With Congress embroiled in a budget impasse, US President Barack Obama scrapped plans to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting and the East Asia Summit.
Not only did this hasty diplomatic retreat undermine US influence and standing in the region, but it seemed to confirm suspicions that the Obama administration's signature 'pivot' to Asia lacks substance.
However, with the unfolding humanitarian catastrophe in Syria revealing confused and conflicted US priorities, Obama's foreign policy agenda was compromised long before his abortive trip to Asia.
The United States said that the use of chemical weapons was a 'red line' and admonished Bashar al-Assad's regime with the threat of punitive military strikes.
Despite repeated chemical weapons attacks and crimes against humanity, Washington has inflicted little more than verbal sanctions on Damascus.
The Obama administration certainly wants Assad out of power, but not if that means giving a leg up to the growing jihadist element of the uprising. And while the Syrian opposition is radicalising as international militants join the war, siding with the dictator in Damascus is inconceivable for the White House and Congress.
This devil's choice of an anti-democratic military strongman or an increasingly illiberal and internally divided opposition has left US foreign policy flat-footed.
By contrast, America's rivals and enemies have been consistent and determined on Syria.
Moscow has steadfastly backed the Assad regime with diplomatic lobbying and shipments of weaponry, thereby safeguarding a market for Russian arms and its naval base on the Mediterranean coast at Tartus.
Tehran and Hezbollah have also aided Damascus with foreign fighters and financial assistance in a bid to secure the Shia alliance between Iran, Syria and Lebanon.
Beijing's shrewd Syria policy is paying dividends as well: By throwing its weight behind Russian vetoes of United Nations Security Council resolutions aimed at taking action on Syria, China has helped discredit the international community's commitment to humanitarian interventions when countries fail to fulfil the 'responsibility to protect' their citizens.
Meanwhile, the Qataris and Saudis have bolstered the cause of Sunni Islamism in the Middle East by mobilising their fiscal largesse and military hardware in support of the rebels' fight against Assad's majority Shia regime.
The Syrian civil war puts the disastrous costs of US foreign policy vacillation into sharp relief: Beset by a lack of clarity and conviction, Washington has effectively left Syria to become a theatre for the power plays and proxy wars of the world's authoritarian regimes.
As well as a blow to the rules-based international order and US power and prestige, this vacuum of American leadership promises to add to the death toll of a war that has already taken the lives of more than 115,000 Syrians.
Benjamin Herscovitch is a Beijing-based Policy Analyst at The Centre for Independent Studies.
Home > Commentary > Opinion > Obama’s Asian about-face masks foreign policy failure
Obama’s Asian about-face masks foreign policy failure
Not only did this hasty diplomatic retreat undermine US influence and standing in the region, but it seemed to confirm suspicions that the Obama administration's signature 'pivot' to Asia lacks substance.
However, with the unfolding humanitarian catastrophe in Syria revealing confused and conflicted US priorities, Obama's foreign policy agenda was compromised long before his abortive trip to Asia.
The United States said that the use of chemical weapons was a 'red line' and admonished Bashar al-Assad's regime with the threat of punitive military strikes.
Despite repeated chemical weapons attacks and crimes against humanity, Washington has inflicted little more than verbal sanctions on Damascus.
The Obama administration certainly wants Assad out of power, but not if that means giving a leg up to the growing jihadist element of the uprising. And while the Syrian opposition is radicalising as international militants join the war, siding with the dictator in Damascus is inconceivable for the White House and Congress.
This devil's choice of an anti-democratic military strongman or an increasingly illiberal and internally divided opposition has left US foreign policy flat-footed.
By contrast, America's rivals and enemies have been consistent and determined on Syria.
Moscow has steadfastly backed the Assad regime with diplomatic lobbying and shipments of weaponry, thereby safeguarding a market for Russian arms and its naval base on the Mediterranean coast at Tartus.
Tehran and Hezbollah have also aided Damascus with foreign fighters and financial assistance in a bid to secure the Shia alliance between Iran, Syria and Lebanon.
Beijing's shrewd Syria policy is paying dividends as well: By throwing its weight behind Russian vetoes of United Nations Security Council resolutions aimed at taking action on Syria, China has helped discredit the international community's commitment to humanitarian interventions when countries fail to fulfil the 'responsibility to protect' their citizens.
Meanwhile, the Qataris and Saudis have bolstered the cause of Sunni Islamism in the Middle East by mobilising their fiscal largesse and military hardware in support of the rebels' fight against Assad's majority Shia regime.
The Syrian civil war puts the disastrous costs of US foreign policy vacillation into sharp relief: Beset by a lack of clarity and conviction, Washington has effectively left Syria to become a theatre for the power plays and proxy wars of the world's authoritarian regimes.
As well as a blow to the rules-based international order and US power and prestige, this vacuum of American leadership promises to add to the death toll of a war that has already taken the lives of more than 115,000 Syrians.
Benjamin Herscovitch is a Beijing-based Policy Analyst at The Centre for Independent Studies.
• Subscribe
Subscribe now and stay in the loop with our giving appeals, event alerts, newsletters and research updates.
We are always pleased to hear from you. If you have any questions or feedback, please contact us here: