Expert warns of South China Sea volatility if US closes bases

2026-03-28 - 01:10

The USS Dewey, an American warship based in Japan, is used for patrols and exercises in the South China Sea. (Wikipedia pic) PETALING JAYA: Two experts have disagreed with a call for countries to reconsider hosting US military bases, warning the move could destabilise Southeast Asia and shift the balance of power in China’s favour. Maritime affairs expert Salawati Mat Basir said the US plays a key role in keeping China in check, preventing it from exerting its claim over various parts of the South China Sea. Beijing has long-running disputes with Malaysia, Vietnam and the Philippines, among others, arising from such claims. Salawati told FMT that US ships homeported in American bases in Japan and Korea conduct frequent patrols and joint military exercises in the South China Sea with allied countries. She described these US bases as the “cornerstone” of East Asia’s security architecture. Closing them would directly diminish the deterrent against China exerting its claim of sovereignty over nearly the entire South China Sea, she said. “The US always conducts freedom of navigation operations (in the South China Sea) where China has always maintained its territorial claim. “A scaled back US military footprint in East Asia would fundamentally alter the regional security landscape, likely accelerating a shift toward Chinese dominance and forcing Asean nations into difficult strategic choices. “The US remains a primary balance against China’s regional ambition,” Salawati, of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, told FMT. The USS Higgins, USS George Washington and USS Dewey are among American warships based in Japan that have been used for patrols and exercises in the South China Sea, often drawing protests from China. Last week, American economist and public policy analyst Jeffrey Sachs said there was no security benefit from hosting US bases, citing Tehran’s attacks on Gulf nations in response to strikes by the US and Israel on Iran. According to the International Peace Bureau, there were an estimated 1,247 foreign military bases worldwide as of last year, with the US maintaining 877. While the US does not have a permanent base in Southeast Asia, it maintains a military presence in a number of countries, including the Philippines, Singapore and, reportedly, Thailand. Malaysia does not host foreign military bases, but Australia maintains a permanent presence at the Royal Malaysian Air Force base in Butterworth under the Five Power Defence Arrangements. Wider impact on Southeast Asia International relations expert Liew Wui Chern said a reduced US presence in Southeast Asia risks allowing China to expand its influence, particularly in the maritime and economic domains. Certain nations could then adopt hedging strategies so as not to fully align with China, which could then put pressure on Asean to “choose a side” as Beijing’s influence grows, he said. “Asean’s long-standing approach of maintaining neutrality would become more difficult to sustain under heightened geopolitical competition, but it would still remain a viable strategic posture,” said Liew, of Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman. Salawati said the absence of the US as a balancing force could lead to certain nations becoming even more China-friendly to secure their country’s interests rather than forming counter-alliances, which she warned could wreck Asean’s cohesion. She also said a foreign power’s reduced military footprint in a region often meant decreased economic engagement. Military aggression in the Indo-Pacific Liew said the wider Indo-Pacific region faced the same risks from a major US withdrawal, with weakened deterrence against military aggression and increased risk of conflict with China. He said US forward bases play a key role in safeguarding the interests of nations like Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, all of which have complicated ties with China, while facilitating the exchange of defence technology and expertise. He said a diminished US military presence might be seen as Washington disengaging from the region—a perception some argue emboldened North Korea and contributed to the outbreak of the Korean War in the 1950s. “A minimal but credible footprint remains important. (If the US were to withdraw) countries like Japan, Australia and India would likely expand their defence roles and spending, but coordination gaps would remain. “This could lead to a looser balancing coalition rather than a tightly integrated alliance system,” said Liew.