In his Washington Post op-ed about the relationship between the United States and the countries of the Indo-Pacific region, Vice President Mike Pence opens with a succinct statement of American interest:
We seek an Indo-Pacific — from the United States to India, from Japan to Australia, and everywhere in between — where sovereignty is respected, where commerce flows unhindered and where independent nations are masters of their own destinies. This region, which includes more than half of Earth’s surface and population, has experienced great progress when these principles have been respected. While some nations now seek to undermine this foundation, the United States is taking decisive action to protect our interests and promote the Indo-Pacific’s shared success.
Our Indo-Pacific strategy rests on three broad pillars. It begins with prosperity. A full two-thirds of global trade traverses the seas, skies, roads and railways of the Indo-Pacific. U.S. trade in the region is worth more than $1.8 trillion annually, supporting more than 3.3 million U.S. jobs, and our total regional investment in the Indo-Pacific is nearly $1 trillion — more than China, Japan and South Korea’s investment combined.
and concludes
The United States seeks collaboration, not control. The president announced our renewed commitment to the region one year ago; this week, it will be my privilege to demonstrate our resolve with further action and investment. Our nation’s security and prosperity depend on this vital region, and the United States will continue to ensure that all nations, large and small, can thrive and prosper in a free and open Indo-Pacific.
I wish he had a better understanding of the U. S. interest which is somewhat broader than that. It is not merely in maintaining the free passage of trade but, in the 21st century, the free passage of information as well. Not only our prosperity but that of all of the countries of the Indo-Pacific region, including China, depends on it.
As a supplemental question, is Google’s facilitation of The Great Firewall of China consistent with American interest? I think the answer is obviously not. Why do we tolerate Google’s engaging in foreign policy antithetical to U. S. policy?
Respect for another nation’s sovereignty generally means hands off their internal affairs. My worry here is Google/Alphabet would market a similar internal surveillance package for use against American citizens by either the G or well heeled private orgs. Yet how to stop that is a maze of twisty passages.