China accuses US's Hegseth of ‘vilifying' remarks at security forum
BEIJING: China has protested to the United States against 'vilifying' remarks made by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the foreign ministry said on Sunday, while accusing it of deliberately ignoring calls for peace from regional nations.
China has objected to Hegseth calling it a threat in the Indo-Pacific, the ministry added, describing his comments at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on Saturday as 'deplorable' and 'intended to sow division'.
'Hegseth deliberately ignored the call for peace and development by countries in the region and instead touted the Cold War mentality for bloc confrontation, vilified China with defamatory allegations, and falsely called China a 'threat',' the ministry said on its website.
'The United States has deployed offensive weaponry in the South China Sea and kept stoking flames and creating tensions in the Asia-Pacific, which are turning the region into a powder keg,' it added in the statement.
Hegseth had urged allies in the Indo-Pacific region, including key security partner Australia, to spend more on defence after warning of the 'real and potentially imminent' threat from China.
Asked about the call to boost defence spending, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said his government had pledged an extra A$10 billion ($6 billion) to defence.
'What we'll do is we'll determine our defence policy,' he told reporters on Sunday, a transcript of his remarks showed.
As part of Washington's longstanding defence ties with the Philippines, the U.S. military this year deployed Typhon launchers that can fire missiles to hit targets in both China and Russia from the island of Luzon.
China and the Philippines contest sovereignty over some islands and atolls in the South China Sea, with growing maritime run-ins between their coast guards as both vie to patrol the waters.
China's delegation at the forum said 'external intervention' was the biggest risk for stability in the South China Sea, saying the country had shown 'goodwill and restraint' through talks on the issue.
'Some foreign powers have sent warplanes and warships to the South China Sea for so-called 'freedom of navigation,'' the state-backed Global Times newspaper cited Senior Colonel Zhang Chi from the PLA National Defence University as saying.
Such actions infringed China's territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, he added.
The United States, Australia, Japan and the Philippines have conducted joint maritime operations in the busy waterway.
China claims nearly all the South China Sea, including parts of the exclusive economic zones of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam.
In 2016, an international arbitration tribunal ruled Beijing's expansive claim had no basis in international law, however.
China's foreign ministry also told the United States not to 'play with fire' on the question of Taiwan.
Any attempt by China to conquer Taiwan 'would result in devastating consequences', Hegseth said in his speech to Asia's premier forum for defence leaders, military officials and diplomats.
China has vowed to 'reunify' with the separately governed island, by force if necessary. Taiwan's government rejects Beijing's sovereignty claims, saying only the island's people can decide their future. ($1=1.5550 Australian dollars)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
8 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Asean must come up with mechanism for Indo-Pacific security
The anxieties of the Indo-Pacific came into full view at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles demanded an explanation from China for what he called an "extraordinary military build-up". Later, Philippine Defence Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. branded China's conduct in the South China Sea as "absolutely irresponsible and reckless". The message they convey is deeply interconnected: the Indo-Pacific is on edge. Two key United States allies — one a resident power, the other a proximate neighbour to China — are openly expressing their strategic alarm. Australia's concerns are rooted in the opaque and accelerated nature of China's military modernisation. From aircraft carriers and hypersonic missiles to deepening cyber and space capabilities, China is not merely modernising — it is transforming the strategic equation of the Indo-Pacific. For Canberra, this raises fundamental questions: What are China's intentions? What security guarantees can regional states rely on when the regional balance of power is tilting so rapidly? As a staunch member of the Aukus partnership and a longtime US ally, Australia is not unfamiliar with military alliances. Yet, it seeks more than just deterrence. It wants reassurance, especially from Beijing that strategic competition will not descend into confrontation. In this sense, Marles' remarks are not hawkish, but rather reflective of a nation navigating uncertainty. And it is precisely this uncertainty that Asean, through the Asean Regional Forum and Asean Defence Ministers' Meeting-Plus (ADMM-Plus), must address. For the Philippines, the danger is not speculative. It is already confronting Chinese maritime coercion in the South China Sea. From water cannon attacks near Second Thomas Shoal to sonar interference in its exclusive economic zone, the Philippines is on the front line of China's maritime assertiveness. Teodoro's choice of words — "irresponsible" and "reckless" — is not mere diplomatic posturing. It reflects the lived reality of a Southeast Asian state struggling to assert its sovereignty amid an asymmetrical power contest. That said, Philippines and China must redouble efforts to co-exist: otherwise, Manila risks being sucked into the vortex of US politics, rendering the Philippines all but a surrogate of the US. The risk of escalation is real. Any miscalculation in these contested waters could quickly drag in external powers, especially with the US-Philippines Mutual Defence Treaty now more operational than symbolic. A localised maritime incident could rapidly spiral into a wider regional conflict. Both Canberra's demand for clarity and Manila's call for accountability point to a shared regional need: a trusted, neutral forum to manage tensions, build confidence and enforce norms. That forum is Asean. And it must act before others do. The Asean Regional Forum, long criticised for being a talk shop, must now institutionalise mechanisms that promote transparency in military modernisation. Asean can propose a Regional Military Transparency Registry, encouraging major players, including China, to voluntarily disclose exercises, deployments and strategic doctrines. This will not eliminate mistrust, but it can begin to manage it. The ADMM-Plus, which includes China, Australia, the US and all major Indo-Pacific actors, offers a more defence-oriented platform. Here, Asean should advocate for the establishment of an Incidents-at-Sea Protocol, modelled on Cold War-era US-Soviet agreements. Such a mechanism would allow real-time communication between naval forces during close encounters, thereby reducing the risk of unintended conflict. Additionally, Asean must press for the long-delayed Code of Conduct in the South China Sea to become legally binding. It is no longer enough to merely discuss principles. Enforcement mechanisms must follow. The Philippines' repeated confrontations with China show that vague promises are insufficient. Asean must also creatively utilise its middle powers — Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam — to initiate back-channel diplomacy to build trust among conflicting parties without the constraints of formal negotiation. In this context, Malaysia's current role as Asean chair and its tradition of non-alignment make it particularly suited to initiate such Track 2 dialogues. Australia's quest for strategic reassurance and the Philippines' demand for accountability reflect a larger regional cry for order, predictability and norms. Asean, by virtue of its geography and centrality in regional architecture, remains the best-positioned body to take up this task.
The Sun
12 hours ago
- The Sun
UK to build attack subs as part of major defence review
GLASGOW: Britain announced it will build 12 new attack submarines as it launched a major defence review Monday to move the country to 'war-fighting readiness' in the face of 'Russian aggression' and the changing nature of conflict. Prime Minister Keir Starmer warned that 'the threat we now face is more serious, more immediate and more unpredictable than at any time since the Cold War,' as he launched the review in Glasgow. 'We face war in Europe, new nuclear risks, daily cyber-attacks, growing Russian aggression in our waters, menacing our skies,' he added. The Strategic Defence Review, which assesses threats facing the UK and makes recommendations, said that Britain is entering 'a new era of threat'. As a result, Starmer said his government aimed to deliver three 'fundamental changes'. 'First, we are moving to war-fighting readiness as the central purpose of our armed forces,' he said. 'Every part of society, every citizen of this country, has a role to play, because we have to recognise that things have changed in the world of today. The front-line, if you like, is here,' he added. Secondly, the prime minister insisted that UK defence policy will 'always be NATO first', and finally that the UK 'will innovate and accelerate innovation at a wartime pace so we can meet the threats of today and of tomorrow.' 'Blueprint for strength' The UK has been racing to rearm in the face of the threat from Russia and fears that US President Donald Trump will no longer help protect Europe. Starmer said it would serve as 'a blueprint for strength and security for decades to come', taking into account the increasing use of drones and artificial intelligence on the battlefield. His government pledged in February to lift defence spending to 2.5 percent of GDP by 2027 in the 'largest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War'. And despite budget constraints, it aims for spending to rise to three percent in the next parliamentary term, due in 2029. The Labour government has said it will cut UK overseas aid to help fund the spending. Based on the recommendations of the review, which was led by former NATO secretary general George Robertson, the government said Sunday that it would boost stockpiles and weapons production capacity, which could be scaled up if needed. This includes £1.5 billion ($2 billion) for building 'at least six munitions and energetics factories', procuring 7,000 domestically built long-range weapons, and spending £6 billion on munitions over the current parliamentary term. The government also said late Sunday that it would build up to 12 new attack submarines as part of its AUKUS military alliance with Australia and the United States. Currently the UK is set to operate seven nuclear-powered Astute Class attack submarines, which will be replaced by the 12 AUKUS submarines from the late 2030s. The defence ministry also said it would invest £15 billion in its nuclear warhead programme and last week pledged £1 billion for the creation of a 'cyber command' to help on the battlefield. China 'challenge' The last such defence review was commissioned in 2021 by the previous Conservative government, and was revised in 2023 after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. While launching the new review, Robertson said it would tackle threats from Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, calling them a 'deadly quartet'. But in an op-ed article for The Sun newspaper, Starmer did not mention China, while warning that 'The Kremlin is working hand in hand with its cronies in Iran and North Korea.' The softer rhetoric on China is in line with the Labour government's efforts to thaw relations with Beijing, which reached new lows under former prime minister Rishi Sunak's Conservative government. The review describes Russia as an 'immediate and pressing' threat, but calls China a 'sophisticated and persistent challenge', according to The Guardian. At a time when Washington is demanding that its NATO allies bolster their own defences, Britain is considering strengthening its deterrent by buying nuclear-missile capable aircraft from the United States, The Sunday Times reported.
New Straits Times
19 hours ago
- New Straits Times
US asks Australia to increase defence spending to 3.5pc of GDP
SYDNEY: Australia's prime minister said on Monday his government would decide its defence capability needs before announcing defence spending, after US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth asked Australia to lift its defence budget to 3.5 per cent of gross domestic product. "What you should do in defence is decide what you need, your capability, and then provide for it," Prime Minister Anthony Albanese told reporters, adding his government had already committed to accelerate A$10 billion in defence spending for the next four years. "We're continuing to lift up," he said, citing a 2.3 per cent goal for 2033 previously set by his government. Hegseth and Australian Defence Minister Richard Marles discussed security issues including accelerating US defence capabilities in Australia and advancing industrial base cooperation during a meeting on Friday, a Pentagon statement said on Sunday. "On defence spending, Secretary Hegseth conveyed that Australia should increase its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of its GDP as soon as possible," the statement said. The ministers' meeting on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue, Asia's premier security forum, is only the second between the security allies since U.S. President Donald Trump took office in January. Albanese, who was re-elected in May and is yet to meet Trump, did not raise defence spending in this year's national budget, saying his government had already announced a A$50 billion boost over a decade. Peter Dean, director of foreign policy and defence at the University of Sydney's United States Studies Centre, said Albanese was positioning ahead of his first meeting with Trump, where the pair are also expected to discuss tariffs. Albanese would want the decision on a defence boost to be seen as a sovereign one not imposed by Trump, after the election showed standing up for Australia was popular domestically, he said. Australia's defence spending in 1987 was around 3 per cent of GDP or 10 per cent of the national budget, compared to 2 per cent of GDP or 6 per cent of the budget in 2025, he said. "To achieve self-reliance in the modern era, with the threat from China, and within our region, it is going to cost more money," Dean said. The US would spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on defence this year, he added. Australia has comitted to spend A$368 billion over three decades on the AUKUS programme to acquire and build nuclear powered submarines, and is also boosting missile acquisition and manufacture. - Reuters
