logo
Are we about to see Trump pull the US Navy out of the western Pacific?

Are we about to see Trump pull the US Navy out of the western Pacific?

Telegraph24-04-2025

It didn't take Donald Trump and his cronies, including unelected billionaire Elon Musk, very long to begin dismantling US strategy and foreign policy that had endured for decades.
Within weeks of taking the oath of office, Trump ended lifesaving food and medical assistance in poor countries, cancelled asylum for Afghans who'd assisted US forces and proposed a 'peace plan' for Ukraine that amounts to unilateral surrender to Russian demands.
Equally absurdly, he threatened to invade and annex Canada and Panama.
In that chaotic, increasingly despotic context, it's tempting to read any proposal for US withdrawal from longstanding security arrangements as part of Trump's institutional destruction.
But one controversial take from Jonathan Panter, a Stanton nuclear security fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City and a 'conservatism and governing fellow' at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, actually makes cold hard sense. In an essay for War on the Rocks, Panter has forcefully argued for the US Navy to pull back from the western Pacific and reposition warships – currently forward-deployed to Japan and other friendly countries – closer to American shores.
'Naval forward presence – the practice of maintaining combat-credible naval forces worldwide to deter adversaries, reassure allies, respond to crises and perform constabulary functions for the global commons – has dominated US foreign policy since the 1990s,' Panter wrote.
But the decades of forward presence has taken a toll on the cash-strapped US fleet as fewer and fewer warships and their crews work harder and harder in more distant locales. 'If the United States wishes to deter China, Beijing must believe Washington can fight a sustained, brutal war – one in which the US Navy can take major losses and still fight on,' Panter wrote. 'Today, that is not the case, and the concept of 'naval forward presence' bears much of the blame.'
There are two basic approaches to naval deterrence. One: to keep ships on patrol in the likeliest conflict zones as a constant show of force. Two: to keep the same ships at home – and surge them into action only when it's time to fight.
For decades, it was the consensus in US navalist circles that forward patrols were more effective as deterrence. The sight of an American warship, looming on the horizon, would surely make some aggressor think twice before doing something rash, right?
Maybe, but forward presence comes at a cost. And while Panter's argument hinges on the material cost – the strain on hardworking ships and their crews at a time when the US Navy is struggling to grow its fleet – there's an equally compelling corollary. In short, forward-deployed
ships are vulnerable to sneak attacks by China's growing missile arsenal and fast-improving submarine fleet.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington DC proved this vulnerability in its seminal 2023 war game simulating a Chinese invasion of Taiwan – and a US and allied intervention on Taiwan's behalf.
'Military doctrine calls for forward deployments to enhance deterrence during a crisis, but these forces make tempting targets,' CSIS warned. In most iterations of the war game, even the ones in which the Chinese invasion failed and Taiwan remained free, Chinese missiles – streaking down without warning in the first hours of the war – ultimately sank all of the roughly 50 major warships the US Navy sails from Japan.
It would be safer for the Americans' Japan-based aircraft carrier and amphibious ships and their cruiser and destroyer escorts to return home to the US West Coast, wait out in the initial waves of Chinese attacks and then steam toward Taiwan to relieve the island nation's beleaguered defenders, CSIS concluded. American losses in ships and sailors were lightest when the US Navy 'did not push its fleet forward as a deterrent signal prior to the start of conflict.'
The calculus favouring a US-based fleet that responds to crises over a forward fleet that attempts to deter them assumes the United States is actually interested in fighting for its allies. There's a dark third alternative: a withdrawn US fleet that escapes the attention of Chinese missiles during the opening barrages of an attack on Taiwan and then does … nothing.
Last year, Trump famously threatened to let Russians do 'whatever the Hell they want in Europe.' And with his current push to end the Russia-Ukraine war on Russia's terms, he's actually making good on that threat.
Given what we now know, do we believe Trump would mobilise the US military to fight for Taiwan? If not, the end of forward presence wouldn't represent some smart strategy for winning a war in the western Pacific. It would represent surrender in advance to whatever China aims to do in the region.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Federal appeals court temporarily reverses decision on Trump's tariffs
Federal appeals court temporarily reverses decision on Trump's tariffs

The Independent

timean hour ago

  • The Independent

Federal appeals court temporarily reverses decision on Trump's tariffs

A federal appeals court has ruled that President Trump's tariffs will remain in effect during the appeal process, temporarily reversing a lower court's decision. The decision applies to broad-based tariffs affecting most U.S. trading partners, as well as duties on imports from Canada, China, and Mexico. The court has not yet ruled on the legality of Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs, but will hear arguments on July 31. A lower court previously ruled that Trump had overstepped his authority, stating that the Constitution grants Congress the power to impose taxes and tariffs. The tariffs have created turbulence for global markets and American businesses, but the ruling does not impact tariffs implemented under separate legal frameworks, such as those on steel and aluminum.

Ukraine soldier has 'Glory to Russia' burnt into skin by Putin's twisted thugs
Ukraine soldier has 'Glory to Russia' burnt into skin by Putin's twisted thugs

Daily Mirror

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mirror

Ukraine soldier has 'Glory to Russia' burnt into skin by Putin's twisted thugs

WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT The captured Ukrainian soldier is seen with the phrase 'Glory to Russia' branded on his skin in a new photograph, which intelligence services in Kyiv have confirmed as genuine A shocking new photograph shows a freed Ukrainian prisoner with 'Glory to Russia ' burnt into his skin by Vladimir Putin's troops. Ukraine 's intelligence services have confirmed the disturbing new image as genuine after it circulated online following the exchange of hundreds of soldiers and civilians this week. In the picture, a man is seen with severe burns to his abdomen, with the phrase deliberately branded on his body. He also has a tube inserted into his stomach. The prisoner swap between Russia and Ukraine took place after US-led efforts to broker a ceasefire between the two sides last month failed, with the deal emerging as one small area of cooperation amid a continuing bloody conflict. ‌ ‌ Confirming that the image of the branded soldier was genuine but dated from a previous POW swap, Andrii Yusov, spokesperson for Defence Intelligence of Ukraine, said yesterday: "Unfortunately, the photo is real. He wasn't in this exchange, but one of the earlier ones. "While examining him at a rehabilitation centre for soldiers, a doctor, overwhelmed by what he saw, took the photo and posted it online. This is evidence of what our defenders go through in captivity. "The photo speaks for itself. And it is imperative that not only Ukrainians see it – they know very well what the Russians are – but the whole world." On Monday, an outpouring of emotion was seen on in Chernyhiv region of northern Ukraine as troops draped in the national flag were paraded through streets, having suffered horrific treatment at the hands of their Russian captors. More prisoner swaps will be taking in a staggered process taking place over the coming days, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the Russian Defense Ministry said, although neither side has confirmed how many. ‌ Those who were swapped included wounded soldiers, as well as those under 25, Zelensky said. He said: "The process is quite complicated, there are many sensitive details, negotiations continue virtually every day." But in the hours before the prisoner exchange took place, Russia launched almost 500 drones at Ukraine in the biggest overnight drone bombardment of the three-year war. A total of 479 drones and 20 missiles of various types were fired at different parts of Ukraine from Sunday to Monday, according to the air force, which said the barrage targeted mainly central and western areas. Ukraine's air force said its air defences intercepted and destroyed 277 drones and 19 missiles, claiming only 10 drones or missiles hit their targets. Attacks have continued over the past 48 hours, with two people killed and 54 injured in Russian drone attacks on Kharkiv overnight. And on Tuesday, three people died and 13 were wounded after Russia hit Kyiv and Odesa with drones and missiles. A number of civilian targets were damaged, including a maternity ward and a cathedral.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store