The trip by five countries of the president ofthe United States, Donald Trump has been identified as the longest trip by Asiaof an American president in decades. Between its scales, which include Japan,South Korea, China, Vietnam and the Philippines, both Allied States and rivalsof the North American power have been chosen and, most of them, with a certainstrategic value for the United States in economic matters but , mainly,security. To this we must add the APEC meeting, which will also be attended byleaders from other States of the region and even the President of Russia, withwhom President Trump reiterated the convenience of maintaining good relationsand that of ASEAN, two of the forums economic and political interests in theregion. A priori, this trip could lead to highlightthe importance of the Asia-Pacific region, renamed this trip as Indo-Pacificregion, for the foreign policy of the United States. This end is not easy torefute.
Since the presidency of his predecessor, Barack Obama, the Asia-Pacificregion was considered one of the key strategic scenarios for US foreign policy.Key issues such as the growth of China as a potential rival for regionalhegemony, the territorial conflicts in the South and East China seas, thegrowing challenges to the regional security of powers such as North Korea andthe growing economic and commercial importance of the region, they caused thatthis one was considered of priority interest for the American foreign policy indifferent speeches and strategic documents. Strategies such as the famous Pivotor Turn to the Pacific, defended by decision makers of the Administration andsupported by leaders such as President Obama himself, self-proclaimed”first US president of the Pacific”, Secretary of State HillaryClinton, National Security Adviser Tom Donilon or the Assistant Secretary ofState for East Asia and the Pacific Kurt Campbell, were justified in theseterms. This strategy aimed to increase the presence of the United States in theregion in order to face these regional challenges.