According to a recent report by The Washington Post, US Defense Secretary Higgenbotham has signed the "Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance" confidential internal document, referring to China as the so-called "only and increasingly pressing threat." Since Trump's second term in the White House, he has been fully exerting pressure on Ukraine to accept a ceasefire with territorial concessions and attempting to withdraw from Europe to allow European allies to self-defend. His Defense Secretary Higgenbotham faithfully executes the Trump route, from his speech at the first visit to Europe after taking office to the beginning of the first Asia-Pacific trip on March 24, as well as the content disclosed in the "Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance," all focusing on targeting China. Thus, the military strategy of the Trump administration and its policy toward China have become clearly evident. One During the Cold War era, America's strategic focus was in Europe. In the anti-terrorism era, America positioned the main threat as terrorism spreading across the globe. From Obama's "Asia-Pacific Rebalance Strategy" to the previous Trump administration's "Indo-Pacific Strategy," and then to the Biden administration which continues this strategy, they all emphasize the shift of America's strategic focus. Upon taking office, the Trump administration immediately took strong substantive steps to implement the "Indo-Pacific Strategy" against China, reflecting a structural change in America's global strategy. This structural change is no longer just a strategic concept or preparation but actual actions. On February 12 this year, US Defense Secretary Higgenbotham began his first European tour after taking office, attending the 26th Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting. In his speech at the meeting, Higgenbotham not only declared the new Ukraine policy of the Trump administration but also clearly required European countries to ensure their own security, while stating that the United States prioritizes dealing with the "competitor" China, whose intentions threaten our homeland and core national interests in the Indo-Pacific region. On March 24, Higgenbotham embarked on his first Asia-Pacific trip since taking office, visiting Hawaii, Guam, the Philippines, and Japan, all aligning highly with his mention in Europe of "homeland and core national interests in the Indo-Pacific region." When a new US government takes office, it usually releases its National Security Strategy and Defense Strategy within about a year. However, there are exceptions. On January 20, 2021, when the Biden administration took over, it promptly released its "Interim National Security Strategic Guidance" on March 3. Its official National Security Strategy and Defense Strategy were not released until March 28, 2022. Similarly, the Trump administration also issued the "Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance" two months after taking office. However, this version of the "temporary" defense strategy under the Trump administration reflects its fundamental strategic orientation. This "Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance" is only nine pages long, with most paragraphs marked as "Confidential/Prohibited for Foreigners to Read." It is said that it was circulated among high-ranking officials at the Department of Defense in mid-March. The essence of the document focuses on responding to the so-called "only and increasingly pressing threat" from China. This differs significantly from the Biden administration's National Security Strategy and Defense Strategy. Although the 2022 version of the Biden administration's National Security Strategy and Defense Strategy ranks China as the top "threat" to the United States, it also positions Russia as a "serious and realistic threat," with North Korea, Iran, and violent extremist organizations labeled as "persistent threats." The "Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance" of the Trump administration not only exaggeratedly considers the Chinese "threat" involving issues such as "Greenland and the Panama Canal" but also openly interferes in China's internal affairs regarding the Taiwan issue. Meanwhile, the US is repositioning its overall military structure, shifting the strategic focus to the Indo-Pacific region. To adapt to this shift in the strategic focus, European and Middle Eastern allies need to significantly increase their defense spending to handle their own security issues and address threats from "Russia, North Korea, and Iran." Two In his speech at the NATO summit after taking office, Higgenbotham demanded that Ukraine accept a ceasefire under humiliating conditions while urging European NATO allies to increase annual defense spending to 5% of GDP. He even hinted at giving up American leadership over European allied forces, aiming to reduce tensions in Europe by mediating a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia, thereby reducing or even abandoning America's commitment to European security, allowing the US to shift its strategic focus to the Indo-Pacific region. Firstly, the US-Japan military alliance is becoming increasingly stronger. Despite differences between the Trump and Biden administrations in handling alliances and national security and military strategies, they are highly consistent in promoting the containment of China's "Indo-Pacific Strategy." Trump explicitly proposed the "Indo-Pacific Strategy" during his previous term, and Biden consistently follows this approach, with only differences in means and approaches. In April 2024, during Biden's term, the US and Japan underwent the "largest-scale upgrade in more than 60 years" of the US-Japan Security Treaty: both sides agreed to upgrade the US Forces Japan Command into a Joint Operations Command, with Japan establishing a "Joint Operations Command" to connect with it. According to this, during wartime, unified command over US forces and Japanese Ground, Maritime, and Air Self-Defense Forces can be implemented, achieving tactical information sharing. On March 30, during his meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Isao Ishiba, Higgenbotham stated that in response to what is described as "China's aggression and coercive actions," the US and Japan stand firmly together. US-Japanese security cooperation will further deepen and become more specific. Both parties reaffirmed that the US Forces Japan headquarters will be upgraded into a US-Japan Joint Command, and both countries will accelerate joint production of advanced medium-range air-to-air missiles and "Standard-6" shipborne air defense missiles to increase ammunition reserves for emergencies. Secondly, strengthening Philippine military forces and reinforcing US-Philippine cooperation. Since the current Marcos government came to power in the Philippines in 2022, it has fully aligned with the US, actively joining the US's "Indo-Pacific Strategy" to contain China. During the Biden administration, the number of US bases in the Philippines increased from five to nine. This time, Higgenbotham's first Asia-Pacific tour began with a visit to the Philippines before arriving in Japan. This undoubtedly reflects the care and importance given to the Philippines, a relatively weaker "piece" on the first island chain, and encourages and indulges the Philippines in causing trouble in the South China Sea. During the meeting between President Marcos of the Philippines and Higgenbotham on March 28, Higgenbotham reiterated the old tune of the US's "firm commitment" to the Philippines. Given the US's current behavior of selling out Ukraine and abandoning European allies, how much credibility does this tone hold? It remains to be seen how Marcos evaluates it. On April 4, Trump announced the imposition of so-called "reciprocal tariffs" globally, with the Philippines ranking among them at 17%. In response, the Philippine government comforted itself by saying, "Other countries are taxed higher; we rank second to last." However, due to the fragility of the Philippine economy, this 17% tariff could lead to an economic recession in the Philippines. The equipment of the Philippine armed forces has always been very outdated, mostly consisting of "hand-me-downs" from retired equipment from the US, Japan, Australia, South Korea, etc., with some more advanced equipment provided by the US and Japan based on their own needs. For example, during the cabinet of Kishida, Japan provided the Philippine Navy with coastal surveillance radar and communication systems needed for networking under the name of "Government Support for Strengthening Security Capabilities." During this visit to the Philippines, Higgenbotham indicated that after previously deploying the "Tiphon" missile system, additional deployments of expeditionary vessel intercept systems and "high-performance" unmanned surface vessels would follow. At the same time, the US State Department approved the sale of 20 F-16 fighter jets to the Philippines, totaling $5.58 billion. Undoubtedly, this amount is a huge sum for the Philippines, whose annual defense spending is less than $5 billion. If this arms deal is to materialize, the Philippines may need to raise funds from multiple sources. Considering issues of internal political struggles and subsequent developments in South Korea, Higgenbotham bypassed this important regional ally in his Asia-Pacific tour. However, Japan and the Philippines are key countries on the first island chain of the US's "Indo-Pacific Strategy" to contain China. Higgenbotham's actions make his intentions clear and malicious intent obvious. Three The secret document of the Trump administration's "Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance" provides a rough outline for the seemingly erratic foreign policies since Trump took office, indicating that America's strategic contraction in Europe and the Middle East is aimed at concentrating efforts on containing China. However, whether Trump's administration's plans will succeed is highly questionable. Upon careful consideration, it becomes apparent that Trump's military strategy contains significant structural contradictions. Firstly, withdrawing from Europe is not easy. The first salvo of the Trump administration, which aimed to achieve success right away and open the way for subsequent policies, has failed. Trump claimed during his campaign that he could achieve a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia within 24 hours of taking office. After taking office, he indeed attempted to achieve this goal all at once. However, Trump's relentless pressure on Ukraine to accept a ceasefire not only drove Ukraine into a corner where it had to retaliate but also made European allies unable to accept it. During this period, America's selfishness and coldness were fully exposed, and its decades-long effort to maintain a so-called moral image was completely destroyed. Trump's cease-fire initiative with Ukraine has made no progress to date. European allies cannot believe that even if a cease-fire between Ukraine and Russia is achieved according to Trump's conditions, they cannot trust that Russia will stop at Ukraine. Moreover, even Russia does not accept Trump's cease-fire conditions. This makes Trump's cease-fire wish entirely one-sided. If Europe remains unstable, the US cannot withdraw from Europe. The main structural contradiction in Trump's European policy lies in the severe lack of consistency between means and objectives. The more Trump urgently seeks a formal cease-fire to shed the burden of European security protection, the more European countries feel the threat intensifying. The more European allies feel threatened, the more they cling to the US, and the less willing they are to accept the cease-fire and peace Trump desires. Secondly, domestic governance is constrained. Due to Defense Secretary Esper and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Milley defying orders during the previous Trump administration, Trump began a major purge of the military upon taking office. As part of this, General Brown, who was not yet halfway through his term as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was dismissed and retired Air Force Lieutenant General Dan Kane was nominated to succeed him. Currently, Kane's appointment is undergoing congressional hearings. As a general favored by Trump and carefully selected by him for the position of Defense Secretary Higgenbotham, Kane stated during the congressional hearing: Ukraine has the right to self-defense, and American aid has stopped Russia's further aggression. The United States is part of a coalition supporting Ukraine's defense, and we should focus on providing assistance only the US can offer. Whether Kane can smoothly take over as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff depends on passing the congressional hearing. His remarks in Congress are vastly different from Trump's once cutting off weapons and intelligence support to Ukraine and pressuring it to accept humiliating cease-fire terms. It can be believed that Kane's remarks not only reflect his personal understanding and attitude towards the Ukraine conflict but also represent the domestic politics of the United States. Just like when Trump irregularly promoted Milley to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Milley defied him when Trump needed him personally. Even if Kane smoothly takes over as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he will not obey Trump's every command. As a high-ranking politician, whether the president is satisfied obviously pales in comparison to considerations of historical political positioning. Thirdly, allies may not necessarily follow unconditionally. As part of the "Indo-Pacific Strategy" to contain China, the US has formed a series of alliances. However, many of these alliances are now fading: the US-Japan-India-Australia "Quad" mechanism is becoming increasingly hollow, and even the US itself questions the US-UK-Australia "AUKUS" because providing nuclear submarine technology to Australia is no small matter, putting this $60 billion project's future in jeopardy. Moreover, due to Trump's threat to annex Canada, US-Canada relations have become extremely tense. Even among the US's Asia-Pacific allies—Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines—they all endure silently under the US's tariff stick. This not only causes economic losses for allies but also affects domestic politics and national sentiment, inevitably eroding alliance relationships. The "Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance" secret document of the Trump administration has exposed its true intentions, tearing away the facade of Trump's previous claim of "not going to war with China." We must remain highly vigilant against this. (Author's Institution: National University of Defense Technology Information and Communications College) Wu Minwen Source: China Youth Daily April 10, 2025, Issue 05 Source: China Youth Daily Original Article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7491444295069729330/ Disclaimer: This article solely represents the author's views. Feel free to express your stance by clicking the 'Like' or 'Dislike' buttons below.