if they say that, [then]…our role is reduced.”
As for China, Underwood believes that it is “a bad actor in many respects. But the question that we’re asking is that if China is a bad actor and the U.S. is trying to restrain them…is it restraining them in an effective way or is it ceding the field? I have to say that the U.S. is really missing the boat on how to deal with the Pacific Islands.”
Clearly, he said, this is a complicated issue. “So our effort is to try to get people to understand that they are empowered to say something and do something. And you can only be empowered if you have information and if you have alternative ways of explaining your reality. And that’s the basic message.”
Hear, hear.
Send feedback to editor@mvariety.com
Zaldy Dandan is the recipient of the NMI Society of Professional Journalists’ Best in Editorial Writing Award and the NMI Humanities Award for Outstanding Contributions to Journalism. His four books are available on amazon.com/.
