Hegseth: US will stand by Indo-Pacific allies against ‘imminent' China threat
US defence secretary Pete Hegseth reassured allies in the Indo-Pacific on Saturday that they will not be left alone to face increasing military and economic pressure from China, while insisting that they also contribute more to their own defence.
He said Washington will bolster its defences overseas to counter what the Pentagon sees as rapidly developing threats by Beijing, particularly in its aggressive stance towards 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 US has pledged to defend.
China's army 'is rehearsing for the real deal', Mr 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 have the capability 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 built sophisticated man-made islands in the South China Sea to support new military outposts and developed highly advanced hypersonic and space capabilities, which are driving the US to create its own space-based Golden Dome missile defences.
Speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue, a global security conference hosted by the International Institute for Security Studies, Mr Hegseth said China is no longer just building up its military forces to take Taiwan, it's 'actively training for it, every day'.
Mr Hegseth also called out China for its ambitions in Latin America, particularly its efforts to increase its influence over the Panama Canal.
He urged countries in the region to increase defence 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,' Mr Hegseth said.
He also repeated a pledge made by previous administrations to bolster US military capabilities in the Indo-Pacific to provide a more robust deterrent.
While both the Obama and Biden administrations had also committed to pivoting to the Pacific and established new military agreements throughout the region, a full shift has never been realised.
Instead, US 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 has also been the case.
In the last few months the Trump administration has taken a Patriot missile defence battalion out of the Indo-Pacific in order to send it to the Middle East, a massive logistical operation that required more than 73 military cargo aircraft flights, and sent Coast Guard ships back to the US to help defend the US-Mexico border.
Mr Hegseth was asked why the US pulled those resources if the Indo-Pacific is the priority theatre for the US.
He did not directly answer but said the shift of resources was necessary to defend against Houthi missile attacks launched from Yemen, and to bolster protections against illegal immigration into the US.
At the same time, he stressed the need for American allies and partners to step up their own defence spending and preparations, saying the US was not interested in going it alone.
'Ultimately a strong, resolute and capable network of allies and partners is our key strategic advantage,' he said.
'China envies what we have together, and it sees what we can collectively bring to bear on defence, but it's up to all of us to ensure that we live up to that potential by investing.'
The Indo-Pacific nations caught in between have tried to balance relations with both the US 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.
Mr Hegseth cautioned that playing both sides, seeking US military support and Chinese economic support, carries risk.
'Economic dependence on China only deepens their malign influence and complicates our defense decision space during times of tension,' Mr Hegseth said.
China usually sends its own defence minister to this conference, but Dong Jun did not attend this year in a snub to the US and the erratic tariff war Mr Trump has ignited with Beijing, something the US delegation said it intended to capitalise on.
'We are here this morning. And somebody else isn't,' Mr Hegseth said.
Mr Hegseth was asked by a member of the Chinese delegation, made up of lower level officers from the National Defence University, how committed it would be to regional alliances. In some, China has a more dominant influence.
Mr Hegseth said the US would be open to engaging with any countries willing to work with it.
'We are not going to look only inside the confines of how previous administrations looked at this region,' he said.
'We're opening our arms to countries across the spectrum — traditional allies, non-traditional allies.'
Mr Hegseth said committing US support for Indo-Pacific nations would not require local governments to align with the West on cultural or climate issues.
It is not clear if the US can or wants to supplant China as the region's primary economic driver. But Mr Hegseth's push follows Mr Trump's visit to the Middle East, which resulted in billions of dollars in new defence agreements.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
36 minutes ago
- New York Times
Ukraine Says Russian Strike on Military Base Killed 12 Soldiers
A Russian missile attack on a Ukrainian military training base killed at least 12 soldiers and wounded more than 60 others on Sunday, the Ukrainian military said, in a rare statement acknowledging casualties within its ranks. Ukraine's military did not disclose where the strike occurred, saying in a statement only that there was not a mass gathering at the time of the attack. 'At the time the air raid alert was announced, all personnel were in shelters, except for those who may not have had time to reach it,' Vitalii Sarantsev, a spokesman for Ukraine's Ground Forces, said in an interview with Ukrainian news media. Ukraine's military does not typically disclose official casualty figures, which are treated as a state secret and are a highly sensitive topic in the country. The strike on the training base came after what Ukrainian officials said was Russia's largest combined overnight aerial assault on the country since the start of the war. Russia launched 472 drones and seven missiles overnight, according to Ukraine's Air Force. It said that the vast majority of the drones and three of the incoming missiles were intercepted, but that at least 18 targets were struck. The air force did not provide further details on what was struck.
Bloomberg
39 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Do Democrats Understand the Manosphere Enough to Win It Over?
President Donald Trump ran on a slogan of Make America Great Again and central to his project is to make men great again. But it's only certain kind of men and a certain kind of masculinity. Think Hulk Hogan, who spoke at Trump's nominating convention as did Dana White, the CEO of UFC. This 'masculinist' approach now steers not only Trump's bombastic, in-your-face political brand, but his personnel and policy choices. At its core, it's an ideology rooted in nostalgia and restoration and the belief that 'real' men, the kind who work with their hands and lead with aggression and brawn, have been left behind and now need a hand up — and room to say and do whatever they want, without any consequences. It means Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and his talk of restoring power to the 'war fighter.' It means promising to restore the US as a place where men make things again, even if it means threatening to wreck the global economy in the process (and even if most Americans don't want to work in factories).
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump's threat to FEMA couldn't come at a worse time
As this year's hurricane season begins, states and local governments are bracing for what climate scientists warn could be another record-breaking year of storms, wildfires and floods. As the representative for Louisiana's 2nd Congressional District — which includes New Orleans and surrounding parishes — I know what it means to live in the bull's-eye of weather disasters. In addition to countless unnamed storms, in recent memory, we've weathered hurricanes Katrina and Ida, which upended lives, decimated neighborhoods and tested every seam of our emergency safety net. In those moments, FEMA — imperfect as it may be — was a lifeline. But now, that lifeline is under threat. With Executive Order 14180, President Donald Trump has initiated a dangerous restructuring of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which millions of Americans rely on in their most desperate moments. The president's plan shifts the responsibility for emergency preparedness and disaster recovery from the federal government to already overburdened state and local governments. That's not reform. It's federal abandonment. It's like closing fire stations and telling people to buy their own hoses. A FEMA Review Council, chaired by political loyalists including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is tasked with evaluating whether FEMA has become too 'bureaucratic.' But let's call this what it really is: a plan to downsize or altogether dismantle FEMA's role, cloaked in the language of efficiency and decentralization. In fact, the president has suggested eliminating FEMA, and he fired his acting FEMA director the day after he told a House Appropriations Committee panel, 'I do not believe it is in the best interests of the American people to eliminate the Federal Emergency Management Agency.' I represent a state that knows devastation. In 2021, nearly 500,000 Louisiana households were approved for assistance in the 30 days after Hurricane Ida. But we are not alone. FEMA responded to more than 100 declared disasters in 2024, including back-to-back hurricanes Helene and Milton that battered Florida and Georgia. In North Carolina, communities are still recovering from Helene's catastrophic flooding. Disaster recovery is incredibly difficult even with federal coordination and resources. Without it, we are setting communities up for failure. These actions have consequences — and they will cost lives. The idea that state and local governments — many of which are already underfunded and understaffed — can assume the full logistical and financial burden carried by FEMA is not only unrealistic, it's reckless. Louisiana knows what it means to be left behind. Katrina showed us what happens when FEMA fails. Louisianans couldn't get back on their feet because the very programs created to help them were insufficient, stalling recovery efforts for years. But Ida showed us what's possible when the federal response is swift, coordinated and sustained. We benefited when FEMA learned from past disasters and provided a more robust, effective response through partnerships with state and local governments on the ground. Weakening FEMA is not just bad policy, it's a moral outrage. And the timing couldn't be worse. In 2023, the U.S. experienced 28 weather disasters — hurricanes, floods, wildfires, tornadoes — that cost at least a billion dollars in property losses. That was the highest on record, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Climate change isn't theoretical. It isn't a prediction for what will happen in the future. It's here, now, reshaping our landscape and threatening lives from the Gulf Coast to the Great Lakes. Not only is Trump gutting FEMA, but he's also proposing massive cuts to NOAA and its subsidiary, the National Weather Service — agencies responsible for storm tracking, forecasting and early warnings. These are the tools emergency managers rely on to know when to evacuate, how to deploy resources and how to save lives. In fact, the National Weather Service office in Lake Charles, Louisiana — ground zero for multiple hurricanes over the last five years — is down a director and two senior meteorologists. The administration is systematically dismantling the architecture of public safety. This is not how you protect a nation. This is how you manufacture chaos. If FEMA's role is weakened or decentralized, response times will slow — when every second matters. Poorer communities, particularly communities of color, will be disproportionately harmed. And the national safety net we rely on to manage crises will fray. And let's not be fooled into thinking disasters only strike red states or only strike blue states. Hurricanes don't ask your party affiliation. Floodwaters don't care who you voted for. They destroy everything in their path — indiscriminately. That's why FEMA must remain a federal responsibility: coordinated, professional and responsive to every American. Aug. 29 will mark 20 years since Hurricane Katrina. As we approach that anniversary, it's devastating to watch this administration dismantle the very federal systems that helped my city rebuild, even if they weren't perfect. We should be honoring the lives lost, not putting future lives at risk. Yes, FEMA needs improvement. It must be more efficient, more equitable and more transparent. But dismantling it is not the solution. Gutting FEMA in the middle of the climate crisis is like grounding rescue helicopters in the middle of a flood. We need to invest in FEMA. Strengthen NOAA. Restore staffing and leadership at the National Weather Service. Give state and local governments the tools they need, but do not make them do it alone. Because when the next disaster hits — and it will — we won't have time to debate funding formulas or organizational charts. We will need help. Fast. Fair. And federal. That's the America our people deserve. And that's the FEMA we must defend. This article was originally published on
