Follow us on social

Biden-austin

Why the Pentagon is not the right place to launch Biden's big China review

His call for a comprehensive strategy is welcome, but putting the DoD out front looks like he's still favoring military-led solutions.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific

The new Pentagon China task force announced by President Biden today aims to conduct a review of U.S. “strategy and operational concepts, technology, and force posture” in the Indo-Pacific. But if it is indeed a “whole-of- government approach” as the president described it, the Pentagon should be careful not to get out ahead of the National Security Council and State Department.

Why? Because the United States needs to rebalance its strategy toward China and Asia more broadly away from military means and toward diplomatic and economic engagement. Tasking the Pentagon to conduct a "sprint effort" to develop a new strategy toward China before the White House (NSC) has formed a more comprehensive overall approach risks signaling that the United States will continue to prioritize military tools in its China strategy, as opposed to leading with diplomatic and economic engagement.

According to reports on Wednesday, the task force will be working over the next several months and will be led by Ely Ratner, who now holds the position of Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense, specializing in China affairs. Aside from briefing members of Congress as their work proceeds, the group — made up of over a dozen civilians and military officers — will give Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin a set of recommendations by early summer.

It is likely that the State Department and the National Security Council will embark on their own China policy reviews. But beginning with such a prominent presidential announcement about a Department of Defense China task force sets the wrong tone and undermines the idea stated in Biden’s own party platform that “Democrats believe the China challenge is not primarily a military one.” Simply put, the most important ways the United States can more effectively compete with China are to revitalize its democratic model and rebuild its economic competitiveness, and the Pentagon is not the agency best suited to lead in either of those areas.

Of course, assigning primary responsibility for a “whole of government” China strategy to the State Department and White House (NSC) does not mean that military issues should or will be ignored. But such an allocation of responsibility would be key to changing America’s military-first mindset toward Asia that is hobbling its ability to approach China more effectively.

While this new Pentagon task force on China should take cues from NSC and State Department leadership, its planned efforts to review America’s force posture and defense strategy in Asia are long past due. As the new task force begins that review, it can draw upon the Quincy Institute’s recent report, Toward an Inclusive & Balanced Regional Order: A New U.S. Strategy in East Asia, which offers recommendations for how the United States could restructure its alliances in Asia around a more stabilizing strategy. 

Until now, the United States has responded to the shifting balance of power in Asia by doubling down on efforts to maintain primacy in the waters of the Western Pacific. This approach risks triggering destabilizing conflict that would harm the interests of the United States, its allies, and the broader region.

Rather than seeking dominance or control in the waters and airspace of the western Pacific, we propose that America instead work with allies to implement a smarter approach to balancing China’s growing power — one centered on denying Chinese control over those same spaces. This new denial strategy should be built on the enhanced defense capabilities of allies in the region, with more dispersed U.S. forces playing a more supporting role to allied efforts. 

This new defense strategy should entail a significant reduction in U.S. ground troops forward-deployed in Asia, greater reliance on smaller surface ships and submarines over large aircraft carriers, and a shift to more long-range, agile air forces and resilient infrastructure in lieu of large numbers of tactical aircraft concentrated at vulnerable forward bases.

These and other recommendations are a necessary complement to even more urgent diplomatic efforts to bolster bilateral cooperation on the pandemic, climate, and trade, while deepening regional economic and humanitarian engagement. Such a diplomacy-first strategy will better enable the United States to, in Biden’s words today, “chart a strong path forward on China-related matters” — and America’s diplomats are best suited to chart that path. 


President Biden departs with Vice President Kamala Harris and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin at the Pentagon, February 10, 2021. Alex Brandon/Pool via REUTERS
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
DOGE can help close empty, useless military bases across US
Top photo credit: George Air Force Base is a former United States Air Force base located about 75 miles northeast of Los Angeles, California. The facility was closed by the Base Realignment and Closure (or BRAC) 1992 commission at the end of the Cold War. It is now the site of Southern California Logistics Airport and a National Guard drone training facility. (Flickr/Creative Commons/slworking2)

DOGE can help close empty, useless military bases across US

Military Industrial Complex

In his search for saving taxpayers’ money, President Trump recently directed Elon Musk and the newly-created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to take a closer look at the Pentagon. And their search is apparently already paying off.

“They’re finding massive amounts of fraud, abuse, waste, all of these things,” Trump declared.

keep readingShow less
Vladimir Putin Masoud Pezeshkian
Top image credit: Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian attend a documents signing ceremony in Moscow, Russia January 17, 2025. REUTERS/Evgenia Novozhenina/Pool

How Iran quietly buttressed its pledge to not build nukes

Middle East

After Masoud Pezeshkian, Iran’s moderate president, entered office last August, he stressed his readiness to negotiate with the United States. Despite fierce opposition by regime hardliners, he appointed as vice president for strategic affairs former Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, an architect of the 2015 nuclear agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), between Iran and the P5+1 countries — the five permanent members of the United Nations Security (UNSC) council plus Germany. The two seemed to enjoy the full support of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who, in a speech last August, declared that there was “no barrier” to negotiations.

Zarif penned two pieces, published by Foreign Affairs and the Economist, and granted an interview to CNN’s Fareed Zakaria in which he emphasized Iran’s readiness to engage the United States and the West. These public offerings would almost certainly not have happened had Khamenei not approved. In fact, the sole purpose of Zarif’s presence in the new Pezeshkian administration was to prepare for negotiations with the United States. Indeed, given the relentless attacks on Zarif by Iran’s hardliners, he could join the new administration only if Khamenei gave his blessing. Other former and current Iranian officials have also expressed strong support for negotiations.

keep readingShow less
Mahmoud Khalil
Top photo credit: Mahmoud Khalil speaks to members of media at Columbia University during the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas in Gaza, in New York City, U.S., June 1, 2024. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon

When anti-war protesters are called national security threats

Washington Politics

Vice President JD Vance stunned Europe at the Munich Security Conference in February by calling the continent out for serious backsliding on core democratic principles.

He cited annulled elections when the wrong candidate appeared slated to win, digital censorship of opinions that run afoul of the majority or established perspective, and the policing of silent thought (prayer) as exhibits A, B, and C. “In Britain, and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat.”

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.