March 18, 2021-- In advance of a flurry of meetings between U.S. officials and leaders of Asian nations, including top foreign policy officials of China, Yahoo News published on March 10 on the balance of forces in the Indo-Pacific region.  U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. S. Clinton Hinote, the deputy chief of staff for strategy, integration and requirements, revealed that recent war games demonstrate that the balance of power is shifting, with China emerging as a serious threat to U.S. interests.  By 2018, he said, the "trend in our war games [with China] was not just that we were losing, but we were losing faster."  

If the Chinese launch an attack on Taiwan, he added, "...we know what is going to happen.  The definitive answer if the U.S. military doesn't change course is that we're going to lose fast.  In that case, an American president would likely be presented with almost a fait accompli," that Taiwan's independent status would be nullified, and it would be fully incorporated into the People's Republic of China.

The war games that Hinote referred to involved a scenario in which the Chinese attack U.S. positions in the Pacific and Taiwan, under the guise of military exercises, ten years from now.  His warning echoed that of Admiral Philip Davidson, chief of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, who told Congress that, as the military balance in the Indo-Pacific "is becoming more unfavorable for the United States and our allies...we are accumulating risk that may embolden China to unilaterally change the status quo before our forces may be able to deliver an effective response."  Davidson's timetable is faster than Hinote's -- he warned that China could invade Taiwan in six years.  He insisted that it is urgent that defense spending on U.S. forces in the region be increased immediately, which was warmly received by War Hawks from both parties.

Military parade in China, on the 75th anniversary of the end of World War 2 (Photo: www.kremlin.ru)

The anti-China military parade before Congress continued this week, as Admiral Craig Faller, commander of US Southern Command, told a Congressional hearing on March 17 that China has become the leading threat in the region, taking advantage of the coronavirus pandemic and increased lawlessness to impose its will on a growing number of countries. "I look at this hemisphere as the front line of competition," Faller told the Senate Armed Services Committee, describing Beijing's efforts as a "full-court press....I feel a sense of urgency," he added. "Our influence is eroding."

Going even further at the same hearing was Northern Command chief Gen. Glen VanHerck, who warned of Chinese infiltration in the Americas, exploiting openings created by their offers of economic development aid.  "They are absolutely in the NORTHCOM AOR [area of responsibility] attempting to influence in the Bahamas, working through 5G for example," he said. "The same thing in Mexico." VanHerck further claimed that Chinese money laundering undergirds criminal activity such as gun and drug running and illegal mining.

Diplomacy, or preparing for war?

As these military officers were feeding hysteria against China in the Congress, the Biden team was holding its first face-to-face meetings in the region, to consolidate an alliance to counter China.  On March 12, President Biden held a virtual conference with his counterparts from India, Australia and Japan.  With an ostensible theme of economic cooperation, focused on expanding production and distribution of COVID vaccines to Asian neighbors, cooperation on 5G and communications, and on climate concerns, the issue of China was the proverbial elephant in the room.  India was offered substantial economic aid by the U.S. and Japan to upgrade their pharmaceutical capability.  This in itself was useful, as the COVID pandemic continues to spread, but it was also described as required to counter what they referred to as China's "vaccine diplomacy."  The online event was designed to bring the four nations into closer strategic alliance as "The Quad", to serve as the basis of an "Asian NATO" military alliance.  The economic component of the relationship is intended to counter the good will gained by China through its involvement in promoting economic development in the region through its Belt-and-Road Initiative, and providing vaccines to its poor neighbors grappling with the pandemic.

The Quad discussion was followed by meetings held by U.S. Secretary of State Blinken and Defense Secretary Austin in Tokyo and Seoul. The stated goal is to bring these countries more directly into the strategy of containing China.  Blinken told the Japanese that China is "aggressive" in dealings with its neighbors, and repressive and anti-democratic at home.  In reporting on the talks, Blinken said, “Japan has real interest in what happens with regard to Taiwan and Taiwan’s straits and we spent some time comparing notes on that."  In Seoul, Austin called for strengthening the alliance with South Korea, claiming that the region currently faces "unprecedented threats" from China and North Korea.

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken and U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin meet with Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga, in Tokyo, Japan on March 16

First meeting with Chinese officials

The meetings with allies preceded an encounter with top Chinese representatives Yang Jiechi, a senior foreign policy official, and State Councilor Wang Yi on March 18 in Alaska.**  The U.S. will be represented by Blinken and national security adviser Jake Sullivan.  The significance of the meeting has been downplayed by the U.S. side, which lowered expectations by announcing this is not the start of a negotiation process.  A spokesman for the Biden team said, “This really is a one-off meeting. This is not a resumption of a particular dialogue mechanism or the beginning of a dialogue process," adding, "This is very much about sitting down, getting an understanding of each other and then taking that back and taking stock. We just felt for a variety of reasons that being on our own territory was extremely important for this meeting and not attempting to meet in China".  The U.S. officials will raise concerns over Hong Kong, charges of human rights violations of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang, alleged economic coercion of U.S. allies, and freedom of navigation in the East and South China Seas.

Further adding to the pre-meeting tension was the announcement on March 16 by Blinken that the U.S. issued sanctions against 24 Chinese officials over changes in election laws in Hong Kong.  A U.S. official said this move is about safeguarding "international rules, norms, and universal values."  China has been the target repeatedly of claims that it is flaunting the "rules based order", meaning the rules established by the U.S. and its allies to protect a geopolitical balance favorable to western financial and diplomatic interests.
It is too early to conclude exactly what the Biden policy will be toward China.  Biden has a long personal relationship with China's President Xi Jinping, and had a two-hour discussion with him in med-February.  After that talk, Biden reported to the Munich Security conference that he does not intend to adopt policies pitting "East against West", arguing against a "return to the reflexive opposition and rigid blocs of the Cold War."

"Global Britain"

Coinciding with U.S. diplomatic initiatives was the release by British Prime Minister Boris Johnson of the U.K.'s "Integrated Review" of its defense posture, which features a "tilt" to the Indo-Pacific as part of his plan for a "Global Britain."  What stands out are proposals to modernize and increase the size of its nuclear stockpile, and to upgrade conventional forces.  The latter calls for modernizing their fleet of tanks, and building new frigates for the Royal Navy, which is scheduled to deploy into the Indo-Pacific region.  Rory Medcalf, the head of the National Security College at Australia's National University, told The Guardian's diplomatic editor Patrick Wintour that the "concept is for the maritime democracies to counter China and uphold the law of the sea."

Photo: Julian Calder.          Photo: Arno Mikkor
The empress of the British Commonwealth, and her Prime Minister, Boris Johnson

In addition to backing U.S. and NATO deployments in the Indo-Pacific aimed at China, the review said the decision to raise the cap from 180 warheads to 260 was “in recognition of the evolving security environment,” identifying Russia as Britain’s “most acute threat.”  The Financial Times reports that this reverses a decision made in 2010 to reduce the size of Britain’s warhead stockpile to no more than 180 warheads by the mid-2020s. Tom Plant, director of proliferation and nuclear policy at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), said the increase was “pretty seismic,” adding: “It may seem like a small increase set against Russia and U.S., but it comes against two decades of nuclear reduction since the U.K.’s 1998 defense review.”

Speaking on March 15 ahead of the review’s release, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab described increasing the stockpile as the “ultimate insurance policy” against threats from hostile states. Asked why the government wanted to end three decades of gradual disarmament, Raab told BBC Radio 4’s Today program: “Because over time as the circumstances change and the threats change, we need to maintain a minimum credible level of deterrent. Why? Because it is the ultimate guarantee, the ultimate insurance policy against the worst threat from hostile states.”

Wintour writes that Johnson's tilt is part of an "imperial fantasy", a return to the empire's glory days with an "east of Suez" geopolitical deployment.  He wrote that Britain's economy is hardly capable of sustaining such a venture, pointing out that Britain's aircraft carriers, one of which is slated to sail to join the allied fleet, are still equipped with a squadron of F-35 fighter jets on loan from the U.S. Marine Corps, as the Brits presently lack a capability for the deployment of a squadron of their own. 

NOTE: This article was written before the March 18 meeting between the U.S. and Chinese officials.  Preliminary reports indicate the initial comments from the U.S. were sharply critical of China, and the Chinese responded by pointing to the hypocrisy of the U.S. making charges of human rights violations.  I will provide a full report in the TLO Daily Video Update on Monday, March 22.