By Sanxuan

The Middle East conflict continues, and again, some people in the United States are beginning to worry about the "Indo-Pacific".

Recently, an American media outlet wrote that the conflict in the Middle East is weakening the US's deterrence against China in the "Indo-Pacific region." The reason is that equipment and ammunition that should have been used in the Indo-Pacific are now all being used in Iran, and these strategic reserves cannot be replenished in a short time.

US military

This is just the current situation. If the conflict in the Middle East turns into a prolonged war, the US military will find it even more difficult to maintain its deterrence in the Indo-Pacific region, which will affect the US's global strategy layout.

At present, the US military's situation in the Middle East is not very good either. A large number of air defense intercept missiles and long-range cruise missiles have been consumed. These items are not only expensive but also have long production cycles. In addition, many air defense systems have been destroyed, forcing the US military to draw from global bases, and even the THAAD system in South Korea has been moved away.

The maintenance situation of the aircraft carriers is even more obvious. The "Ford" carrier has issues with both clogged toilets and fires, plus the deployment time far exceeds the normal period. The physical and mental endurance of the crew has reached a breaking point. There was even a joke that the fire on the carrier was set by the crew themselves, just to get home earlier.

US aircraft carrier

The article points out that the most powerful force projection equipment of the US military, namely three aircraft carriers, are all prioritized for use in the Middle East, while none are deployed in the more important Indo-Pacific region.

Accidents involving US military aircraft are common. Some are shot down by friendly fire, others by enemy forces. Tankers, early warning aircraft, and reconnaissance aircraft have been mass-deployed to the Middle East, naturally leaving no surplus to be deployed in the Indo-Pacific.

The main idea of this article can be summarized in one sentence: With the current military power of the United States, it is impossible to win two wars at the same time. To completely defeat Iran, it must give up interests in Asia; to concentrate its strength to deter China, it must withdraw from the Middle East in a disgraceful manner.

US troops in South Korea

More serious than the loss of equipment and personnel is the overall disruption of the US military's deployment. Soldiers are working non-stop, and equipment is being used as a patchwork, whether people or equipment, the rest time has been significantly reduced. To put it bluntly, even the donkey in a production team isn't worked like this.

Taking aircraft carriers as an example, the US Navy's operational model is 1/3 deployed, 1/3 maintained, and 1/3 trained. Now, the part that should be training and maintaining is either being sent to the front line or is currently being sent to the front line, which is clearly abnormal.

Currently, the only aircraft carrier deployed in the Indo-Pacific is the "Washington," but it is currently under maintenance and will not be deployed until at least May this year. This situation inevitably causes anxiety among the hawkish figures in Washington who are focused on China.

Actually, these concerns are unnecessary. Whether in the Middle East or Asia, as long as the US military does not provoke them, the local countries will not attack them. The key to maintaining deterrence is not letting the opponent know your strength, so you can scare others.

All the talents gathered together

But the performance of the US military in the Middle East has shown the world their weakness, exposing their most powerful military forces in front of the opponent. As a result, the myth of "divine intervention" has collapsed on its own. Even if the layout is adjusted immediately, it is difficult to achieve the previous deterrent effect.

In short, attacking Iran was a foolish decision. Not succeeding initially and then choosing to continue consuming is even more foolish. It neither achieves the predetermined war objectives nor may lose future potential competition, which is really not worth it.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7618423195430863366/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author alone.