
Hegseth says US will stand by Indo-Pacific allies against 'imminent' threat of China
SINGORE — U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reassured allies in the Indo-Pacific on Saturday that they will not be left alone to face increasing military and economic pressures from China.
He said Washington will bolster its defenses overseas to counter what the Pentagon sees as rapidly developing threats by Beijing, particularly in its aggressive stance toward Taiwan. China has conducted numerous exercises to test what a blockade would look like of the self-governing island, which Beijing claims as its own and the U.S. has pledged to defend.
China's army 'is rehearsing for the real deal,' Hegseth said in a keynote speech at a security conference in Singapore. 'We are not going to sugarcoat it — the threat China poses is real. And it could be imminent.'
China has a stated goal of having its military be able to take Taiwan by force if necessary by 2027, a deadline that is seen by experts as more of an aspirational goal than a hard war deadline.
But China also has developed sophisticated man-made islands in the South China Sea to support new military outposts and built up highly advanced hypersonic and space capabilities, which are driving the U.S. to create its own space-based 'Golden Dome' missile defenses.
Speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue, a global security conference hosted by the International Institute for Security Studies, Hegseth said China is no longer just building up its military forces to take Taiwan, it's 'actively training for it, every day.'
Hegseth also called out China for its ambitions in Latin America, particularly its efforts to increase its influence over the Panama Canal.
He repeated a pledge made by previous administrations to bolster U.S. military capabilities in the region to provide a more robust deterrent. While both the Obama and Biden administrations had also committed to pivoting to the Pacific — and even established new military agreements throughout the region — a full shift has never been realized.
Instead, U.S. military resources from the Indo-Pacific have been regularly pulled to support military needs in the Middle East and Europe, especially since the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. In the first few months of President Donald Trump's second term, that's also been the case.
The Indo-Pacific nations caught in between have tried to balance relations with both the U.S. and China over the years. Beijing is the primary trading partner for many, but is also feared as a regional bully, in part due to its increasingly aggressive claims on natural resources such as critical fisheries.
Hegseth cautioned that playing both sides, seeking U.S. military support and Chinese economic support, carries risk.
"Beware the leverage the CCP seeks with that entanglement,' Hegseth said.
China usually sends its own defense minister to this conference — but in a snub this year to the U.S. and the erratic tariff war Trump has ignited with Beijing, its minister Dong Jun did not attend, something the U.S. delegation said it intended to capitalize on.
'We are here this morning. And somebody else isn't,' Hegseth said.
He urged countries in the region to increase defense spending to levels similar to the 5% of their gross domestic product European nations are now pressed to contribute.
'We must all do our part,' Hegseth said.
It's not clear if the U.S. can or wants to supplant China as the region's primary economic driver. But Hegseth's push follows Trump's visit to the Middle East, which resulted in billions of dollars in new defense agreements.
Hegseth said committing U.S. support for Indo-Pacific nations would not be based on any conditions on local governments aligning their cultural or climate issues with the West.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


India Today
24 minutes ago
- India Today
Even Pak did it: Congress reiterates demand for Parliament session on Op Sindoor
Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge on Sunday reiterated his party's demand for a special session of Parliament to discuss Operation Sindoor and the terror attack in Pahalgam. Addressing reporters, Kharge said that the Centre should take a cue from Pakistan, which has convened its Parliament and held deliberations on the developments, and show similar seriousness in addressing the said that the entire nation stands with the armed forces and called for unity on issues concerning national security. He urged all political leaders to exercise restraint and avoid politicising military a veiled swipe at Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Congress President said, "We must know when to speak what. There should be unity in national matters and a focus on defeating our opponents. All leaders across the country should remain silent regarding matters of national security. It's better to understand what has happened before speaking about it. There should be no election campaign before the delegation reports are out. PM Modi should refrain from giving election speeches. There is no need for self-praise. The entire nation stands with our armed forces." He further questioned the Prime Minister's public remarks on the military operation, noting that the PM had earlier stated he had given full authority to the armed forces. "Why is he speaking again now? The Prime Minister should not make self-glorifying speeches. We have said, let's convene Parliament and talk. Even Pakistan has convened its Parliament and is holding discussions. None of us will speak against the nation," Kharge remarks came a day after he accused the BJP-led government of misleading the nation over Operation Sindoor. In a post on social media, the Congress chief alleged that instead of offering clarity on US President Donald Trump taking credit for the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, Prime Minister Modi was "on an election blitz, taking personal credit for the valour of the armed forces".He also referred to the interview given by India's Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), General Anil Chauhan, in Singapore, saying that the revelations raised important questions about defence preparedness."In the wake of the remarks made by the CDS in Singapore in an interview, there are some very important questions which need to be asked. These can only be asked if a Special Session of the Parliament is immediately convened. The Modi Government has misled the nation. The fog of war is now clearing," Kharge Chauhan, who was in Singapore for the Shangri-La Dialogue, admitted in an interview with Bloomberg for the first time that an unspecified number of Indian fighter jets were downed during the recent hostilities with India's Operation Sindoor, which was launched after the Pahalgam attacks, Pakistan had claimed that it had downed six Indian fighter jets, a claim India had previously Chauhan categorically rejected Pakistan's assertion that it had shot down six Indian jets, including four Rafales, calling it 'absolutely incorrect'."What is important is that, not the jet being down, but why they were being down... Why they were down, what mistakes were made - that are important. Numbers are not important," General Chauhan to the comments, Congress leader Jairam Ramesh said that Defence MInister Rajanth Singh should have informed the political parties about the losses before a military official revealed them InMust Watch


Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Resource war: How commercial assets turned into front line weaponry
Chennai: Recently, J.D. Vance, the US vice president, confirmed what the world feared. He termed the competition between the US and China in developing artificial intelligence (AI) as an 'arms race'. Policy makers in both the countries believe that whoever wins this race will dominate the world, going forward. At the core of this battle is computing power and this has given a fresh impetus to the chip war that began between the US and China five years ago. In May 2020, during his first term as the president of the US, Donald Trump fired the first salvo. The US commerce department added Chinese tech giant Huawei Technologies to the 'Entity List', a measure which prevented the company that sells smartphones, telecom equipment and cloud computing services from accessing advanced computer chips produced or developed using US technology or software. The reason? The US feared that Huawei's attractively priced products, backed by Chinese government subsidy, would soon dominate the next generation telecom networks, ending American clout in the field. The move had a debilitating impact on Huawei. Its global expansion took a hit and revenue crashed. 'A corporate giant faced technological asphyxiation," Chris Miller, in his book Chip War, wrote. According to him, this development reminded China of its weakness. 'In nearly every step of the process of producing semiconductors, China is staggeringly dependent on foreign technology, almost all of which is controlled by its geopolitical rivals—Taiwan, Japan, South Korea or the US," he wrote. China began investing billions of dollars to develop its own semiconductor technology in a bid to free itself from America's chip choke, he added. But the US is in no mood to make this endeavour easy for China. It has progressively tightened restrictions on China's semiconductor sector. The 'Entity List' has since grown to include over 140 Chinese companies—fabrication units, semiconductor tool companies and even investment companies that operate in the sector. Restrictions have extended from chips with high bandwidth memory to semiconductor manufacturing equipment and software tools. China, which sees US restrictions as an attempt to deny it the technological greatness it deserves, has retaliated. It began imposing restrictions on export of critical and rare earth minerals that are crucial for production of weapons, semiconductors and electric vehicles. There are 17 rare earth minerals and China has absolute control on most of them (see chart). In October 2023, it introduced export permits for graphite needed to produce lithium ion batteries. In December that year, it banned transfer of rare earth minerals extraction and separation technologies and the technology to make magnets. China, over the years, has mastered these technologies. In the same month, it banned the export of antimony, gallium and germanium apart from imposing stricter review of graphite exports to the US. In February 2025, in response to Donald Trump imposing 10% tariffs on all Chinese products, the middle kingdom added five more critical minerals— tungsten, indium, bismuth, tellurium and molybdenum to the export control list. This meant that companies require special export licenses to export the minerals. On 4 April, after Trump's Liberation Day tariffs, China further added seven more minerals and magnets to the export restrictions list. There is no clarity whether these restrictions have been suspended after the recent US and China trade talks in Geneva. The US is now scrambling to find alternate sources for these minerals. All of a sudden, economic resources which were till recently seen predominantly as commercial assets, have acquired new edge as strategic instruments. They are no longer controlled just by the market— geopolitics has a greater say over them. A short history Demand for resources began to rise after the Industrial Revolution in 1760 which introduced the use of metals such as iron and steel. The rise of mechanized factory systems increased output and thus, demand for resources. As the demand rose, countries such as Great Britain, France and Belgium began colonizing the world in search of resources. 'Colonization was all about exploitation of natural resources," said S. Gurumurthy, writer and a corporate advisor. The British empire met its demand for cotton, tea, leather, coal and iron ore from India for almost two centuries, he added. Post World War II, resources were seen as market instruments. They were freely traded for a price. According to the World Trade Organization, between 1950 and 2024, global trade volumes grew by 4,500%. 'It was also a period when countries used trade to increase co-dependence in the hope that it would enhance peace and welfare," Dhruva Jaishankar, executive director, Observer Research Foundation — America, said. Europe bought gas from Russia in the hope that the latter would leave them alone. The US built a strong economic relationship with China on the assumption that the Asian nation could integrate with the global economy, eliminate poverty, and embrace democratic principles. Of course, trade in resources has not been entirely free. Nations have imposed restrictions. In the last 75 years, the US is the biggest culprit. As a sole super power, it denied various countries technology and resources that it deemed were dual use—for both civil and military applications. As the US-China rivalry intensifies, the weaponization is spilling beyond dual use technologies. China, it appears, is not loath to leveraging the domination it has built in the global economy. The new normal China accounts for more than 30% of global manufacturing output. This is the highest concentration of manufacturing in one place," said Jaishankar. The US had a similar share for a short period of time immediately after World War II when the protracted war had destroyed much of production facilities in mainland Europe and Japan. 'China has managed to achieve this without a war," he said, adding 'it is now trying to use its manufacturing power as a strategic leverage." It is not just manufacturing. Consider China's domination in the shipping space. It controls over 100 ports across 63 nations. As of 2022, it had 96% share in container production, 48% of global ship building orders and 80% of ship-to-shore cranes. It has similar domination across many sectors. 'What is worrying is that China has revealed its intention to weaponize goods, logistics or the entire supply chain," said an Indian government official who did not want to be identified. There is a conscious attempt by China to make the world depend on it. Simultaneously, it is reducing its dependence on the world. The restriction on export of rare earth minerals is just a beginning, he added. The resentment For more than four decades, China had silently focused on growing its economy. It eased rules to attract manufacturing taking advantage of its low wage costs. It invested in infrastructure—power, roads, ports and airports. It enabled building factories at unheard of scale which substantially reduced the cost of production. Global brands rushed to China to take advantage of it. Until a few years ago, 85% of all iPhone produced by Apple were assembled in China. At one point in time, almost all of Nike's shoes were produced in China. There were warnings within the US about this excessive dependence. Michael Pillsbury's book, The Hundred-Year Marathon, detailed China's secret desire to upstage the US as a global superpower. He, indeed many others, pointed out that China harboured a deep resentment and a sense of injury for losing its status as a middle kingdom when it dominated the world—economically, culturally and militarily. In the early 1700s, China (and India) had a large share of the world economy. On the eve of the Industrial Revolution, in 1760, it accounted for a third of the global economy. In the two centuries that followed, it lost out significantly. By 1979, China's share of the global economy was just 2%. Chinese consider the period between 1839 and 1945 a 'century of humiliation' that saw political fragmentation, decline and subjugation by foreign powers such as Russia, Japan and the West. The Chinese yearned to regain this lost glory. Today, China has 19% share in the global GDP, fast catching up with the US' 27%. Late wakeup call Policy makers in the US, for years, took a benign view of China's growth. Pillsbury pointed out that they saw their China policy as a commercial win and ignored the strategic dimension. Only when China began to assert itself, did they realise the depth of US' dependence on China and its real motive. It is not a surprise that Pillsbury, as Trump's advisor, is the architect of US' China policy now. Today, the US and China are engaged in a contest. The US is playing to its strength by denying advanced technology to China. By focusing on the massive $295 trade deficit (in 2024) and imposing massive tariffs, the Trump administration wants to reduce its dependence. China, for its part, is thinking long term to upstage the US. Lizzi Lee, a fellow at the Asia Society Policy Institute's Centre for China Analysis, best described its strategy in a recent Financial Times article. He wrote: 'Xi is not looking to win the trade war in a conventional sense. He's positioning China for a drawn-out, grinding, contest by building domestic capacity, hardening supply chain and rooting out perceived vulnerabilities to foreign pressure." India play As the US and China fight for supremacy, India needs to have a strategy to deal with the fallout. 'Countries, be it China or the US, have exclusive rights over their resources. Weaponizing such resources is the new normal," said Ajay Srivastava, founder, Global Trade Research Initiative, a trade focussed think tank. India needs to put in place policies to minimise the impact of such decisions. India should identify and develop resources that the world would need and use it as a bargaining chip, he added. 'India may lack such resources now but we need to identify those and invest now," Gurumurthy added. China, Jaishankar said, does not have all the resources within its nation. It had worked assiduously to tap these critical minerals across the world, especially from African nations. China's strength, he added, is in developing the ability to process them in an effective manner. 'India needs to follow a similar strategy. We should strike deals with nations which have these resources and import the mineral for processing in India. That will give us control over it," he explained. India has already drawn up a list of critical minerals and has taken steps to secure them. It is part of the Mineral Security Partnership, a multi-nation initiative led by the US comprising 40 countries. It has struck, or is close to striking, a few deals in Latin America and Africa. But processing the minerals is easier said than done. It is capital intensive and requires a long lead time. Investors don't support such projects unless there is a strong business case. Experts have also suggested that India should frame policies to suit its strengths. Some have questioned pushing electrification of vehicles in a big way. With India lacking the raw material to make batteries, the rise in electric vehicles will shift India's energy dependence from West Asia to China. Others have recommended that India should invest heavily in taking a lead in green hydrogen. India is blessed with abundant sunlight and focus on storage systems can help it use solar power to drive green hydrogen efforts. India's efforts, such as production-linked incentives, have cut its dependence on China for solar cells and modules. More needs to be done if India has to become self-sufficient. To make all this possible, the country, particularly its private sector, would need to invest in research and development. If there is one thing that can come in India's way is its hubris, warned experts. 'What is needed is a long term vision and a step-by-step approach to achieve it," GTRI's Srivastava said.


Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Realistic 'Reborn' baby doll craze grips Brazil, sparking heated debate: 'Real children are more...'
Brazil is witnessing a unique cultural and political moment as hyper-realistic 'reborn' baby dolls gain massive online popularity and stir heated discussions in legislative halls, according to a report by the New York Post. These hand-crafted dolls, often used for grief therapy or parenting practice, have become a social media trend. Influencers are staging dramatic scenes like simulated births and casual outings in shopping malls with the dolls, drawing millions of views. In Rio de Janeiro, the city council has passed a bill to honour the artists who create these dolls. It awaits approval from Mayor Eduardo Paes. Meanwhile, in other parts of the country, lawmakers are proposing fines for individuals who attempt to seek medical treatment for the dolls. The move follows a viral video that allegedly showed a woman bringing one to a hospital. Politicians have even brought the dolls into legislative chambers. In Amazonas, state lawmaker Joao Luiz appeared with a reborn doll in the State House this week to push for a ban on offering public healthcare services to them. However, local media clarified that no such incidents have ever been officially recorded by health authorities. The issue has sparked criticism among politicians as well. Congresswoman Talíria Petrone voiced her frustration with the attention the matter is receiving. 'Can we focus on what really matters? If someone wants to have a doll, let them. I have two real children and they're more than enough work,' she said. Also read: Chinese cobbler with no legs learns English from radio, shares Harvard dream: 'I believe I can...' Despite the political debate, the community around these dolls remains strong. Over the weekend, dozens of reborn doll enthusiasts gathered for the 10th annual meet-up in Villa Lobos Park, Sao Paulo. Many attendees defended the practice, saying criticism should be directed at attention-seeking influencers, not the broader community of collectors and caregivers. Berenice Maria, a nursing assistant and longtime reborn doll owner, finds emotional solace in them. 'I love reborns, despite the hate we see out there,' she said. 'I want the right to go out with them … go to the mall, go to the park.' Daniela Baccan, who co-owns a reborn doll shop in Campinas, said the dolls range in price from 700 reais (approx. ₹11,800) to nearly 10,000 reais (approx. ₹1.7 lakh). While controversy has led to increased security concerns, it has also boosted business. 'We're locking up the store more, adding cameras,' said Baccan. 'But at the same time, online demand has increased, and the store is seeing a much higher flow of people.' Also read: Trump biographer's bombshell claim on why US President hates Harvard: 'He didn't get...'