MILITARY TIES: U.S. soldiers cruise the Sulu Sea in the southern Philippines last year as a part of a series of joint U.S.-Filipino maneuvers XINHUA

On July 22 in Phuket, Thailand, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC) with representatives of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) participating in the 16th annual ASEAN Regional Forum.

Clinton also projected cooperation between the United States and countries in the lower Mekong region, saying Washington will name a permanent ambassador to the ASEAN Secretariat in the near future. U.S. President Barack Obama has an agenda to visit Southeast Asian countries, including Malaysia and Indonesia, in November while attending the informal APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting to be held in Singapore, according to media reports.

Some observers now believe the United States is back in Southeast Asia to "reoccupy" a sphere of influence it had long since lost during George W. Bush's presidency. Such assertions have likely been influenced by Clinton's speech. She announced in Thailand that "the United States is back in Southeast Asia," and that "we are fully engaged with our ASEAN partners on a wide range of challenges."

Although the United States actually had never totally abandoned Southeast Asia, Clinton used the word "back" to illustrate a point. Not only was it intended to underscore the Bush administration's indifference toward the region, its use was a powerful signal about the future Washington intends to forge with Southeast Asia.

But it was not just Clinton's first appearance at ASEAN meetings that drew special attention. Instead, what the international community really cares about is why the United States is back in Southeast Asia and what it will do in the region—not to mention what role it will play.

Winds of change

Washington's Southeast Asia policy adjustment is based on considerations in various aspects.

Current U.S. policy seeks strong alliances with ASEAN and its member nations—a powerful departure from the Bush years. Many U.S. experts, for some time, have insisted the Bush Administration's apathy toward Southeast Asia allowed Washington to lose control and influence over the region.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, for example, was absent from two of the last three ASEAN Regional Forum meetings. Bush, meanwhile, even missed the U.S.-ASEAN Summit in 2007—the one that marked the 30th anniversary of their partnership—altogether.

On the eve of her Thailand visit, Clinton spoke at the Council on Foreign Relations, a Washington think tank. She said the United States had already begun to revitalize its relationship with its ASEAN allies. Moreover, the ASEAN Regional Forum, could prove, so far, one of the best opportunities for the Obama administration to do so.

Indeed, Washington has good motivation. China's rising influence in the region has also prompted the United States to strengthen bilateral ties with ASEAN member states. The Sino-ASEAN relationship has been fully developed in various aspects. Statistics show bilateral trade between Beijing and ASEAN member nations exceeded $230 billion in 2008 and that bilateral investment volume had reached about $60 billion by the end of that year. Meanwhile, the U.S.-ASEAN trade volume was $178 billion, and the United States had invested about $100 billion in the region.

The Heritage Foundation, another Washington think tank, recently held a seminar to discuss American leadership in Southeast Asia and challenges from China. Policy observers there consistently struck a pessimistic note saying China is expanding its influence, while the United States has become a passive player in the region.

By signing the TAC with ASEAN, the United States paved the way to join in the East Asia summit. As ASEAN requires, a summit member must be ASEAN's full dialogue partner that has signed the TAC, and maintains substantive political and economic relations with ASEAN.

For sure, the United States never wanted to be a bystander when it comes to East Asian integration. Rather, it hopes to be involved in the process, and to establish an East Asia Community or an Asia-Pacific Community—based on the current "10+6" framework (10 ASEAN members, plus China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand).

The United States had been hesitant about signing the TAC for many years. That's because TAC signatories need to abide by mutual agreements on respecting sovereignty, non-interference in each other's domestic affairs, and resolving disputes peacefully.

These promises, however, could restrict Washington's activities in the region, especially if it seeks military actions and new sanctions against North Korea and Myanmar.

Myanmar is an ASEAN member, while North Korea is a TAC signatory state. Thus after signing the TAC, Washington's policies on Myanmar and North Korea will likely be affected.

Washington's Southeast Asia policy, which helps the United States explore a wider market, could also benefit the U.S. economic recovery. East Asia has led the world in the rapidest economic growth, and may also be the region that is likely to overcome the economic crisis ahead of other parts of the world.

At the same time, many countries outside the region are now gravitating closer owing to economic considerations. To break away from the global economic downturn, Washington must heed East Asia. Besides, it doesn't cost the United States as much energy to recover its traditional relationship with Southeast Asian countries compared with other parts of the world.

In addition, the United States plans to conduct cooperation with lower Mekong countries. It has convened a foreign ministers' meeting with Cambodia, Thailand, Laos and Viet Nam and negotiated a new U.S.-Mekong cooperation framework. They have reportedly scheduled cooperation in environment protection, health care and education.

For instance, they will seek a partnership between management departments of Mekong and Mississippi River in central and south United States. Moreover, the two sides will endeavor to prevent and cure infectious diseases including HIV/AIDS, pursue various public-private partnerships and promote technological cooperation.

Overall, the U.S.-Mekong cooperation revolves around promoting development. But cooperation in the Greater Mekong region should not cover lower Mekong countries alone, but also nations along upper Mekong, such as Myanmar and China.