U.S. military puts 'great power
competition' at heart of strategy: Mattis
Send a link to a friend
[January 20, 2018]
By Idrees Ali
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. military
has put countering China and Russia at the center of a new national
defense strategy unveiled on Friday, the latest sign of shifting
priorities after more than a decade and a half of focusing on the fight
against Islamist militants.
In presenting the new strategy, which will set priorities for the
Pentagon for years to come, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis called China
and Russia "revisionist powers" that "seek to create a world consistent
with their authoritarian models."
The "National Defense Strategy" represents the latest sign of hardening
resolve by President Donald Trump's administration to address challenges
from Russia and China, at the same time he is pushing for improved ties
with Moscow and Beijing to rein in a nuclear North Korea.
"We will continue to prosecute the campaign against terrorists that we
are engaged in today, but great power competition, not terrorism, is now
the primary focus of U.S. national security," Mattis said in a speech
presenting the strategy document, the first of its kind since at least
2014.
It sets priorities for the U.S. Defense Department that are expected to
be reflected in future defense spending requests. The Pentagon on Friday
released an unclassified, 11-page version of the document, which did not
provide details on how the shift towards countering China and Russia
would be carried out.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, speaking through an interpreter
at a news conference at the United Nations, said the United States was
using a confrontational approach.
"It is regrettable that instead of having a normal dialogue, instead of
using the basis of international law, the U.S. is striving to prove
their leadership through such confrontational strategies and concepts,"
Lavrov said.
"We're open for dialogue, we're prepared to discuss military doctrines,"
he added.
China's U.S. embassy criticized the strategy, saying Beijing sought
"global partnership, not global dominance."
"If some people look at the world through a cold war, zero-sum game
mindset, then they are destined to see only conflict and confrontation,"
an embassy spokesman said in a statement.
Elbridge Colby, deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and
force development, said at a briefing with reporters that Russia was far
more brazen than China in its use of military power.
Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimean peninsula in 2014 and intervened
militarily in Syria to support its ally, Syrian President Bashar
al-Assad. Still, Moscow was limited by its economic resources, Colby
said.
China, on the other hand, was described as economically and militarily
ascendant. China has embarked on a far-reaching military modernization
that Colby said was in "deep contravention to our interests."
Experts praised the document's targeting of the largest national
security threats rather than the longer lists of risks in some previous
strategies. But without knowing the budget commitments, it was difficult
to assess if it was a sound strategy.
"If we don't actually see where the money is, you know, there is the
danger that it could become all words," said Mara Karlin, a fellow at
the Brookings Institution think tank and a senior defense official in
the Obama administration.
[to top of second column]
|
Three F/A-18E Super Hornets fly in formation over the aircraft
carriers USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76), USS Theodore Roosevelt (CVN
71), USS Nimitz (CVN 68) and their strike groups along with ships
from the Republic of Korea Navy as they transit the Western Pacific,
November 12, 2017. Courtesy Aaron B. Hicks/U.S. Navy/Handout via
REUTERS
SUPPORT FOR ALLIANCES
The document also listed North Korea among the Pentagon's
priorities, citing the need to focus U.S. missile defenses against
the threat from Pyongyang, which beyond its nuclear weapons has also
amassed an arsenal of biological, chemical, and conventional arms.
The document said that international alliances would be critical for
the U.S. military, by far the world's best-resourced. But it also
stressed a need for burden-sharing, an apparent nod to Trump's
public criticism of allies who he says unfairly take advantage of
U.S. security guarantees.
Trump has called the NATO alliance "obsolete", but Mattis said the
United States would strengthen its traditional alliances while
building new partnerships and listening more to other nations'
ideas.
"We will be willing to be persuaded by them, recognizing that not
all good ideas come from the country with the most aircraft
carriers," Mattis said.
The Pentagon is also working on a policy document on the country's
nuclear arsenal. While Mattis did not specifically address that
review, he said the priority is deterrence.
"How do we maintain a safe and effective nuclear deterrence so those
weapons are never used? It is a nuclear deterrent, it is not a war
fighting capability unless it is the worst day in our nation or the
world's history," Mattis said.
Mattis had harsh words for the U.S. Congress and its inability to
reach agreement on budgets.
The U.S. military's competitive edge has eroded "in every domain of
warfare" he said, partly because of inconsistent funding. A bill to
fund the government only through Feb. 16, approved on Thursday night
by the House of Representatives, appeared on the verge of collapse
in the Senate.
"As hard as the last 16 years of war have been, no enemy in the
field has done more to harm the readiness of the U.S. military than
the combined impact" of spending caps and short-term funding.
In sheer spending terms, the United States' military outlay per year
is still far more than China and Russia. The United States is
spending $587.8 billion per year on its military, China $161.7
billion and Russia $44.6 billion.
(Reporting by Idrees Ali; Additional reporting by Michelle Nichols
at the United Nations; Editing by Grant McCool, James Dalgleish and
Daniel Wallis)
[© 2018 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2018 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
|