The battle for the Pacific will reshape

the world
America's shift in defence strategy to focus on the Far East has
momentous significance for Europe and Asia.

The Telegraph
06 Jan 2012

The Pentagon briefing room rarely hosts all of America’s service chiefs, let alone the
president. Its use by Barack Obama to announce the conclusions of his defence review
was designed to add a sense of drama – and the occasion certainly lived up to its
billing. Future historians will probably conclude that this was the week when
America’s entire foreign and defence strategy pivoted decisively away from Europe
and towards the Pacific. More ominously, it might also mark the onset of a new, if
concealed, arms race between the US and its aspiring rival, China.

First things first: America’s military dominance will remain unchallenged for the
foreseeable future. Mr Obama might have announced spending cuts of almost $500
billion over the next decade, but this amounts to a light trim for a defence machine
with an annual budget of $650 billion, amounting to 45 per cent of all military
expenditure in the world. America is not axing capabilities in the foolish fashion of
British governments; rather, its power is being focused on the great strategic
challenges of the next century. These can be simply summarised: the struggle for
mastery in Asia, home of the world’s most populous countries and fastest-growing
economies, and responding to sudden crises. To this end, the US will reduce its
presence in Europe, cut 90,000 soldiers and bulk up in the Pacific, with new bases in
Australia and elsewhere. As for other flashpoints, few will be surprised that the US
policy stresses the goals of containing Iran and guaranteeing free passage through the
Strait of Hormuz.

On a purely military level, two points stand out. The US might be cutting its army, but
it has ruled out reducing its fleet of 11 aircraft carriers, each of which packs more
punch than the entire air forces of most countries. While China’s defence budget has
recorded double-digit increases for the past decade, it has still launched only one
carrier – an old Russian model of doubtful combat value. Second, Mr Obama stressed
his determination to invest in “intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance”. Put
simply, the US will seek to extend its lead in the most advanced combat systems:
where scores of troops – and hundreds of support staff – might once have been
required to dispatch a senior al-Qaeda operative, now one unmanned drone can do
the job.
America’s new course could well be shifted by a strategic shock akin to the September
11 attacks. Nevertheless, this plan will have momentous consequences for Europe and
Asia alike. For decades, the US has underwritten the security of the Atlantic as well as
the Pacific, effectively allowing Europe a free ride and permitting a string of Nato
members the luxury of running down their defence budgets. This era is rapidly coming
to a close. Yet with a few honourable exceptions, such as Britain and France,
European powers have failed to fund their armed forces adequately, or deploy them
when needed. Germany, in particular, must overcome the burden of its history and
face up to the responsibilities that go with being the Continent’s leading economic
power.

Mr Obama’s address studiously refrained from mentioning China, the country that
probably has most at stake. Beijing’s leaders will now have to make far-reaching
choices of their own. As events in Burma have shown, China’s “peaceful rise” has
alarmed many of its neighbours: for most countries in the region, American power
and values remain far more appealing. Moreover, China has grown rich largely thanks
to trade, not least with the US. Faced with the net of containment that America is
quietly laying across the Pacific, China will search for the Achilles’ heel of the US Navy,
perfecting a new generation of missiles capable of destroying aircraft carriers from
hundreds of miles away, working out how to cripple the internet, and how to blind
the US satellite network, on which all its military assets now depend.