With the U.S. adding little to the equation, their effort is proving to be enough—just enough for the moment—to counter balance China’s aggressiveness.

In terms of what effort the U.S. is adding, what little there is is coming thanks to the U.S. military. Specifically, it includes the U.S. Navy and Air Force’s stepped up efforts to maintain freedom of navigation and freedom of over-flight throughout the South China Sea, as well as the U.S. Marine and Army’s efforts to hold joint drills with many of these countries.

This latter effort, while minor in nature, has been most effective in making it clear to China that these countries, on their own and as a combined force, are willing and able to stand up to China, and if needed assault and take possession of those islands off of their coast that they claim sovereignty over. As a collective response, these efforts are sending a clear message to China that the countries she is toying with are prepared to reinforce the rule of law in the South China Sea area… both individually, jointly, and if America ever gets its act together, with the U.S. as a partner too. 

In terms of whether all of this will accomplish anything or not, it should be remembered that the concept of “balancing,” as a strategic tactic used as a means to resolve international differences, has been around for thousands of years. In many conflicts states have banded together to counteract the capabilities or threats of a prospective adversary, and it has worked. Scholars say that balancing is not only a natural outcome of the emergence of international threats, but that it works well… even, as in the case in South East Asia, where the countries banding together have past differences that still fester. In these cases, the new threat posed by the new aggressor provides enough incentive for them to put aside their prior disagreements and join together to face the rising challenger.

Thus we see Korea and Japan coming together and, at least for the moment, burying the hatchet they have been wielding against each other since Japan took over Korea in 1910 and ruled it until it lost the war in 1945. The same with Vietnam and the U.S. 

Vietnam recognizes that while it is a naturally aggressive, pugnacious little spitfire of a country, ready to go to war with anyone that toys with it, when it comes to facing China it needs the might of the U.S. military behind it if it is to succeed. So then, our old enemy of the 60s and 70s has reached out to us—and we have welcomed and even embraced them— to patch up those remaining sore spots that exist from the old Vietnam War, so that we can work together against a new, emerging common enemy. It’s interesting: the enemy of my former enemy is now my own enemy. 

As for China, it has been caught off guard by all of this.

On one side, it saw an advantage in stepping forward to quickly take forceful action to seize control over the nine line segment of the South China Sea, while U.S. leadership was out to lunch for the past 8 years.

From their perspective, having watched President Obama draw a “red line” with Bashar al-Assad and then do nothing about it when he stepped over it; overturn one of America’s fundamental foreign policy planks—solidarity with Israel; turn his back on those in the middle east who asked for America’s help during the Arab spring, but got nothing in return; tuck America’s tail between its legs and abandon Iraq long before the country was able to stand on its own two feet, thus enabling the birth of ISIS; give in to the Mullahs of Iran by granting them both the right and the money to surreptitiously develop nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles to deliver those weapons to America's shores, and on, and on… it is no wonder they thought they could act with impunity. All they did was follow Putin's play book… and it almost paid off.

What they didn’t expect however was that Obama’s temerity to act­—or, if you prefer:

•   His failed command or lack of stewardship; or even

•   His determination to redistribute global power by taking it from America and giving to the rest of the world (aka Obama's “redistributionist vision” or Obama’s “hope and change” foreign policy,

would cause the countries of South East Asia to come together to act on their own.

But they did, and that coming together has produced some interesting diplomatic payoffs, of a kind that would have been hard to imagine several years ago, when China began to show its heavy hand in the South China Sea.

Among the recent events to occur has been the expression by ASEAN of its grave concern over China’s island building, and the threat these actions have on the world’s freedom to navigate and fly over this area. While little more than a unified statement, and therefore seemingly not much on the surface, the fact that ASEAN is speaking with a unified voice is impressive in itself, never mind that it is speaking out against China.

Until now ASEAN as an organization would never have risked using language that might alienate China. America’s lack of leadership on this issue then has caused the countries of ASEAN to act in unison, to stand up to China, even though many of ASEAN’s members retain not just close but necessary economic and political ties to China.

One can see this too in yet another coming together: Japan and the Philippines recently signed a joint defense agreement. This unprecedented defense plan gives to the militarily backward Philippines the awesome strength of Japan’s own military might. Make no mistake, Japan is no nation to toy with when it comes to warfare, and its commitment to come to the defense of the Philippines, despite its supposed pacifist constitution, is a major step forward... one forced by the aggressive actions of China.

What benefit is all of this you ask, if China continues to act with impunity? The answer is that this coming together of the nations most threatened by the nine line segment shows that these countries are no longer fearful of Beijing.

That is an impressive outcome, one that has caught Beijing flatfooted. Where the Communist Party leaders were convinced that they could out-step Obama on the global stage—as Putin too believes—they never thought that in the process their actions would unify those tiny, insignificant little countries they intended to bully into submission.

But the game isn’t over yet.

China is no pushover when it comes to backing down, and so if the new coming together of these countries is going to accomplish anything other than to make China perk up its ears and take notice, the U.S. must once again join in the game. Specifically it must begin now to build on the few things it has done to support this new partnership in South East Asia.

So far what the U.S. has done has been minimal… after all, the U.S. military budget has been slashed beyond recognition and little can be done if there is no money to pay for it. Still, thankfully, the men in the Pentagon have found a way to respond positively to Singapore’s request to host four U.S. combat ships and a surveillance aircraft on its territory.  Similarly, they have set aside funds to support a request by Australia to rotate marine detachments through Darwin, ostensibly for local training, but in reality as a means to gain a permanent footprint in this most essential of all staging areas in South East Asia.

In the Philippines too, things have changed. In response to a mostly Philippines request the DoD has approved an Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement. This agreement will allow the U.S. military to once again have permanent access to bases in the Philippines. This time, at a minimum, five bases that abut the South China Sea.

The question is, is this enough? And the obvious answer is no.

First, the Chinese know that Obama is a lame duck. Their task is to complete enough of their work to be able to declare an ADIZ before he leaves office. If they can do that, then they will win the first step. Whether they win the second step or not will depend on who America elects as its next President.

If it is Clinton, then likely as not the ADIZ will stand. Hilary will not go to war over an ADIZ.

The same might be said for Bernie Sanders, after all, he would rather replicate China's form of socialist government and economy than fight it. Back in the 60s when this author was in Vietnam fighting, a guy like Sanders would have been called a "fellow traveler," a communist and socialist sympathizer. So despised were fellow travelers by our government that they couldn't pass a security clearance background check, because of their belief in socialism and communism. Someone like Sanders could never have gotten into OCS. Today, however, he may be our next President. My, how times have changed.

But what of Trump or Cruz. Our bet is that Cruz would spout off and throw invectives around, but do nothing. The ADIZ would stand.

Trump, on the other hand, is an unknown. He might actually—using his keen sense of business—find a way to make it so painful for the Chinese to continue with their game that they would back away from it, perhaps claiming that they are doing so as a goodwill gesture to the new American President, and/or their neighbors in South East Asia.

Why would China do this? Because Trump, more so than the others who are running for President, knows how to cause economic costs for China, costs so high that China would decide to bend rather than break. Specifically, Trump would be able to generate economic pain for China in places other than the South China Sea, enough pain so that the Chinese would decide that it is better for them to give up on their adventurism than to continue to suffer the economic consequences a person like Trump could saddle them with... economic grief of a type that could even lead to the people of China overthrowing the Communist party rather than continuing to see their economically improving life brought back to the starvation level existence it was at in the 1970s.

By simply deciding that China’s assertiveness should be met with economic and political costs outside of the South China Sea area, and moving quickly and determinedly to create those costs, and letting China know that until it backs away from its claims to the South China Sea those costs will continue to mount, a leader like Trump could succeed where the other Presidential candidates would likely fail.

The simple truth is, the United States and China have a deep and multifaceted relationship, including on important security issues. If the U.S. has the stomach to challenge China on these issues, forcing China to either cooperate with the U.S. or feel the pain, it can gain leverage over China’s actions in places like the South China Sea. Many, many areas exist in which pressure of this type can be brought to bear, from the cancellation of high-level visits and invitations to military exercises to the turning away of Chinese tourists, cancellation of student visas, as well as the attacking of other symbols of China’s power status, something that is highly valued in Beijing and goes to the heart of both the Chinese government and its people being able to "save face.".

As an example of how effective economic pressure can be applied, a U.S. president with both the backbone and business savvy to know how to win a negotiation by threatening economic hardship for his opponent would be able to make quick work of a country like China. In China's case the mere threat of the leveling of import-export restrictions on the export to America of their goods, the raising of taxes on every aspect of how they deal with America from the most simple application fee for a visa to the price of data exchanged through the San Francisco to Beijing internet servers, not to mention tariff and custom fee increases across the board, would destroy the foundation of China's national economy. And for those who say such a move will hurt America as much as China, this is simply not the case.

China disproportionally depends on its exports to create a stable economy, one that employs its 1.3 billion people. By playing with tariffs alone the U.S. could easily upset China’s economy, as their exports are the source of over 45 percent of their inbound foreign trade (currency)… a commodity that China desperately needs in order to support its declining economy.

The United States thus has the upper hand in any trade war involving the cessation of trade with China. However, the U.S. also has the upper hand when it comes to the cost of outlasting such a trade war. This is so because as an export based economy China is prone to the extra costs of trying to keep that economy going, by importing the raw materials it needs to make the products it exports. That is, because of the economic geography China finds itself stuck with, it has an extremely limited capacity to sustain its own economy if it does not export. This is because China is effectively an island nation, hemmed in by unfavorable maritime terrain… terrain that the U.S can exploit. In fact, China's recognition of this is one of the reasons she wants to control the South China Sea.

Thus, a U.S. president intent on using economic actions—not sanctions, but actions—as a quick and easy means for forcing China to stop the exploitation of its neighbors, could easily do so. This is especially so since, within China’s part of the world, with neighbors like Vietnam, the Philippines, Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and the others already angry at her, she could not depend on them to come to her aid.

Further to all of this, while China may appear as a superpower militarily, within the greater economic world China is a weakling (see video above). This is already evident. Its renminbi has crashed, its stock market acts like a yo-yo, its government is corrupt (then again, so is most of ours...) and the country’s post Deng Xiao Ping model for economic growth is proving to be both elusive and hard to control.

All of this can be used against China, and a well grounded U.S. businessman with a backbone would know how to do it.

As to what all of this means for resolving the increasingly dangerous situation developing in the South China Sea, while at this stage we would say that China has won one point in this tennis game, its neighbors have evened the score by coming together to stand up to it. In tennis that would make this game "15 All."

The asking by the Philippines, Vietnam, Singapore and Australia for the U.S. to increase its military involvement in those countries, and the Pentagon's agreeing to do so, has racked up one more point for the side of the good guys. So too has the new joint defense agreement between Japan and the Philippines, it has brought one more point to their side. That makes the score 40–15, in our favor, with every point having been won because of the actions of the countries China is trying to subjugate.

But if the game is to be won, it’s up the U.S. to take the next step. And this it must do by a) reinforcing its commitment to the region by increasing that portion of the U.S. military’s budget needed to broaden the relationships it has in South East Asia, thus showing China that the U.S. not only stands by its allies but is willing to put its money where its mouth is, and more importantly, b) by electing a President who understands how to use economic power to pressure an adversary to quickly change their ways or die—as is done every minute of every day in business.

Specifically, in business the goal is not to put your opponent out of business, it is to make him act in a way that furthers your own business' growth and profitability. If in the process your opponent is able to grow and prosper too, then all well and good... in fact, help him if you can, because in the end it will be good for you too. But if he is fixated on himself to the point that he is hurting your business and refuses to change, then squeeze him until he either changes or goes out of business. After all, it's not personal, it's only business.

For the moment then the game sits at 40-15. If China announces an ADIZ before Obama leaves office, it will be 40-30. Who scores the next point will depend on who America elects to be President.

Vote wisely.