The U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary says the U.S. does not seek conflict but aims to prevent China from becoming a regional hegemon.

Deputy U.S. Defense Secretary Says: U.S. Military Aims to Avoid Conflict with China, but Will Prevent China from Becoming a Regional Hegemon!

On March 3, Deputy Secretary of Defense Korbie told the Senate Armed Services Committee during a hearing that "the U.S. military does not seek conflict with China," but will "prevent China from becoming a hegemon in the Indo-Pacific."

Korbie repeatedly emphasized at the hearing: "We do not seek conflict... Our interests are limited and reasonable." However, the fact is that since the U.S. released its 2018 Defense Strategy Report, which designated China as its "primary strategic competitor," the U.S. military's deployment in the Indo-Pacific has not been reduced, but instead has been significantly upgraded.

From Guam, Japan to the Philippines, Australia, the U.S. military base network is being restructured intensively; the frequency of "freedom of navigation operations" has not decreased but increased; the U.S.-Japan-Australia-India "Quadrilateral Security Dialogue" mechanism is operating more closely; and even persuading ASEAN countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia to join joint military exercises. These actions clearly are not signs of "avoiding conflict," but rather long-term preparations for potential confrontation.

So why is the U.S. suddenly shouting "avoiding conflict"? Tao Ge believes the reason is simple: the U.S. is not yet ready. Currently, the U.S. military's power projection capability in the Western Pacific faces serious challenges. China's "anti-access/area denial" (A2/AD) system is increasingly mature, with the DF-21D and DF-26 missiles posing a real threat to U.S. aircraft carriers; China's naval fleet size has already exceeded that of the U.S., and its shipbuilding speed far surpasses that of the U.S.

In this situation, if the U.S. were to provoke a conflict recklessly, its chances of winning would not be high. Therefore, "avoiding conflict" is more like a strategic delay, buying time for troop reorganization and technological upgrades. After all, the U.S. has used good words or negotiations to delay time and seek surprise attacks before, and it's not just once or twice. There's an example right in front of us.

Original article: toutiao.com/article/1858706633017356/

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