The Pentagon’s senior defense policymaker on Thursday defended the lack of any mention of Chinese aggression toward the Philippines in the South China Sea or Beijing’s military pressure against Taiwan in recent remarks as part of a new U.S. strategy aimed at avoiding a war with China.
Elbridge Colby, undersecretary of defense for policy, also defended the Trump administration’s policy toward the self-ruled island of Taiwan as a bid to maintain the fragile status quo across the 100-mile Taiwan Strait without upsetting China with harsh rhetoric.
Asked during an online press briefing for reporters why a speech he made in Manila on Monday made no mention of China or its bullying of Philippine vessels in the South China Sea, Mr. Colby said it is part of a new strategic approach the administration sees as an improvement on the Biden administration’s China strategy.
“Kind of the key theme of this approach is strengthening countries and delivering results, real kind of military and capability results, and not, as we call it, peacocking,” he said, noting, “I think there’s been a lot of talk along those lines for many years, but much less delivery.”
In a major policy address in Manila, Mr. Colby said the new policy of “realism” involves ending “moralizing speeches” about China and building a “denial defense” near islands stretching from Japan to the Philippines.
On Taiwan, Mr. Colby said any lack of verbal statements about Chinese pressure on Taipei is based on the growing risk of a major conflict with China.
Mr. Colby was asked about Taiwan concluding major military exercises this week that included drills simulating a defense against a Chinese invasion and said U.S. policy remains keeping the status quo and “a stable balance of power.”
However, Chinese military operations around Taiwan have sharply increased since 2022 in what military officials call a military pressure campaign against the island democracy. China regards the island as a breakaway province and is building military forces for an assault, perhaps as early as 2027.
The Chinese operations have been called rehearsals for an invasion by the commander of the Pacific Command, Adm. Sam Paparo.
Largescale Chinese missile deployments through regions close to Taiwan and near daily warplane incursions across the center dividing line of the Taiwan Strait are indications the military balance has shifted in Beijing’s favor and that the status quo is undermined.
The new Pentagon policy of silence regarding Chinese military activities is an attempt to distinguish the Trump administration from the previous administration’s “intense rhetorical pressurization around that sensitive issue without a commensurate focus on delivering military capability in the region, whether U.S. or ally and partner,” Mr. Colby said.
He said the change is “designed to keep the rhetorical atmosphere at a stable level — again, that concept of strategic stability … where nobody in this region has an interest in a major war.”
“We see a part of our responsibility as not contributing to rhetoric that might make that more likely; but at the same time, that relentless strengthening of deterrence throughout the region designed for that peace-through-strength model,” he said.
The undersecretary made no mention that the administration is holding up a $14 billion arms package that would bolster Taiwan’s defenses. The hold was imposed following the summit between President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping in May.
The new weapons package is being reviewed by the administration over concerns the arms sale could deplete already diminished stocks of defensive interceptor missiles.
An earlier arms package for Taiwan approved in December is worth about $11 billion and will include Army HIMARS rocket systems, self-propelled howitzers, anti-tank missiles and loitering drones.
Mr. Colby said the current policy of engaging Chinese leaders is no different than the policies of presidents Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan who met with Soviet leaders during the Cold War.
“We believe not only is that, again, the right approach, the strategically sound approach, we believe it’s an approach that resonates throughout Asia and the Indo-Pacific but particularly in the countries of ASEAN and Southeast Asia where countries understand the importance of strength,” he said. “They don’t want a big war. Nobody wants a big war. But you understand that you have to be strong to ensure that you can prevent that outcome.”
While he criticized the Biden policy toward China, Mr. Colby was silent regarding the first Trump administration, which sharply altered the United States’ decades-long conciliatory approach to Beijing.
One of those major policy shifts was publicly stating that the 100 million members of the Chinese Communist Party did not represent China’s 1.4 billion people.
Mr. Colby did not provide any examples of what he called peacocking, a term defined as making strong statements not backed by action.
However, the first Trump administration included major speeches directly criticizing the Chinese Communist Party and its various activities from senior officials, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, White House National Security Council Adviser Robert O’Brien, Attorney General William Barr, and others.
Mr. Pompeo stated in a 2020 speech that the major addresses sought to expose the imbalances in relations with China and the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party in seeking global hegemony at America’s expense.
“My goal today is to put it all together for the American people and detail what the China threat means for our economy, for our liberty, and indeed for the future of free democracies around the world,” he said July 23, 2020.
By contrast, the new policy of “realism” crafted by Mr. Colby involves renewed engagement with Beijing in the hope the interaction will produce strategic stability.
China, however, has shown few signs of favoring improved relations with the United States and is continuing regional threats and restricting exports of vital rare earth minerals needed by U.S. industry in retaliation for Mr. Trump’s increased tariffs.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.