By Asad Mirza In the last week in November, the US President Joe Biden’s administration released a Global Posture Review (GPR).This review aims to help it “best allocate military forces in pursuit of our national interests” and focuses on the United States’ strategy.
The Pentagon says that the review will help it “best allocate military forces in pursuit of our national interests” and it has sought to focus efforts on moving away from the Middle East and focusing on countering China.
The review also departs from the manner in which major decisions were made by the last administration that impacted the military and allies – often on Twitter with little discussions within administration and which often caught officials by surprise.
Pentagon maintains that in reality the review did not lead to any major changes in the distribution of US troops around the world, but the details speak otherwise.The review recommends that the US improve its military infrastructure in Guam, Australia, and to focus more on AUKUS and QUAD agreements.
Major details on other potential moves have not been made public, as the report has mostly been classified.
However, Mara Karlin, a senior Pentagon official said, on the Indo-Pacific “we’re moving the needle a bit”, but the review did not look at whether the military could fight two major conflicts at the same time or at the space, cyber or nuclear domains.
She further disclosed that US officials conducted GPR consultations with Australia, Japan, South Korea, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) allies as well as a dozen governments in the Middle East and Africa.
According to her the GPR calls for additional cooperation with allies and partners across the region to advance initiatives that contribute to regional stability and deter potential military aggression from China and threats from North Korea.
Chinese response
On its part, China said that the United States intends to militarise the Indo-Pacific region to contain China.China’s spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry, Zhao Lijian, stated that China strongly opposes the US’s move to increase its military expenditure and expand its military power to maintain its military hegemony under the pretext of the “China threat” conspiracy.
He urged the US to abandon the Cold War mentality of fabricating an imagined enemy, and stop words and deeds that threaten international peace and security.China has repeatedly said the deal poses a risk of nuclear proliferation in the region, and undermines regional peace and stability.
The GPR advocates sending extra fighter jets including F-22 Raptors, F-35 Lightning II, B2 stealth bombers to Australia to deter possible Chinese military aggression and threats from North Korea.
Impact on Quad and Aukus countries
Recent developments, such as the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, China’s rising military aggression towards Taiwan, and a dangerous Russian military build-up near the Ukrainian border, make such analyses more relevant.
But what makes understanding GPR more interesting is the nomenclature, instead of analysis or review it uses the word ‘posturing’ which implies many perceptions of aggrandisement.GPR calls for the expansion or consolidation of bases to which the US has access.
Accessing bases requires extensive consultations and is something that only allies and partners can offer.
The AUKUS was originally billed as providing Australia with nuclear-powered submarines.
The AUKUS’s objective seems to be much more than that.The new accord is a critical component of Washington’s efforts to keep China from acquiring military dominance in the region.
Similarly, QUAD was billed as giving access to the US capabilities to the partner countries but in reality it seeks to use the logistics and operational capabilities of the partner countries instead of providing or enhancing armed capabilities of the partnering countries like India.
US Military officials in the Indo-Pacific have continuously warned about the challenge the US military faces in the region.
Admiral Phil Davidson, the then-commander US Indo-Pacific Command, warned in September 2020 that the US military was not prepared for Chinese missile threats in the Pacific.
The growing Chinese missile arsenal has impeded the US military’s ability in Asia’s waterways and airspace.
Countering terrorism
Moreover, after the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, the review directs the Pentagon to continue its “Defeat ISIS” campaign and to continue analysing what the department’s enduring troop requirements are in the Middle East, as the counterterrorism mission is still on-going.
The commander of Special Operations Command, Gen.Richard Clarke, recently told reporters that the threat of terrorism hasn’t subsided but rather “metastasised” into other areas of the globe.According to the official, the GPR is supporting several inter-agency reviews in Africa to ensure that the department has the right force to counter terrorism threats and support allies.
The GPR did look at what was required for those counterterrorism requirements and has a set of recommendations that are classified, he said.
The GPR however, comes before the National Defence Strategy and National Security Strategy, which usually outlines the US administration’s longer term defence plans and that of the government in power, so ultimately it may turn out to be just a political gimmick by President Biden to bolster his anti-China stance, for the time being.
(Asad Mirza is a political commentator based in New Delhi.He writes about Muslims, current affairs, interfaith, and international affairs.)
asad/ksk/
#Defense #Delhi #Joe Biden #Washington #China #Doma #Delhi #New Delhi #Bid #Karli #Mon #Ara #Washington #Russia #Oppo #Zen #Twitter #Ring
.
