How America Should Be Responding in the Pacific and Beyond
Suhas Nannapaneni
With growing acknowledgment from Admiral Philip Davison, head of America’s Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) that China could “overmatch” US forces within five years, it has become ever more crucial that the US invests in indirect defensive measures in addition to traditional Pacific defense.
Currently, Congress has authorized a $2.2bn fund for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative (PDI) which is far short of the $22.7bn that American commanders are asking for the next five years. Given these funding limits, the question becomes where to strategically place America’s troops, planes, ships, and missiles in order to deter further encroachment from Beijing. Although the US has many large bases in South Korea and Japan, China has an immense advantage in ballistic and cruise missiles. Currently, China has 1,250 ground-launches ballistic and cruise missiles with a range between 500 and 5,500 kilometers, whereas the US only has a conventional ballistic missile with a range between 70 and 300 kilometers.
This disparity puts Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, and much of the Philippines within range of Chinese air strikes and forces the US to look further into Micronesia in order to establish securable large bases. Most notable, of course, would be Guam which INDOPACOM describes as “our most crucial operating location in the western Pacific”. The American territory is distant enough from Chinese missiles but close enough to act as a springboard for bombers and other weapons. Furthermore, America could also set up bases in the nearby Palau and Marshall Islands. Although these islands are still at risk from Chinese cruise missiles fired from ships and submarines, INDOPACOM has requested to spend $4.4bn over the next six years to bolster the island’s air and missile defenses.
Despite America’s top brass recognizing the need to invest more in the Pacific, it is far from a given that America could victoriously face-off with China directly. Currently, China has the largest navy in the world with 350 ships and submarines in comparison to US Navy’s 293. Although the US outpaces China in tonnage (2:1) and aircraft carriers (10:1), China spends less than 1.5% of its GDP on defense, well below the NATO threshold. In a Pacific arms race, there are few guarantees on purely military grounds,
This is why the US needs to also focus on the “gray zone”. Namely, working with Asian allies to project force at critical maritime junctions and increased cybersecurity measures as it is sure to become a crucial component in modern warfare.
Firstly, America must make use of its strategic allies in Japan, South Korea, India, and even the Philippines. With India sizably increasing its Navy’s budget, it is important to make strong pacts with the nation that has control of the Andaman Islands. These islands control the entrance into the Straits of Malacca, perhaps the most crucial of geographic chokepoints for China’s dependence on Middle Eastern Oil. Furthermore, defensive access to international waters surrounding South Korea, Japan, India, and the Philippines, in addition to our own territories in Micronesia would give Western powers a distinct advantage in blockading China’s growing Navy.
Domestically, in the face of China’s hack of thousands of Microsoft customers on the heels of Russia’s own hack, it is clear that the US must invest in more formidable regulations as well as cyber defense. In the new age of warfare, when cyberattacks can shut down electric grids, internet servers, and government communications, network security is vital in preparing a potent defense.