December 23, 2024 - 11:00am
As President-elect Donald Trump continues to nominate candidates to serve in his next administration, one name could indicate the direction of America’s foreign policy during his second presidency. Elbridge Colby, who wrote the National Defense Strategy in 2018, has now been picked to be the next Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, vowing to “focus our defense policy on restoring peace through strength and always putting America first”.
A Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense in Trump’s first term, Colby is popular with conservative realists for his scepticism of foreign military entanglements. Conversely, others on the Right fear that Colby is too dovish towards Iran. Nonetheless, he is undoubtedly accomplished, not to mention aligned with Trump’s foreign policy instincts. The Undersecretary of Defense for Policy is responsible for developing Pentagon strategy, and Colby’s writing and public statements provide an insight as to where he will focus his energies: namely, China.
Colby believes that the military threat posed by Beijing is far more potent and concerning than is generally understood in Washington. In turn, he argues that US military resources need to be redeployed from Europe and the Middle East to the Pacific in order to better deter China. American military resources, especially naval resources, are currently spread too thin; amid an inadequate defence industrial base which produces warships far too slowly and expensively, this overstretch is increasing maintenance delays and crew exhaustion. At the same time, the People’s Liberation Army is ramping up its production of highly capable missiles and warships, demonstrating the likelihood that the US military would lose a war over Taiwan.
In tandem with Trump’s push for European allies to spend more on defence, an argument that Colby has made repeatedly, we should therefore expect fewer high-end naval and air force deployments on the continent. This should not be a great concern for European governments, which have traditionally preferred the Americans to carry the expensive weight of deterrence activities related to Russia. Because of Moscow’s increasingly sophisticated nuclear ballistic missile submarine forces, however, the US Navy will maintain submarine deployments in European waters under Trump. If Europe is to reach one conclusion from Colby’s appointment, it is that its leaders should invest significantly and immediately in refuelling and transport aircraft, and boost support for Ukraine.
While some claim that giving Colby a top Defense brief will lead to an abandonment of US support for Ukraine, this concern is arguably overstated. Though he has lobbied for a more cautious provision of US military aid to Ukraine, the incoming administration is likely to recognise that this aid is its primary lever of influence towards Russian concessions in future peace negotiations. Still, Colby’s appointment does emphasise that Trump wants to put intellectual weight behind his argument that Europe must do much more for its own security. The same principle applies to other allies such as Taiwan and Japan, which Colby has argued must also significantly increase defence spending.
Though he is outspoken on social media, US allies will find a good partner in Colby. I know from personal experience that he is willing to engage in serious and respectful debate. He has strong views but also a sustaining interest in productive dialogue. He will further a Trump defence policy that seeks to avoid conflict wherever possible, while pursuing urgent preparations for war of a kind not seen since 1945.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeAs an Australian I am more afraid of the USA and its military might and ambitions than I am of China. The USA controls spy bases in Australia (especially Pine Gap) whose operations are of crucial importance to the USA’s military activity in various parts of the globe. Like many Australians I suspect that our own government has not much say about what the USA does on and from Australian soil. We ask who was behind the dismissal of the Whitlam Government in 1975 and why and the answers we glean are that the USA was behind it all.
50 years ago and lefties still bang on! Whitlam’s government was a shambles. You were well rid of it. A pity Whitlam was so badly served by his colleagues.
“focus our defense policy on restoring peace through strength and always putting America first”.
What a sad testament to the state of the republic that such thought is necessary.
Sad indeed, but when one finds oneself at the bottom of a deep hole, step one is to put down the shovel and stop digging it deeper. At least we’ve finally crossed that threshold. Got to start somewhere.
Yep
I agree with this new policy guru that the threat of China can’t be underestimated, and I’ll go further and give it a name, Xi Jinping. Since he has taken over he has claimed the entire South China Sea, built artificial islands and militarized them, provoked a border conflict with India, unilaterally broken the treaty the CCP signed with Hong Kong, conducted economic warfare over perceived insults, refused to allow an international investigation of the global COVID pandemic, greatly increased intimidation tactics against Taiwan, declared a ‘no limits’ partnership with Putin’s Russia, put Uyghur Muslims in concentration camps, and eliminated presidential term limits to allow himself to remain in power indefinitely. Did I miss anything? This is all in addition to the economic manipulation and cultural suppression of Tibetans and other minorities that was already happening before he took power.
Xi Jinping is the most dangerous leader of a foreign nation on the planet, not least of which because of the lack of foresight on the part of American business leaders and political elites allowing our economy to become so dependent upon theirs. Xi’s pattern of behavior fits a disturbing pattern that few have identified or discussed, maybe out of respect, maybe out of disbelief, and maybe out of fear. He shares a pattern of militarism and openly expansionist intentions that anybody living the past eight decades should understand. Replace the South China Sea with the Sudetenland and Taiwan with East Prussia and you’ll have a pretty good idea who I’m talking about. Our governments should take a balanced approach that emphasizes deterrence to forestall conflict and preparing for the worst if it can’t be prevented. He may not give us much of a choice.
Usually you are level-headed but I think this topic has got you activated…I still agree some of what you say, but I like to know my enemy and assume they are smart if not smarter than me! insulting is for fools!
Everything they are doing, we’ve done before and worse otherwise we would not be the powerhouse we are now or recently. And everything they’re now doing better than us is because we gave them the power to do so, believing ourselves to be superior (underestimating our enemy).
Failing to step back, strategically observe, study them, learn their language, and identify their vulnerabilities—when they already know ours—is the ultimate folly of the century!
We cannot win by force – because they know what we know and even prepared themselves for it and beyond! Not to mention again, we gave them the technology and they surpass us! ouch!
We need to study and slow down and surprise them just like they have – and yes that may take centuries just like they did!
What we used to call conquer and divide is now cooperate and hold….we are in a new territory!
But nothing wrong with becoming like Venezuela! or Australia…some power but not ruling the world!
What we do now is more important than what we have done in the past 800 years!
ps. if they got us by providing cheap material, it is quite obvious to me what we need to do but I have been laughed at and I thought OK I will wait and laugh later! just like them be slower, wait longer, and then move!
Europe is the western top of Euroasia and its future is as part of Euroasia. Trump and Colby know that. They also know that the US’ economic weaknesses, which Trump is trying to address, mean the US cannot stay in Europe even if Trump wanted to, which I doubt. Trump realises what European Governments don’t or won’t. It is time for the US to leave Europe after eighty years and for Europe to make its peace with Russia.
But it is Europe which is a prime anti Russia proponent despite being dependent on the USA. I also doubt the US will let go of such a profitable market.
Xi instructed his military to be ready by 2027. Big bluff or for real? He’s an Autocrat. Who’s telling him stuff he doesn’t want to hear? So we better assume he’s not only serious but largely unchecked.
Turning Taiwan into a porcupine already happening. West coast is not terrain conducive for amphibious operations. Most likely is blockade and US would need to run that. Cuban Missile crisis in reverse. Perhaps the key is how long either side could sustain such a strategic standoff. The World economy would obviously crash the moment a blockade initiated and just poss China could be more exposed by this than US. That may prove the main reason Xi holds off.
In many regards US couldn’t deliver a surge in military power fast enough to totally deter by 27. The requirements are quite different from supporting Ukraine. So this has a big element of gamble on both sides.
A Chinese invasion of Taiwan would be just the excuse we need in the West to disengage completely and remedy all the terrible mistakes of Clinton Blair and their successors. The economic impact on China would be devastating and put Xi’s rule seriously at risk.
Russia had no significant Western markets to lose. And Xi is not Putin. It won’t happen.
Yes a correct analysis. There will be no invasion of Taiwan by the PRC.
In any event there will be a gradual rapprochement between the two…they are both China.
What will not happen is Taiwan becoming an aggressive outpost for the US Empire, such as Ukraine became.
An excellent choice. The views he has expressed regarding Iran are not at all “dovish”, just sensible and based on many historical precedents.