U.S. urges Asian allies to prepare for China's ‘imminent' threat head-on
Screengrab from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlBWgVbzBFE
SINGAPORE: U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth delivered an absolute and grim message during his speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, forewarning that China's intentions toward Taiwan signify an upfront threat to global peace and security. A stark warning on Taiwan
According to a recent CNN report, Hegseth made a clear warning saying that 'There is no reason to sugarcoat it. The threat China poses is real, and it could be imminent,' highlighting intelligence reports that the Chinese military is vigorously setting up a plausible attack on the island by 2027. Hegseth accused Beijing of attempting to redesign the Indo-Pacific order via military pressure, principally with its regular training drills mimicking an attack on Taiwan. U.S. calls for allied unity
Hegseth stressed that the United States cannot dissuade China alone. 'We ask – and indeed, we insist – that our allies and partners do their part on defence,' he said, asking countries in the region to meaningfully increase defence outlays. He cited NATO partners who have allotted up to 5% of GDP on defence as a standard for Asian allies. Hegseth's comments echo a mounting resolve from the Trump government to strengthen preemption in the light of what he labelled Beijing's 'wake-up call' to the region. China pushes back against 'defamatory allegations'
Beijing summarily rebuked Hegseth's remarks. In a statement, China's foreign ministry vilified the U.S. for making 'defamatory allegations' and 'sowing division' via the defence forum. Chinese bureaucrats maintained that they remain open to negotiation but carped at Washington's growing military pomposity in Asia. Pressures were further augmented by China's pronouncement to reduce its involvement and input in the forum, sending a low-level team instead of its defence minister. Rising tensions, but no backing down
Notwithstanding calls for sobriety from other regional powers, Hegseth made it clear that the U.S. will manifest and sustain a strong presence in Asia. 'We will not be pushed out of this critical region, and we will not let our allies be subordinated and intimidated,' he said. While reiterating that Washington does not seek friction that could lead to war, he asserted that the Trump administration is dedicated to guaranteeing Taiwan's safety and will stand firm against Chinese hostility in contested areas such as the South China Sea. See also India hangs four over 2012 Delhi bus gang-rape
Experts and forecasters note that, in contrast to recent changes in U.S. policy toward Europe, the administration's approach to Asia remains intensive and forceful, underscored by sustained combined military training with Japan, the Philippines, Australia, and South Korea.
Without high-level consultations arranged between the U.S. and China, optimism for alleviating tensions appears minimal, leading to the reinforced geopolitical schisms presently defining the Indo-Pacific region.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
9 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Riding wave of voter anger, South Korea's Lee Jae-myung now faces policy challenges
Mr Lee Jae-myung's ability to lead will be judged by the strength of his policies. PHOTO: REUTERS SEOUL - South Korea's new President Lee Jae-myung rode a wave of voter anger against the December martial law attempt by his ousted predecessor, but his ability to lead will be judged by the strength of his policies. With preliminary results suggesting a comfortable win over Mr Kim Moon-soo, the candidate for the conservative People Power Party, Mr Lee will take office with a resounding mandate and his Democratic Party in control of parliament. Healing the political rifts that led to former President Yoon Suk Yeol's shock martial law and its divisive aftermath will be a tall order. Analysts say both candidates were vague on their policy plans during the campaign, and Mr Lee Jun-han, a political science professor at Incheon National University, said the results are more an indictment of Yoon and his PPP's poor performance than an endorsement of the DP. He said Mr Kim, who opposed Yoon's impeachment, was unprepared and the PPP did not show remorse after the martial law. "(The next president) should properly interpret that the people's choice has been one-sided and reflect that in the government's operation or politics in the future," he said. "If they don't, public sentiment will fluctuate quickly." While Mr Lee has had his eye on the presidency for years, there have been major developments since he narrowly lost to Yoon in the 2022 election, said Mr Kim Jun-seok, a political science professor at Dongguk University. "Now he has restoration of democracy as one of his tasks," Mr Kim said. "Nonetheless, there are huge challenges faced by South Korea. A grim outlook on the economy that's projected to grow maybe less than 1 per cent. And there's a crisis outside, dealing with Trump. He has a lot of work to do." Voters said they were looking for the winner of the snap election to calm the economic and political shocks that have roiled the country since Yoon's Dec 3 martial law decree led to months of economic downturn and sparked nationwide protests. Many complained, however, about a lack of specifics in policy debates. Mr Lee has pledged to draft a second supplementary budget for the year as soon as the election is over, and promised vouchers to help local businesses and subsidies for childcare, youth, and the elderly to address growing discontent around tightening purse strings. His camp says they intend to seek more time to negotiate on trade with US President Donald Trump, but it is unclear how any request for an extension of the tariff deadline will be received in Washington. With a rise in anti-China sentiment among South Koreans and Trump's push to isolate Beijing, Mr Lee must also tread carefully with any plans to improve ties with China. Mr Lee has also shown sensitivity to the political winds, moderating some of his stances on China, Japan, and populist economic policies such as universal income ahead of the election. "I hope he will resuscitate the economy and get rid of insurrection forces," said small business owner Im Young-taek, 64. "And I do really hope he will make people comfortable. Things may not be easy with Trump but I hope he will hire capable aides and resolve the issues well." Mr Lee's Democratic Party will control parliament, easing the passage of legislation and budgets after years of deadlock between Yoon and the legislature. That may do little to soothe political polarisation, however, with conservatives warning that Mr Mr Lee and the DP will steamroll over any opposition. "They have absolute power, which could lead to a departure from social unity," said Incheon University's Mr Lee. "Since they are the absolute majority, there seems to be little check and balance to stop them." In May a DP-led committee passed legislation aimed at changing an election law that Lee has been convicted of violating. They have also promised to pass legislation clarifying what protections presidents have from criminal investigations, a move seen as trying to reduce Lee's exposure to other ongoing charges. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
CNA
22 minutes ago
- CNA
Liberal Lee Jae-myung wins South Korea presidency in martial law 'judgment day'
SEOUL: South Korea's liberal party candidate, Lee Jae-myung, was elected president in Tuesday's (Jun 3) snap election, six months to the day after he evaded military cordons to vote against a shock martial law decree imposed by his ousted predecessor. Lee's victory stands to usher in a political sea change in Asia's fourth-largest economy, after the backlash against the martial law brought down Yoon Suk Yeol, the conservative outsider who narrowly beat Lee in the 2022 election. Nearly 80 percent of South Korea's 44.39 million eligible voters cast their ballots, the highest turnout for a presidential election in the country since 1997, with Lee terming the polls "judgment day" against Yoon's martial law and the People Power Party's failure to distance itself from that decision. With more than 99 percent of the votes counted, the Democratic Party's Lee stood at 49.3 percent to PPP candidate Kim Moon-soo's 41.3 percent, according to National Election Commission data. A subdued Kim conceded the race and congratulated Lee in brief remarks to reporters. Lee had long been favoured to win, and his supporters erupted in cheers as exit polls by the country's major broadcasters showed him defeating Kim by wide margins. In a brief speech to supporters gathered outside parliament after the polls closed, Lee said he would fulfil the duties of the office and bring unity to the country. "We can overcome this temporary difficulty with the combined strength of our people, who have great capabilities," he said. He also vowed to revive the economy and seek peace with nuclear-armed North Korea through dialogue and strength. The martial law decree and the six months of ensuing turmoil, which saw three different acting presidents and multiple criminal insurrection trials for Yoon and several top officials, marked a stunning political self-destruction for the former leader and effectively handed the presidency to his main rival. Yoon was impeached by the Lee-led parliament, then removed from office by the Constitutional Court in April, less than three years into his five-year term, triggering the snap election that now stands to remake the country's political leadership and foreign policies of a key US ally. Lee has accused the PPP of having condoned the martial law attempt by not fighting harder to thwart it and even trying to save Yoon's presidency. Kim was Yoon's labour minister when the former president declared martial law on Dec 3. "I was here on Dec 3 after martial was declared and December 14 when Yoon was impeached," said Choi Mi-jeong, 55, a science teacher who gathered outside parliament to hear Lee speak. "Now Lee Jae-myung is becoming president. I hope he will become a leader who supports ordinary people, not vested interests, not a small number of riches." US State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce told a briefing that Washington was awaiting final certification before commenting. Official results were expected to be certified by the National Election Commission on Wednesday morning after ballots are sorted and counted by machine, then triple-checked by election officials by hand to verify accuracy. Just hours later, the inauguration ceremony is planned. NEED FOR CHANGE Park Chan-dae, acting leader of Lee's Democratic Party, told KBS that the projections suggest voters rejected the martial law attempt and are hoping for an improvement in their livelihoods. "I think people made a fiery judgment against the insurrection regime," he said. The winner must tackle challenges including a society deeply scarred by divisions made more obvious since the attempt at military rule, and an export-heavy economy reeling from unpredictable protectionist moves by the United States, a major trading partner and a security ally. Both Lee and Kim pledged change for the country, saying a political system and economic model set up during its rise as a budding democracy and industrial power are no longer fit for purpose. Their proposals for investment in innovation and technology often overlapped, but Lee advocated more equity and help for mid- to low-income families while Kim campaigned on giving businesses more freedom from regulations and labour strife. Lee is expected to be more conciliatory toward China and North Korea, but has pledged to continue the Yoon-era engagement with Japan. Kim branded Lee a "dictator" and his Democratic Party a "monster," warning if the former human rights lawyer becomes president, nothing will stop them from working together to amend laws simply because they do not like them. 'POLARISED' "The economy has gotten so much worse since Dec 3, not just for me but I hear that from everybody," Kim Kwang-ma, 81, said. "And we as a people have become so polarised... I wish we could come together so that Korea can develop again." There were no female candidates running in Tuesday's election for the first time in 18 years. Despite polls showing wide gaps between young men and women, gender equality was not among the key policy issues put forward during this election, a stark contrast from the 2022 vote. "One thing I am a bit frustrated about with mainstream candidates whether Lee Jae-myung or other conservative candidates is they lack policy on women or minority groups," said Kwon Seo-hyun, 18, a university freshman and first-time voter who went out to the streets for anti-Yoon protests following his martial law.
CNA
29 minutes ago
- CNA
Commentary: US speech at Shangri-La Dialogue hit the right notes – but talk is cheap
SINGAPORE: Since the first Shangri-La Dialogue (SLD) in 2002, every sitting United States Defense Secretary has delivered an address at the summit to explain their strategic vision for the region and reassure US allies and partners. Pete Hegseth continued this long tradition with his speech on Saturday (May 31) at this year's edition of the security forum. Taken at face value, his speech hit all the right notes. But talk is cheap. His domestic talking points, his insistence that Asia spend more on defence, and inconsistencies between his statements and US actions may raise more questions than answers. BRINGING MAGA TO ASIA 'America is proud to be back in the Indo-Pacific – and we're here to stay,' Mr Hegseth proclaimed. Yet many points hinted at him not just addressing audiences in Singapore, but back in Washington too. On one hand, talking about how the US defence establishment is improving its capabilities, from raising the defence budget to over US$1 trillion to investing in American shipbuilding, supports his assertion that America is 're-establishing deterrence around the world' by building 'credible deterrence' at home. His proclamation that Washington is shunning its past 'moralistic and preachy approach' was even likely welcomed by some Southeast Asian officials in the room, given past efforts to tout liberal values were met with a mixed response. However, not all these domestic references were welcomed by international audiences. References to an 'invasion of 21 million illegals' and US President Donald Trump's electoral victory, for example, are targeted at the MAGA (Make America Great Again) crowd. An allusion to 'taking back the Panama Canal' was likely met with concern by smaller countries. Dismissing climate change as something that was 'preached' by previous governments, while politically popular with the MAGA base, underplayed what many regional governments consider an existential security issue. Perhaps the clearest sign that Mr Hegseth had his mind on a domestic audience were the worrying statements made about China. In years past, Washington has claimed to engage the region on its own merits, refraining from calling out China directly. In the Biden era, China was generally framed as a 'serious competitor' with whom cooperation was necessary, with the term 'threat' reserved for North Korea and more recently, Russia. Even under Trump 1.0, officials tended to criticise 'threatening' policies and actions. Yet, Mr Hegseth seemingly discarded this facade, explicitly calling China a threat. Mr Hegseth also claimed that an invasion of Taiwan 'could be imminent,' even as Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said – on the same day after his speech – China does not want a war. While not surprising, this stridently anti-China stance raises concerns about how the US might engage Southeast Asia. The apparent gulf between what Southeast Asian governments and Washington consider important, including a confrontational approach to China and dismissal of climate change, may hinder cooperation going forward. INSISTENCE THAT ALLIES AND PARTNERS DO MORE ON DEFENCE US officials have traditionally called on European counterparts to bear a greater portion of the financial burden for their security. This time, YetMr Hegseth called for US Asian allies and partners in Asia to follow suit with 5 per cent of their gross domestic product. No country in Asia currently spends that much on defence. According to the SIPRI military expenditure database, most ASEAN countries spent less than 1.5 per cent of their GDP on defence in 2024. Even Japan and South Korea which have been actively modernising their militaries spent 1.4 per cent and 2.6 per cent respectively. Singapore is the outlier with roughly 3 per cent, still well below Mr Hegseth's expectations. This is not to say that Asian countries are neglecting their defence capabilities. SIPRI data show that ASEAN military expenditures rose from US$20.3 billion in 2000 to US$48.3 billion in 2024. But it is unlikely that Washington's demand for 5 per cent will ever be achieved. Doing so would require a dramatic reworking of government budgets and legislation, along with potential political unrest trouble asif guns are seen to be prioritised over butternecessities and infrastructure. The flipside is that Washington may pressure Asian allies that do not spend enough – including with the pledge of US protection itself. After all, as US President Donald Trump remarked on the election trail, he would encourage Moscow to do ' whatever the hell they want ' to NATO members who do not spend enough on defence. WHAT AMERICA SAYS AND WHAT IT DOES There are also inconsistencies between Mr Hegseth's words and the US' recent actions. Most leaders in the region would welcome his acknowledgment of the 'geographic necessity' of economic cooperation with China, for example. Or promising to work with regional governments as 'partners, not dependents.' Yet, Washington has levied tariffs universally on its 'partners', including countries with whom America has signed free trade agreements. Washington is also pressuring countries such as Malaysia to Vietnam to enforce rules of origin to cut down on transshipments of Chinese goods. The inconsistencies deepen the more you look. Mr Hegseth criticised China for a 'lack of respect for neighbours' but offered no explanation for how this is different from US ambitions in Greenland and Canada. He raised, as he did in Manila and Munich, that the Indo-Pacific is America's 'priority theatre,' but did not address concerns that munitions are being redirected to the Middle East to support US strikes on the Houthis. At the core of many of these concerns is the question: Is the US serious about its pivot to Asia? The idea of a pivot was first mooted in the Obama administration, but Washington has struggled to make this concrete amid crises in the Middle East and Europe. Just as Mr Hegseth invoked Singapore's founding prime minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, in his speech, it would be helpful for US officials to recall Mr Lee's thoughts on America's strengths and weaknesses from a decade ago. While America's 'creativity, resilience and innovative spirit' allow it to confront and overcome its core problems, the US cannot simply treat Asia like a movie that it can pause and resume at will. 'It does not work like that,' he said. 'If the United States wants to substantially affect the strategic evolution of Asia, it cannot come and go.' Yes, talk is cheap. It is now up to the US to practise what it preaches and convince the region of its credibility.
