WASHINGTON (AP) – Biden administration faces enigma as it rethinks the positioning of military forces around the world: how to focus more on China and Russia without withdrawing from long-standing threats the Middle East – and make that change with potentially weaker Pentagon budgets.
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin ordered a review of the “global stance” for a few months a few days after taking office. It will assess how the United States can better organize and support its extensive network of troops, weapons, bases, and alliances to bolster President Joe Biden’s foreign policy.
The review is part of the administration’s effort to chart a path for a military still embroiled in decades-old conflicts in the Middle East, facing flat or declining budgets and facing problems. internal issues such as racism and extremism.
Its outcome could have a lasting impact on the army’s first priority: making sure it is prepared for war in an uncertain era of arms control. Also at stake are relations with allies and partners, weakened in some cases by the Trump administration’s approach to diplomacy.
Austin’s review is closely related to a pending decision by the administration on whether to fulfill the previous administration’s promise to withdraw completely from Afghanistan this spring. And it moves forward separately from the big questions about the modernization of the strategic nuclear force.
Like the Trump administration, Biden’s national security team views China, not militant extremists like Al Qaeda or the Islamic State group, as the No. 1 long-term security challenge. Unlike his predecessor, Biden sees great value in U.S. commitments to European nations in the NATO alliance.
This could lead to significant changes in the U.S. military “footprint” in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia-Pacific, although these changes have been tested earlier with limited success. The Trump administration, for example, felt compelled to send thousands of additional air and naval forces to the Persian Gulf area in 2019 in an effort to deter what it called threats to regional stability. Biden has seen reminders of this issue in recent days with violence in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It could also mean a hug from Biden for the recent efforts of military commanders to find innovative ways to deploy forces, detached from permanent bases that entail political, financial and security costs. A recent example was the visit of an American aircraft carrier to a Vietnamese port. Commanders see the value of deploying forces in smaller groups in less predictable cycles to keep China out of balance.
Signs of change appeared before Biden took office.
In December, General Mark Milley, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, spoke of his own view that technological and geopolitical change argues for rethinking old ways of organizing and locating forces.
The very survival of American forces will depend on China’s boom adaptation, the spread of technologies such as artificial intelligence and robotics, and the emergence of unconventional threats such as pandemics and climate change, Milley said.
“Smaller will be better in the future. A small, almost invisible and undetectable force, which is in a constant state of motion and is widely distributed, would be a force that can survive, “he told a Washington conference.” You will not achieve any goal if you are dead. “
Austin made a similar and narrower point last month about the positioning of U.S. forces in Asia and the Pacific.
“There is no doubt that we need a more resilient and distributed stance of strength in the Indo-Pacific in response to China’s counter-intervention capabilities and approaches, supported by new operational concepts,” Austin wrote in response to questions from the Senate formulated before its confirmation. audition.
Austin also noted his concern about competing with Russia in the Arctic.
“This is fast becoming a region of geopolitical competition and I have serious concerns about Russian military buildup and aggressive behavior in the Arctic and around the world,” he wrote. “Similarly, I am deeply concerned about Chinese intentions in the region.”
This does not argue for abandoning large U.S. military centers abroad. But it suggests more emphasis on deploying smaller groups of troops in shorter rotations to non-traditional destinations.
This change is already underway.
The military, for example, is developing what it calls a “Arctic-capable brigade” of soldiers as part of a growing approach to the High North. This area is seen as a potential flash point, as the great powers compete for natural resources that are more accessible as the ice packs recede. Similarly, the Air Force is sending B-1 long-range bombers to Norway, a NATO ally and neighbor of Russia, for the first time.
China is considered an Arctic nation, but the U.S.’s main concern with Beijing is its growing assertiveness in Asia and the Pacific. According to the U.S. view, China intends to build military force to deter or block any U.S. effort to intervene in Taiwan, the semi-autonomous democracy that Beijing sees as a renegade province that must eventually return to communist retreat.
A Foreign Ministry report this month called Taiwan the most likely spark of a war between the United States and China, a prospect with dire human consequences that said “the Biden team should be concerned.” .
“Millions of Americans could die in the first war in human history between two nuclear-weapon states,” the report said.
Washington also cites concern over China’s efforts to modernize and potentially expand its nuclear arsenal, while declining to participate in any international nuclear arms control negotiations.
The most intense focus on China began during the Obama administration. The Trump administration went further by formally declaring that China and Russia, not global terrorism, were the main threats to U.S. national security.
Some now question whether this change has gone too far.
Christopher Miller, who served as acting secretary of defense during the last two months of Donald Trump’s presidency, said in an interview that he agrees that China is the key threat to national security. But he said U.S. commanders in other parts of the world told him China’s focus cost them the resources they needed.
“So I felt it was time to review that again and make sure we didn’t create any unwanted consequences,” Miller said.