|
國際現勢 -- 開欄文
|
瀏覽19,251 ｜回應29｜推薦2 |
|
|
|
川普上台後，世局大戲一齣接一齣；國際高潮一波又一波。他並非原因或主角，只不過身間觸媒和插科打諢兩個角色而已。悲劇變鬧劇一再上演，根據「量變導致質變」法則，在川痞/川瘋/川丑三合一變形臭蟲下台前，我們怕不是要看好幾場慘劇。能不能渡過這個「川劫」，就要看我們大家的造化，和一眾善男信女「阿門」或「阿彌陀佛」的修為了。
由於節目繁多，劇情層出不窮：
1) 「親愛的，我把『規則』變沒了」
2) 「親愛的，我不裝了！自由主義的面具太沉重，還是帝國主義本尊帥氣」
3) 「親愛的，『大衛大戰歌利亞』的戲碼改成『卡尼勇嗆川瘋子』」
4) 「親愛的，『阿貓阿狗』們登場機會來了」
5)、6)、7)、8)、9)…，族繁不及備載。
故開此欄，一起欣賞當下各顯神通，讓人眼花繚爛的棋局和好戲。同喜還是同悲，且聽下回分解。本部落格原有個別地區或重大議題的專欄，仍然照常營業。
本文於 修改第 2 次
|
|
中等國力國家拉幫結派--David Luhnow等
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
中等國力國家拉幫結派 -- David Luhnow等 2026/09/24
下文在今年初刊出；當時未能及時轉載。最近國際局勢的發展，尤其是歐盟和加拿大間的眉來眼去、打情罵俏，讓三位的分析仍然值得參考。
Squeezed by US and China, the world’s middle powers are teaming up
Nations are increasingly seeking to bypass the bigger players on trade, supply chains and security
David Luhnow/Kim Mackrael/Bertrand Benoit, 02/07/26
LONDON—In a world increasingly shaped by two unpredictable great powers—the U.S. and China—the world’s middle powers are boosting cooperation in areas from trade to security in a bid to ensure they don’t become roadkill in the new world order.
Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney has emerged as one of the biggest proponents of cooperation among a range of countries including Canada, most of Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia, India, Brazil, Turkey and others.
“Middle powers must act together because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu,” the Canadian leader told the World Economic Forum recently in Davos.
The emerging world order leaves many countries feeling unmoored. On the one hand, the U.S. is retreating from its longstanding role as the leader of the international rules-based order, and it is more openly using its economic and military power to coerce other nations into doing its bidding. China, meanwhile, has pitched itself as the new grown-up in the room, but countries don’t trust it because they see it as an autocracy willing to bend global trading rules in its favor.
“The rest of the world is seeing these two unsavory alternatives, and bouncing around between these two poles,” says Eswar Prasad, an economist at Cornell University.
Middle powers are increasingly trying to protect themselves in two ways: hedging against their dependence on the superpowers by boosting self-reliance, and seeking alliances with other middle powers on specific issues, like supply chains, trade routes or security cooperation, said Stormy-Annika Mildner, executive director of the Aspen Institute Germany.
Large parts of the world outside the U.S. and China are still signing trade deals. Many are ramping up military spending. And others, like France, are trying to create homegrown alternatives to U.S. dominance in tech software.
But none of this will be easy, or fast. Middle powers are a diverse group, so “it comes down to finding the right coalitions for the right topics,” Mildner added.
And given such countries often have competing interests and values, they could cause more global disruption instead of helping anchor security and peace.
Western countries spent 70 years building trade and security links with the U.S. Untangling that isn’t quick or cost-free. For now, many have no choice but to try to avoid a damaging trade war or showdown over security.
“For all our frustration and anger, we shouldn’t hastily write off the trans-Atlantic partnership,” German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said in Davos. His country has reasons for caution about pulling away quickly from the U.S.: It sits close to Russia, lacks nuclear weapons of its own and has a stagnant economy that relies heavily on exports.
There are few easy options in areas like trade. The U.S. has long been an engine of global demand, but it is now closing itself off, limiting options for other nations to sell their exports. China isn’t an alternative because it is focused on selling to other countries, rather than buying from them.
Under Carney, Canada has steered away from the U.S. in trade policy with China, accelerated approval of delayed oil, gas and mining projects to develop more economic autonomy, and expanded export terminals to reduce reliance on U.S. sales.
The European Union has pressed ahead with free-trade deals with India and South America’s Mercosur countries, and is pushing to complete a deal with Australia. “We are making a deliberate choice: openness over protectionism, cooperation over fragmentation, and rules-based trade over unpredictability,” EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič said.
India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi awaits the arrival of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.© Money Sharma/AFP/Getty Images
Merz recently visited India. He is touring Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates this week, and will be in China at the end of the month. The trip will follow recent visits to China by French President Emmanuel Macron and the U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer. But all are wary of swapping out one form of dependence for another—possibly worse—version.
Many middle powers, especially Germany, are increasing military spending. The European Commission, the EU’s executive body, created a financing program last year to help fund member countries’ military spending. Canada joined that program in December.
European countries are also deepening defense and security ties with like-minded countries in East Asia, including Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Australia and New Zealand—all of which share fears of Russia and China.
The U.K., Italy and Japan, for instance, are developing a sixth-generation jet fighter by 2035. South Korea has emerged as a major arms supplier to some European countries. Poland is buying tanks, the Baltics artillery and Norway long-range missiles from South Korea. And the U.K. and Australia are working together with the U.S. to build nuclear-powered submarines, something South Korea is doing as well.
“There is a growing octopus of ties between Europe and Asia which reflects the rise of China but also hedges against the U.S. to some degree,” says Neil Melvin, director of international security studies at the Royal United Services Institute think tank in London.
There are limits to Europe’s ability to defend itself. The continent can produce its own artillery, tanks, subs and ships, but is heavily dependent on the U.S. in key areas such as fighter aircraft and military satellites, as well as nuclear protection.
“If anyone thinks here, again, that the European Union—or Europe as a whole—can defend itself without the U.S., keep on dreaming. You can’t. We can’t,” North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary-General Mark Rutte told the European Parliament recently.
Melvin says the world is likely entering a period where countries cluster in smaller groups of trust. But he warns that middle powers will struggle to find common ground, especially if they have different values. He wonders whether countries like Saudi Arabia could really be partners for European democracies or Canada.
Unless middle powers can look beyond their short-term interests, they could become a further destabilizing force, Prasad says. After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, India refused to join in international sanctions against Russian oil sales, and has provided the Kremlin with a major financial lifeline for its war.
Many middle powers, such as Turkey and Israel, may also fight for regional influence and disrupt stability. Israel’s decision to become the first country to recognize Somaliland, a self-governing territory within Somalia, has sparked tensions with Turkey and Egypt, who oppose the move.
There is also a risk of nuclear proliferation. France’s decision by Charles de Gaulle to opt out of NATO’s command structure and create its own nuclear deterrence is looking prescient. Last week, Merz confirmed publicly for the first time that Berlin was discussing a potential extension of the French and British nuclear umbrella to Germany. Sweden has said it wants to join those talks. But costs could be prohibitive for a continent with stagnant economic growth.
The European Union itself is a good example of the promise and limits of cooperation—it links 27 countries, giving it collective clout to negotiate trade deals and set common standards. But its bureaucracy bogs down decision-making on everything from boosting economic growth to collective defense.
Given U.S. security guarantees, the EU never had to grapple much with defense, said Melvin. Now, a new world order will test the EU’s ability to create quick consensus. “Without U.S. power, it’s very unclear that there’s a thing called Europe rather than a lot of different countries with different interests,” he said.
Write to David Luhnow at david.luhnow@wsj.com, Kim Mackrael at kim.mackrael@wsj.com and Bertrand Benoit at bertrand.benoit@wsj.com
Corrections & Amplifications The Baltics are buying artillery from South Korea, and Norway is buying long-range missiles from South Korea. An earlier version of this article incorrectly said Poland was buying artillery from the Baltics and long-range missiles from Norway. (Corrected on Feb. 7)
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
沙胡衝突升溫；川蠢不知所措 - Will Neal
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
橫批：「自作孽不可活」。
Trump’s Secret White House Flip-Flopping Chaos Is Leaked
YES... BUT ALSO, NO.
Will Neal, 09/ 21/26
Donald Trump has spectacularly flip-flopped on whether to help a key ally in the Middle East suffering from the fallout of his war with Iran.
Saudi Arabia is under attack from Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, who earlier this summer seized on the chaos caused by the 80-year-old president's campaign against Tehran to reopen their own war with Riyadh, which had been subject to a fragile truce since 2022.
Saudi officials have, over the past several weeks, pleaded with the White House for help in defending themselves. The kingdom's de facto ruler, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, 41, personally called Trump on Thursday and asked him to order U.S. forces to join in countering the rebels' attacks, the New York Times reports.
Trump had told aides only the day before that he was not inclined to do so. He changed his mind after speaking with bin Salman, and ordered the Pentagon to prepare for a wave of strikes. U.S. commanders quickly approved a list of targets, selected warplanes for the attacks, and began loading munitions.
The president then told Fox News in a Sunday morning interview that he was still in "deciding mode" about the new campaign. By noon, he had reversed course again, telling officials he had called off the strikes for the time being. Many of those aides had been either "deeply skeptical or outright opposed" to the attacks anyway, sources in the administration told the Times.
It represents something of a dilemma for Trump. The president noted on his call with Fox that the Houthis have so far made good on a pledge not to attack U.S. ships in the Persian Gulf. But he also needs Saudi Arabia's help in waging his war with Tehran, particularly by using U.S. airbases in the kingdom to pressure Iran into reopening the Strait of Hormuz.
Trump launched his campaign against the Islamist regime in February with a pledge the conflict would last a "few weeks." It is now nearing its eighth month, with no ceasefire in sight. Tehran has meanwhile shuttered the strait, through which roughly a fifth of global oil supply passes each year, sending gas prices through the roof and shockwaves across the global economy.
The president is likely mindful of opening a new front in his campaign as Republicans head toward November's midterm elections, overshadowed by both the war and cost-of-living concerns, ahead of which Democrats hold a seven-point lead on the generic congressional ballot.
The Daily Beast has contacted the White House for comment on this story.
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
歐盟建議加拿大為「準會員」 - Jorge Valero
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考：
* Squeezed by US and China, the world’s middle powers are teaming up
下文最後一段報導馮•德•萊恩主席的評論；這位女強人可說是罵川痞不帶髒字的高手。
EU Proposes Canada Become the Bloc’s First ‘Associate Member’
Jorge Valero/Andrea Palasciano/Katharina Rosskopf, 09/16/26
(Bloomberg) -- European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed Canada becoming the first associate member of the European Union.
She offered the invitation during her state of the union address in Strasbourg, France, Wednesday, with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in attendance.
"In this new world, we must urgently re-imagine our partnerships and build global coalitions for our resilience and democracies," von der Leyen said. "I would like to work with you on opening the door for Canada being the first associate member of the European Union."
Carney warned earlier this year that the "rules-based international order" was effectively dead and has made repeated calls for so-called middle powers to band together to oppose the pressure tactics and intimidation of the world's dominant economies. Bloomberg reported earlier that the transatlantic allies were in talks to forge a new alliance to ensure their security.
Von der Leyen also discussed closer cooperation with Canada on manufacturing, tech, defense and energy, and cited the Arctic as a "flagship joint project."
Canada's priority list includes concluding the ratification of CETA, the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, an accord that was negotiated a decade ago but that still hasn't been formally approved by 10 European countries, according to people familiar with the discussions.
Outstanding issues also include ironing out differences over EU's carbon pricing tool on imported goods, its deforestation and pesticides rules.
Canada, unlike the UK, has been granted access to SAFE, the bloc's €150 billion ($173 billion) loan program for defense procurement.
Canada and the EU will be expected to make progress ahead of their summit in Montreal in October, at which they could sign a digital trade agreement that it's been in the works, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
"Europe and Canada believe in democracy," von der Leyen will say. "That power does not belong to the strongest, the richest or the loudest."
-- With assistance from Max Ramsay.
©2026 Bloomberg L.P.
相關報導
* US 10-Year Yield Rises to Highest Since 2007 as Fed Looms
* MBS and Saudi Arabia Face Crisis With Key Oil Pipeline Shut for Weeks
* Trump Jr.'s Wife Says Russian Paid for Parties But Not Wedding
* Apple Just Launched Its New iPhones. Here Are 16 More Products Coming Soon
* Crypto Stocks and Tokens Drop After Senate Blocks Landmark Bill
* 'Death Sentences': Crafting America's Favorite Countertops Is Killing Workers
* What It Takes to Get Your First Job on Wall Street
* AI Is Transforming Business. Now It's Transforming the MBA Classroom
* A New Business School Dean Takes On the AI Era
* Fusion Gets $14 Billion Bet It's More Than a 'Science Project'
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
美國武器短缺亞洲盟國心驚 -- Cate Cadell等
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參看本欄2026/09/08貼文；針對伊朗戰爭所導致：「美國武器短缺」的問題，下文分析更為深入。
U.S. weapons shortage from Iran war alarms allies confronting China
Concerns are growing in Asia and within the Pentagon that dwindling stockpiles will embolden China and North Korea.
Cate Cadell/Noah Robertson/John Hudson, The Washington Post, 08/27/26
FILE - A U.S.-made Patriot missile is launched during an annual exercises in Ilan County, 80 kilometers (49 miles) west of Taipei, Taiwan, on July 20, 2006. Patriot missile systems have long been a hot ticket item for the U.S. and allies in contested areas of the world as a coveted shield against incoming missiles. In Europe, the Middle East and the Pacific, they guard against potential strikes from Iran, Somalia and North Korea. So it was a critical turning point when news broke this week that the U.S. has agreed to send a Patriot missile battery to Ukraine (AP Photo/File) 飛彈射擊照片
The massive expenditure of U.S. munitions in the Middle East is increasingly worrying Asian allies and frustrating Pentagon officials overseeing the Indo-Pacific, who fear that the prolonged war with Iran could undermine U.S. readiness for a conflict with China as it continues to step up military pressure across the region.
Concerns about the depleted stockpile come as the United States canceled an amphibious landing exercise with South Korea scheduled for September, citing demands on U.S. forces from the war in Iran, a week after President Donald Trump announced that he was scaling back joint military exercises with the key ally.
South Korea and other U.S. partners in Asia, including Japan and Taiwan, rely on Washington as the dominant supplier of major conventional weapons and are reckoning with years-long backlogs. The Middle East conflict has intensified those strains, consuming and reallocating munitions that could be critical in a war with China.
One Taiwanese official said they expect "significant delays" of Pac-3 Patriot missiles due to the drain on supplies as the Pentagon has depleted most of its interceptor stockpile in the Middle East, describing the shift in focus from the Indo-Pacific as "troubling."
In December, Beijing staged its largest-ever military drill around Taiwan, encircling the democratically governed island with ships and aircraft. Nearly $30 billion in U.S. arms approved for sale to Taiwan have yet to be delivered, including $882 million worth of Patriot missiles, according to Taiwan Security Monitor.
Japan has similarly been warned by the Pentagon of possible delays in defense shipments, including Tomahawk cruise missiles, according to an Asian diplomat familiar with the matter.
Current and former officials and diplomats spoke to The Washington Post on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of arms sales discussions and U.S. military supplies.
Japanese Defense Minister Shinjiro Koizumi said in May that delays were "possible" but there had been no change in Tokyo's plans to acquire Tomahawk missiles. Taiwanese defense officials told Taiwan's parliament in March that they still expect 102 Patriots to be delivered this year. The Financial Times reported in May that deliveries of 400 Tomahawks to Japan could be delayed as much as two years.
Japan's Embassy in Washington and Taipei's representative office in Washington did not respond to requests for comment. A Defense Department official said "the Joint Force remains postured, ready, and capable of deterring aggression" in the Indo-Pacific, adding that U.S. military resources, including naval forces, routinely move between combatant commands.
"It seems to me that the likelihood that [Taiwan is] going to get a whole 100 is pretty low. I think the number one priority for the United States, rightly, will be refilling its own stockpiles," said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at the Washington think tank Defense Priorities.
"The United States probably also feels like it owes Gulf state allies some replenishment. The war on Iran is not over," she said.
The drain on weapons in Iran has become a source of tension between President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, The Post has reported, though the president has repeatedly denied that U.S. weapons stockpiles are running low.
Borrowed radars, diverted ships
Officials at Pacific Command, which oversees U.S. military operations in Asia, have also expressed frustration over the shifting focus and dwindling resources available to deter Beijing, according to three people familiar with the matter.
One U.S. official said more than 30 ships that were supposed to be in the Pacific had been sent to the Middle East during the war.
"It's clear that they're paying a big price, especially on the Navy side of things," the official said.
This month, the Japan-based USS George Washington was diverted to the Middle East, relieving pressure on the USS Abraham Lincoln after concerns about its extended deployment and conditions for sailors aboard the ship.
The departure of the region's last aircraft carrier underscores a broader diversion of U.S. forces from the Indo-Pacific, where China fields the world's largest navy by number of vessels.
Since the Iran war began, the Pentagon has drawn down several advanced missile-defense systems including Patriot interceptors.
In April, Gen. Xavier Brunson, commander of U.S. Forces Korea, confirmed during testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee that radars used in missile defense systems were taken from the Korean Peninsula ahead of U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities in June 2025, and that additional munitions were moved this year. He said the THAAD interceptor system, the centerpiece of U.S. missile defense on the peninsula, remains in place.
A one-way warming with China
Questions about U.S. military readiness in the region come as Trump is sending warmer overtures to top U.S. adversaries there: Chinese leader Xi Jinping and North Korea's Kim Jong Un.
Trump has repeatedly said that Xi won't invade Taiwan while Trump is president, though Beijing has never publicly stated as much. Trump recently described Kim as "unthreatening and respectful," and said he expects to meet with the North Korean leader this year.
A roughly $14 billion U.S. arms package for Taiwan was shelved ahead of Trump's May summit in Beijing with Xi. The two leaders are expected to meet in Washington on Sept. 24.
One Chinese official said any signals that the White House will approve the package would "severely undermine" further potential visits this year.
Beijing has brushed off requests from the Pentagon's policy chief to visit China for discussions on the military relationship. For months, the undersecretary of defense for policy, Elbridge Colby, has in vain pushed for a meeting with Chinese defense policy planners, according to two diplomats familiar with the matter. China's lack of interest was first reported by Politico.
Colby, alongside others in the White House and the Pentagon, has prodded Asian allies to shoulder more of their own defense costs. At a forum in the Philippines this month, he pushed back against any suggestion that the region is being deprioritized. "We are not leaving; in fact, we are digging in," he said.
Allies have struggled with the contradiction of that pressure to spend more on U.S. arms while facing delays in delivery. "The situation is very challenging," the Taiwanese official said.
Trump in May raised concerns in Taipei about his commitment to Taiwan when he described arms sales to the island as a "good negotiating chip" with China, though an $11 billion arms package approved by the president late last year represents the largest-ever single U.S. arms commitment to Taiwan.
Beijing has continued to ramp up military activity this year. Following its record-breaking military drills around Taiwan in December, China has expanded military infrastructure on disputed reefs in the South China Sea and squeezed Taipei with a spate of new coast guard drills near the island.
In July, Beijing also celebrated its first known test of a sea-based nuclear-capable missile, rattling the United States and its Asian allies.
"Beijing continues to manufacture its own reasons for increased drills and military pressure around the island," said Craig Singleton, senior fellow at the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, which tracks the frequency of Chinese incursions near Taiwan.
Window of vulnerability
Questions about the state of U.S. munitions in the Indo-Pacific have sharpened during the war in Ukraine. The U.S. has sent billions of dollars worth of weapons to support Kyiv, but of different types than what would be needed in a long-range, maritime-heavy conflict in the Pacific.
The Iran war, however, has more directly affected the Pentagon's Asia deterrence posture, experts say.
"Between Iran and the western Pacific, there's a lot of overlap," said Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and a senior adviser at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, which has run dozens of war games since 2023 examining how quickly U.S. munitions could be depleted.
Those war games found that defending against an invasion of Taiwan would probably exceed current Pentagon supply plans and that many critical weapons would be exhausted within weeks.
"Even at the beginning of the war against Iran, we were likely inadequate for a conflict with China in the western Pacific," said Cancian.
Xi has instructed China's military to be capable of invading Taiwan by 2027, according to U.S. intelligence officials, though recent assessments say Chinese leaders do not currently have imminent plans to do so.
The theoretical deadline, however, underscores what analysts and officials say is a "window of vulnerability" in U.S. munition stores.
The Pentagon has pressed defense contractors to dramatically accelerate weapons production and awarded Lockheed Martin a $58.6 billion contract to triple Patriot interceptor production by 2030.
Beijing has not fought in a hot war since its 1979 conflict with Vietnam, but in the decades since, it has built a rapidly expanding arsenal of sophisticated ballistic, hypersonic and anti-ship missiles.
China's defenses are far more advanced than Iran's, making close-in attacks far riskier and increasing reliance on long-range missiles that can strike from safer distances. Across simulations run by CSIS, the U.S. generally expended 5,000 long-range missiles in just four weeks of conflict with China.
The Post reported that more than 850 Tomahawks were fired in the first four weeks of the Iran war. CSIS estimates that figure has since exceeded 1,000, from a prewar stockpile of between 3,100 and 4,500 missiles.
The Pentagon has depleted other key long-range munitions, including roughly a quarter of its prewar stock of Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles and as much as three-quarters of its 90 Precision Strike Missiles, according to April CSIS figures.
Most critical, analysts say, is the rapid depletion of defense munitions, including THAAD and Patriot missiles, which have been deployed extensively in both Ukraine and the Middle East.
"They are the most critical because there are no good substitutes. When you run out of Patriots, when you're out of THAADs, there's no way you can stop missiles coming in," said Cancian.
In an Indo-Pacific conflict, missile-defense interceptors would shield the roughly two dozen U.S. bases in Asia and tens of thousands of American troops in Japan and South Korea.
Analysts estimate that the U.S. has already expended most of its pre-Iran-war inventory of Patriots and THAAD interceptors, leaving only around 1,000, according to CSIS figures published in late July.
"China has 3,000 ballistic missiles or more. So that's just bad math," said Kavanagh.
Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post.
本文於 修改第 2 次
|
|
美軍高端防空飛彈低庫存背景 - Doyle McManus
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
希望習總千萬不要因為這篇報導的訊息，而起了躍躍欲試或鋌而走險的念頭。此外，美國的「財大氣粗」碰上無人機這種新科技，就露出一戳就破的「紙老虎」原形。
U.S. is running low on advanced defensive missiles — and it could take years to recover
Doyle McManus, 09/06/26
The statistics are sobering — so sobering that Defense Department officials refuse to confirm, deny or discuss them.
From Feb. 28 through July, the first five months of the war with Iraq, U.S. forces burned through almost 60% of the nation's advanced defensive missiles — the Patriot and THAAD interceptors that protect American troops.
When the war began, the Pentagon had almost 2,800 Patriot and THAAD missiles in its worldwide inventory, according to a study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, an independent think tank. By the end of July, that number had dropped to about 1,100, CSIS reported. Almost two-thirds of the Patriots and almost 40% of the longer-range THAAD were gone.
"This is a generational annihilation of our theater missile defense capability," said Tom Karako, director of CSIS's Missile Defense Project. "There's no way you can look at this and not see it's a setback."
The White House and the Pentagon have not challenged the CSIS figures, although they have issued sweeping denials that any shortage exists.
"We have far more munitions than anyone in the world, and far more than we need," President Trump said in July.
That's true, but misleading. The U.S. military still holds vast inventories of short-range offensive missiles. But the sophisticated defensive missiles that protect U.S. troops no longer are abundant — as even Trump has acknowledged.
"We have certain types of munitions [of which] we have unlimited, virtual unlimited supply," he said last month. "We have others where it's a little bit tighter."
The result is a squeeze that has prompted U.S. commanders to husband Patriot and THAAD interceptors as scarce assets.
For much of August, when a frayed de facto ceasefire was in effect, U.S. forces did not respond with high-end missiles when Iran attacked oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz.
But when Iran launched rockets against U.S. bases in Jordan last week, Patriots reportedly were used to knock the incoming missiles down. (The Pentagon has declined to confirm or deny those reports.)
The U.S. weapons arsenal "no longer has the capacity to deter a Chinese attack against Taiwan," the Council on Foreign Relations warned in a report last month. Defense planners share the same concern over a potential Russian assault on the Baltic states.
The conservative Heritage Foundation has forecast that the Pentagon's inventory of missiles would run out "within the first week of a Taiwan conflict."
In Europe, a U.S. defense official told the Associated Press last month that the shortfall was "beyond critical." If Russia attacked a NATO country, the official said, U.S. forces in the area would "take punch after punch in the mouth."
The core question is whether the United States has so few missiles that it cannot credibly deter China or Russia from attacking their neighbors.
"You've got to be strong enough to send a clear message that our enemies should not try anything because we're a credible force," said Leon Panetta, President Obama's former defense secretary. "Now we're losing a lot of that credibility — and that's dangerous."
Knowing that U.S. forces have been left without thousands of weapons needed to deter conflict, Karako said, could in itself be provocative. "It could tempt an aggressor to do something, knowing that we have fewer [missiles] to thwart them."
The obvious remedy is to build more interceptors — a process Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered even before the war began. But ramping up missile production won't immediately replenish the stockpile.
Before the Iran war, defense contractors were producing only about 620 Patriots and 96 THAAD each year — fewer than half the number expended during a few weeks this spring.
At current production rates, it will take at least three years to return the Patriot inventory to its prewar level, and at least four years for THAAD, CSIS reported.
Defense experts warn that the stocks need to be even larger than they were before the war to credibly deter China or Russia.
Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and principal author of the CSIS estimates, says most analysts believe it will take years after replenishing the stocks expended in the Persian Gulf to build a credible deterrent against China.
The Pentagon has enough munitions, both offensive and defensive, to continue fighting the campaign against Iran, he added — but some of those less-sophisticated weapons can be used only at shorter ranges, which means placing more troops in harm's way.
Cancian said the CSIS figures were based on publicly available Pentagon budget and acquisition documents, updated in some cases from recent press reports — but not from leaks of classified information.
The roots of the missile shortage began long before the war with Iran. Trump and Hegseth are not the only ones to blame, although their belief that Iran would quickly capitulate appears to have been a major factor.
Nor did former President Biden cause the shortage, as Trump has claimed Biden gave several hundred Patriots to Ukraine, but the shortfall is far larger than that.
The underlying problem, defense experts say, is that the United States designed its missile defense programs for a world in which only a few major powers like China and Russia posed serious threats.
But the landscape of military technology has changed. Missiles and drones have become cheaper and easier to acquire, and countries like Iran can strike targets at great distances without making a huge investment in weaponry.
That's a transformational change — and the Pentagon has been behind the curve, argues Michael C. Horowitz, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. "This is the kind of situation in which great-power militaries like the United States struggle," he said.
So the Trump administration faces several challenges. It needs to replenish its depleted stores of advanced defensive missiles — a process that has only just begun, and which Congress has not yet funded. Meanwhile, Horowitz and others argue, it also needs to build less expensive missile and drone systems to fill the multiyear gap before Patriot and THAAD inventories can be restored.
The Pentagon has begun that process, deploying several relatively inexpensive anti-drone missile systems.
Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act last year included $7.7 billion for low-cost missile and drone programs, but 13 months later, more than 90% of the money remains unspent, Horowitz said.
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
中、美太空爭霸戰蓄勢欲發 -- Cassell Bryan-Low等
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考：
* US confirms for first time it has deployed space weapons (09/15)
US, China arm for space warfare: hunter satellites and orbital weapons
Amid the rapidly-evolving field of military space operations, Beijing and Washington are preparing for the possibility of conflict extending into space.
Cassell Bryan-Low/Joey Roulette/Eduardo Baptista, 09/02/26
In June, a secretive unmanned Chinese spaceplane closely monitored by U.S. military analysts released a small satellite hundreds of miles above Earth in an orbital region crowded with commercial and military satellites. The object then looped around another Chinese satellite before returning towards the spaceplane, according to U.S. space-tracking firm LeoLabs.
Little is known about the satellite or the mission. But the U.S. military operates a similarly secretive spaceplane resembling a small shuttle, also with no crew. Both programs reflect the rapidly evolving field of military space operations as Beijing and Washington prepare for the possibility of conflict extending into space, according to a Reuters review of documents, space-tracking data and interviews with current and former military officials.
Chinese researchers linked to the military are developing technologies ranging from satellites designed to pursue and even capture other spacecraft to systems that could extend fuel supplies while doing so, according to a Reuters review of patent-related documents, procurement notices and academic papers. And the United States and Britain conducted their first joint military operation in space in the path of a suspected Chinese spy satellite, according to commercial space-tracking data.
"The Chinese are rapidly developing capabilities," including ground- and space-based weapons designed to interfere with or destroy targets, U.S. Space Force’s Chief of Space Operations General Chance Saltzman said in July. The threat from China is "substantial," added Saltzman, who is retiring.
Satellites have become indispensable to modern warfare, as conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have demonstrated. For decades they have provided communications, navigation and intelligence services to armed forces on Earth, and once placed in orbit typically remained on fixed paths. Increasingly, however, militaries view them as active weapons platforms capable of launching attacks by disrupting a satellite’s operations through jamming or laser dazzling, or even capturing enemy spacecraft.
Disruption of U.S. space capabilities would "cripple our massive military in the terrestrial sphere," affecting everything from surveillance to missile defense, said Everett Dolman, a former professor at the U.S. Air Force's Air War College. Spaceplanes, because they are agile and capable of deploying satellites or carrying cargo, could appear to opponents as potential "space fighters," he said.
ALLIES JOIN THE U.S. EFFORT
The growing competition comes as Earth's orbit becomes increasingly crowded. SpaceX, which recently debuted on public markets, operates about 11,000 Starlink satellites and plans a constellation of larger AI-enabled data centers in space. China is building rival networks, while U.S. President Donald Trump's Golden Dome missile defense program envisions space-based interceptors.
The United States is also refining capabilities that could prove important in a future conflict.
In the joint U.S.-British operation in September last year, U.S. space forces working from a base in Colorado directed a U.S. military satellite to swoop in close to a UK one as China's Shiyan 12-01 satellite passed about 83 kilometers beneath them, according to space intelligence company Slingshot Aerospace. At that altitude, specialists consider the distance relatively close.
Three space experts with military backgrounds told Reuters it appeared intended as a signal to Beijing, including at space-tracking firm COMSPOC. Andrew Turner, a retired senior British air force officer who is now a space consultant, said it was “almost certainly a strategic signal to China” to demonstrate allied unity, capability and a warning to not interfere with the UK satellite.
The U.S. and Britain publicly announced the operation, the first known one between two members of the "Five Eyes" intelligence alliance, but did not disclose its proximity to a Chinese spacecraft. Much of what occurs in space remains classified because of its intelligence implications.
U.S. Space Command told Reuters the mission demonstrated the ability to work with allies in space. Britain's defense ministry said space is increasingly important to military operations and the UK and its partners were conducting advanced orbital operations to protect their national and military interests. Neither commented on the operation’s proximity to the Chinese satellite.
The U.S. Space Force’s next chief of space operations, Lieutenant General Douglas Schiess, had been involved in the operation. In an interview shortly afterward, he said operating close to another spacecraft could help verify whether an allied satellite is functioning properly or determine whether an adversary is "doing something it shouldn't." He declined to say at the time whether another country's satellite had been nearby.
Britain recently disclosed that the mission was conducted alongside a maritime deployment to the Indo-Pacific region.
Using space not only to support military operations on Earth but also to influence their outcome is "really, really important," then U.K. Space Command chief Major General Paul Tedman said in April at a conference. He has since retired from the military.
China's foreign ministry said it was not familiar with the specific details of the U.S.-British operation. More broadly, Beijing opposes the weaponization of space and supports its peaceful use, the ministry said, while accusing Washington of stoking an arms race through efforts including the missile defense system Golden Dome and potential space-based weapons.
Asked about Shiyan 12-01 and the Chinese spaceplane, the ministry said it had no information. State news agency Xinhua has described Shiyan 12-01 as conducting space environment surveys, and the spaceplane as an experimental craft supporting the peaceful use of space.
U.S. Space Force says its own spaceplane is carrying out a range of tests and experiments.
SPACE WEAPONS
U.S. Space Command head General Stephen Whiting has repeatedly emphasized the importance of space to modern warfare, warning that adversaries are developing capabilities to deny the United States access to key systems and reduce military effectiveness. He has said adversaries would likely seek to target U.S. space assets early in a conflict.
To counter such threats, the U.S. must adopt a more active warfighting posture in space, Whiting argues. That means not only protecting U.S. systems but also being prepared to threaten or strike hostile assets if necessary. He has called for orbital interceptors and other weapons.
"We must be well-prepared for conflict in space. And if deterrence fails, we will fight and win," he told a conference in April.
We must be well-prepared for conflict in space
U.S. Space Command chief General Stephen Whiting
Western officials warn of a range of threats, including ground-based lasers, electronic jammers, cyberattacks and anti-satellite missiles.
In orbit, the United States, China and Russia all operate maneuverable satellites capable of approaching and inspecting other spacecraft. Such systems could be adapted to carry weapons, including lasers or projectiles. Western officials say Beijing and Moscow have demonstrated technologies that could be used to threaten U.S. and allied satellites.
The U.S. has also accused Russia of developing an anti-satellite capability involving a satellite designed to carry a nuclear weapon. Moscow has denied that it is developing a space-based anti-satellite nuclear weapon.
The UK's Tedman, in an interview last fall, said militaries now see satellites as “weapons systems” that need to maneuver and fight. The West is “working hard to retain our strategic advantage in space,” he said.
Some specialists note that disrupting satellites remains easier from Earth than through spacecraft-on-spacecraft attacks.
In a rare disclosure about its own capabilities, the U.S. Space Force announced in June that it had introduced an earthbound electromagnetic weapon from L3Harris Technologies designed to disable or disrupt adversary satellites.
"DOGFIGHTING" AND HUNTER SATELLITES
Although the United States remains the world's leading space power, China is rapidly expanding both the number of satellites it operates and the complexity of its missions.
Chinese satellites have demonstrated what U.S. officials describe as orbital "dogfighting," which includes multiple satellites moving in a synchronized way in proximity. Chinese spacecraft have also shown the ability to capture a defunct satellite and move it into a different orbit.
Last year, China conducted what was likely an on-orbit refueling attempt, according to a U.S. Space Force official. Refueling would be a major breakthrough because satellites are normally constrained by the fuel they launch with. The ability to replenish fuel could determine whether a spacecraft remains a hunter or becomes the hunted.
Chinese institutions continue to pursue new capabilities. Patent-related documents show the maker of some of China's most advanced military aircraft acquired technology that allows satellites to autonomously calculate fuel-efficient maneuvers while pursuing another spacecraft.
Meanwhile, a technology-transfer notice published by the National University of Defense Technology described a mature system capable of managing hundreds of satellites simultaneously for both defensive and operational purposes.
Researchers at another major Chinese university with close military ties have also been developing pursuit satellites, including concepts involving multiple spacecraft using nets to capture targets, according to patent-related documents.
The institutions and the People's Liberation Army did not respond to requests for comment. On-orbit capabilities such as re-fueling and capturing another satellite could have non-military uses.
China's official military's newspaper, PLA Daily, said in a 2022 editorial that controlling space was essential for safeguarding national security, seizing the strategic initiative and achieving victory in war.
Make sense of global markets with the Trading Day newsletter. Sign up here.
本文於 修改第 2 次
|
|
伊朗戰爭的確改變了中東局勢 – Joseph Krasuss
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考：
* US and Iran trade attacks, marking first major military escalation in a month (08/31)
* Iran Is Facing Its Soviet Moment and Possibly Its End (08/30)
* Military leaders warn Hegseth against extending Iran war operations (08/30)
* Six Months Into the Iran War, Who Is Winning? (08/28)
* After six months, the Iran war has reached its endgame - a costly stalemate (08/27)
Six months on, the Iran war has changed the Middle East, but not in the way its architects had hoped
JOSEPH KRAUSS, 08/28/26
It's been six months since the United States and Israel attacked Iran with the perennial goal of transforming the Middle East through military force. The region has changed, but not in the way they had hoped.
The Islamic Republic survived the assassination of its top leaders and weeks of heavy bombing, and found a potent form of leverage in the Strait of Hormuz. Gulf Arab nations saw worrying gaps open up in the American security umbrella they have relied on for decades — and some are looking at alternatives.
Israel has once again thrashed its enemies without defeating them, and after nearly three years of war in Gaza and new land seizures, is at risk of a generational rupture with the U.S., its closest ally. Hopes of normalizing relations with Saudi Arabia — another enduring U.S. and Israeli aspiration — have dimmed even further.
When they attacked Iran on Feb. 28, the U.S. and Israel hoped to topple its clerical leadership and replace it with a pro-Western government. Instead, they've ended up with a "hardened and very radical regime," said Barbara Leaf, a former ambassador who served as assistant secretary of state for the Middle East in the Biden administration.
"That is going to be exceptionally difficult to deal with, to say the least," she said. Iran's "confidence has grown over the months that it cannot only survive, but it can prevail, it can reset the regional landscape."
Iran was on the ropes before the attack
In the runup to the war, the Islamic Republic appeared more vulnerable than at any point since Saddam Hussein's Iraq invaded in 1980.
Iran's currency had cratered, setting off some of the biggest anti-government protests in its history, which were brutally suppressed in January, with thousands killed. Israel and the U.S. had pounded its military and nuclear sites during a 12-day war the previous summer, and its militant allies had been throttled in the wars that followed Hamas' Oct. 7, 2023, attack out of Gaza.
But the tide changed shortly after the initial U.S. and Israeli strikes, as Iran's leaders were quickly replaced and its people — sheltering from the war — ignored exhortations from the attackers to rise up again.
Iran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz, a critical trade route for oil and gas, and attacked Gulf countries hosting U.S. troops, rattling the global economy. U.S. President Donald Trump agreed to a ceasefire in April and signed a deal with Iran in June, which crumbled weeks later.
Iran is now determined to exert permanent control over the strait, to use it to ward off future attacks and secure other concessions, while giving no ground on its disputed nuclear program. It's a risky gamble, especially as the U.S. tightens its blockade and vows new sanctions on Iran's already battered economy.
"Iran has demonstrated that Hormuz gives it significant leverage, but prolonged disruption also hurts its neighbors, China, and the global economy, while encouraging alternatives to the strait," said Yoel Guzansky, an expert on Iran and the Gulf at Israel's Institute for National Security Studies.
"Tehran's danger is confusing its ability to survive with victory and demanding more than its leverage can deliver," he said.
Gulf nations doubt US security guarantees
For decades, the U.S. has been committed to protecting wealthy Gulf oil exporters from external aggression, using a sprawling network of bases across the region.
The arrangement helped secure global energy markets, deterred Saddam's Iraq and later Iran, and contributed to the United Arab Emirates and other Gulf nations becoming havens of prosperity in a volatile region.
It's been tested before, but never like this.
Iran retaliated against Israel, but it also trained its missiles and drones on Gulf nations that had hoped to stay out of the war. It struck U.S. bases and critical energy infrastructure, stretching air defenses and drawing down American supplies of sophisticated interceptors.
Iran responded to attacks on its civilian infrastructure by striking its neighbors' desalination plants. That raised fears that a war begun without consultation with Gulf nations could lead to catastrophic attacks on their water and electricity.
"The fact that the war began without a clear political objective and against the advice of key regional partners, and that there has not been clear evidence of a Plan B once the initial attacks failed to dislodge the Iranian regime, is likely to undermine confidence in the U.S. across the region and may take some time to repair," said Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, a Gulf expert at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy.
Last month, Saudi Arabia entered into a new defense pact with Pakistan and Turkey, an early indication that stalwart American allies might seek new security arrangements. Their options are limited, however.
"The dilemma facing Gulf states is there is no viable alternative to the full range of defense and security networks with the U.S.," Ulrichsen said.
Israel batters its enemies but risks losing its closest friend
Lebanon's Iran-backed Hezbollah launched missiles into Israel days after the outbreak of the war, triggering heavy retaliatory airstrikes and another ground invasion. Israel has reoccupied large parts of southern Lebanon, adding to its wider seizure of territory following the Oct. 7 attack.
Its many tactical victories have come at a mounting cost in international isolation. Israel has been widely accused of genocide in Gaza, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been indicted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity, all of which Israel adamantly denies.
Of greater concern for Israel is its unprecedented erosion of support in the United States. That accelerated as some critics came to see it as having led the U.S. into another Mideast war, something to which the Trump administration has at times lent credence.
As the war settled into a stalemate over the summer, outspoken critics of Israel won some key Democratic primaries across the United States and more than half of House Democrats voted to cut aid to Israel. Israel has also come in for growing criticism from the right.
In addition to deteriorating sentiment in the U.S., there's less chance of forming stronger ties with other countries. Normalization of ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia appears increasingly distant.
"The conflicts that have swept across the region since Oct. 7 have led officials in Saudi Arabia to view the current Israeli leadership as contributing to regional instability and not therefore a viable diplomatic partner at the moment," Ulrichsen said.
Krauss reported from across the Middle East for over two decades, including postings in Cairo, Jerusalem and Baghdad.
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
世界將走向「具有中國特色」 - Mark Leonard
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
A Future With Chinese Characteristics
Mark Leonard, 08/18/26
The world is undergoing a historical and cultural rupture. Just as Hollywood and other American exports once gave the rest of the world a glimpse of modern life and the future that awaited them, China is now doing the same for African, Latin American, and even American young people.
BERLIN—For much of the 20th century, the United States represented not just a place on the map. It was also a point in time. When Western Europeans looked at images of America after World War II—depictions of Hollywood’s glamor, American cars, and newfangled labor-saving devices—they thought they were looking into the future.
The American Dream had an especially irresistible draw for East Europeans behind the Iron Curtain, and for tens of millions of Chinese during the opening and reform era that began after Mao Zedong’s death in 1976. China’s great economic reinvention was inspired, in part, by Deng Xiaoping’s awe at American modernity, which he witnessed firsthand during an official visit in 1979.
But fast-forward to 2026, and the positions have been reversed. For most people in most countries, the future can now be seen in China. Just as Hollywood once showed the world what modern life looked like, China is showing African, Latin American, and even American young people what an economy built on green energy, mobile payments and other services, and advanced robotics looks like. For Cobus van Staden of the China-Global South Project, the West is “increasingly being framed as backward-looking [and] associated with the past,” a phenomenon presumably accelerated by Trumpism, with its rejection of renewable energy, diversity, and its social conservatism.
In many parts of the West, disillusionment has given rise to Chinamaxxing on social media, with American and European influencers performatively embracing Chinese mannerisms and aesthetics. And in the Global South, young people aren’t just imitating Chinese practices like drinking hot water or trying out tai chi. They are watching as China reshapes their daily experiences.
This signals a genuine historical rupture. For generations, most countries defined themselves in relation to the West. Some sought (or were convinced) to emulate Western development models like the Washington Consensus, and many were keen to acquire Western technology and aid, or simply to get the West’s approval. Other countries did push back against the West’s influence and attack Western hypocrisy, but their counter-models were themselves defined by opposition to the West.
Either way, West-centrism was the prism through which geopolitics was conducted and interpreted. When countries in the Sahel invited Russia’s Wagner Group mercenaries to help them deal with insurgencies, it was seen as a reaction against France and its traditional role in the region. When Angola invited Sinopec to exploit its oil fields, it was seen as a snub to Portugal and the United Kingdom. And then there are the many challenges to US hegemony in the Middle East, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. Around the world, memories of bloody Western interventions or financial crises still linger.
Yet younger generations around the world are not even pro- or anti-Western so much as they are post-Western. For them, China, not the US, is at the center of their conceptual universe and envisaged future.
What happened? One of the big differences between countries in the Global South and the Global North is their demographic profile. In the US and Europe, the median age is 40–50, compared to 19 in Nigeria, and 29 in South Africa, India, and Lebanon. That means some 70% of Nigerians aren’t even old enough to have registered the 2003 US invasion of Iraq or the 2008 global financial crisis. As Cobus points out, young West Africans “never knew anything more than the US as we know it now.” The era of Donald Trump encompasses their entire political memory, and they presumably are not very impressed.
This shift in perceptions is not just an African story, of course. In Vietnam, which has long had a fraught relationship with China, young people are becoming less reflexively Sinophobic than their elders. Chelsea Nguyen, a researcher at the London School of Economics, credits the COVID-19 pandemic for catalyzing this change. The West’s perceived mishandling of the pandemic undermined its status as a model worthy of emulation. Many Vietnamese turned to exploring their own history and that of their Asian neighbors, including China. As in much of Africa, growing exposure to China’s rapid technological progress and Chinese consumer goods transformed the country’s global brand.
Meanwhile, Loubna El Amine, a China scholar at King’s College London, notes that in regions riven by instability—such as the Middle East, where the US itself is a big part of the problem—“a lot of the attraction of China is its absence rather than presence.” The latest Arab Opinion Index bears this out, showing that 77% of respondents view US policies as a threat to the region’s security and stability, compared with just 25% for China—and that was well before Trump launched his catastrophic war against Iran. And, of course, China carries none of the colonial baggage that complicates European interventions (or even peacebuilding efforts) in the region.
Still, China has been known to be aggressive in pursuing its economic agenda in the developing world, whether through predatory loans, acquiring critical national infrastructure, or deliberately exporting its domestic overcapacity. Such behavior ruffles feathers as much in Thailand, Mexico, and Nigeria as it does in the US and Europe. Moreover, young people’s widespread distrust of their governments can easily bleed into unhappiness with China when political leaders are seen to be giving it undue privileges.
Since the pivot to China as an exemplar of modernity is in many ways pragmatic and non-ideological, its hold on the popular imagination is still tenuous. Lots of leaders in the West want to compete with China for “soft power.” But the key is not to counter Chinese “propaganda” or improve Western PR. The winners in the battle for hearts and minds will be those who offer real solutions to people’s problems and create more opportunities for prosperity than are currently available.
Mark Leonard, Director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, is the author, most recently, of Surviving Chaos: Geopolitics When the Rules Fail (Polity Press, 2026). He’s been writing for PS since 2004.
相關閱讀：
* Innovation
How Europe Can Save a Trillion Euros and Win the AI Race
Eric Hazan, Lenny Benbara and Baptiste Lefort \outline a strategy that enables the EU to succeed within the context of multiple possible futures.
* Economics
What Should Be Done About Asia’s Undervalued Currencies?
Jeffrey Frankel advises the US not to squander what remains of its influence by demanding foreign-exchange interventions.
* Politics
* Putin Likes His Worst Option in Ukraine
Carl Bildt expects the Russian president to continue his self-destructive war and potentially lose Crimea in the process.
Miscellaneous
* Look East for Lessons in Democratic Resistance Aug 20, 2026, Jeffrey N. Wasserstrom
* No Escape from the Russian Terror Playbook Aug 10, 2026, Nina L. Khrushcheva
* How Trump Is Reinvigorating Democracy Aug 17, 2026, Jan-Werner Mueller
* Why US Bond Markets Are Trembling Aug 20, 2026, Jim O'Neill
* The Canary in the AI Coal Mine Aug 3, 2026, Kenneth Rogoff
Unlock everything PS has to offer
Get every new issue of PS Quarterly in print and digital, plus the full magazine archive—along with a pop-up-free experience, ten gift articles a month, a complimentary one-year gift subscription, and more. Your personalized discount is applied.
UPGRADE NOW
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
美海軍最後一艘亞洲航母移防中東 – Ben Finley/Didi Tang
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考：
* How Trump’s war blew a hole in Western defences (子標題：Months of downing Iranian missiles has left stocks of Patriots and Thaads dangerously depleted)
* Centcom commander visits USS Abraham Lincoln amid questions about conditions on ship
US pulls last aircraft carrier in Asia as Trump focuses on Iran and the Western Hemisphere
BEN FINLEY/DIDI TANG, 08/16/26
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's war against Iran is stretching the limits of U.S. aircraft carriers and leaving the western Pacific without one of the key American warships as China shows more signs of aggression.
The USS George Washington is departing the Pacific and expected to replace the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Middle East amid growing concerns about mental health and supply issues aboard the long-deployed carrier. The Lincoln has had its time at sea extended from its original May return date to support operations against Iran.
The lack of a U.S. carrier in the Pacific may be short-lived if the Navy deploys another in the next couple of months. But it shows how the open-ended operations with Iran are running some American sailors ragged, analysts say, while the Trump administration further retreats from the Asia-Pacific region and focuses on the Western Hemisphere.
"The administration says that the Pacific is supposed to be the most important behind the Western Hemisphere," said Greg Poling, director of the Southeast Asia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Instead, the U.S. is "doing the exact opposite" of its previously expressed goal of pulling out of the Middle East.
American allies in the Pacific are unsettled over the unpredictability of the Republican administration, Poling said, while Beijing "is quite happy with U.S. distraction, with the frustration of U.S. allies and partners."
China may take advantage of US carrier's absence
Beijing sees the U.S. military presence in the region as a threat to China's rise and an obstacle to its ambition to seize Taiwan, the self-governing island it claims as its own. But the United States has argued that the Pacific region is too important economically to lose.
No one expects China to invade Taiwan because an American aircraft carrier has left the region. But the carrier's absence gives the Chinese another opportunity to show its strength, said Bryan Clark, a former Navy submariner who is a defense analyst at the Hudson Institute.
"They're using this as part of the narrative to demonstrate to the Philippines, to Japan, to Indonesia and others that the U.S. is not the big dog in the western Pacific anymore," Clark said. "They would just prefer that countries in the region decide that China is the bigger power and the U.S. is not able to guarantee their security anymore."
China conducted naval exercises this week with Indonesia and recently has shown signs of aggression toward Japan and the Philippines, two key U.S. allies that also have territorial disputes with Beijing.
China carried out military drills this month near the Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea. Both China and the Philippines have claims over the shoal. Last month, a Chinese guided-missile destroyer conducted a live-fire exercise off Japan's southernmost island of Okinotori.
Adm. Frank Bradley, head of the U.S. Special Operations Command, has been trying to reassure regional allies of Washington's commitment. He was in Manila on Thursday, telling his Filipino counterparts that U.S. special operations forces are ready to step up joint exercises to strengthen the countries' alliance. He also is expected to travel to Japan.
"We have the ability to project force, the United States, anywhere on the globe," Bradley told The Associated Press. "And when the threat in the region of the Middle East has been attended to, we will redeploy and reorient and be able to project that force wherever else it might be required."
"I also feel very confident in the Armed Forces of the Philippines' ability to protect their sovereignty here and for us to remain close with them," he said.
Evan Sankey, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute who focuses on U.S. policy toward China, said aircraft carriers provide psychological assurance to U.S. allies. The absence of carriers in the region, he said, "adds to the general sense that the U.S. is distracted by events in the Middle East."
Trump has relied on aircraft carriers for military actions
Trump has relied heavily on aircraft carriers to support military operations during his second term. For example, the USS Gerald R. Ford returned home in mid-May after an 11-month deployment, the longest since the Vietnam War, during which it supported the U.S. fight against Iran and the capture of Venezuela's then-leader, Nicolás Maduro.
The Ford had experienced a fire in a laundry space that forced the carrier to turn around and return to the Mediterranean Sea for repairs and left hundreds of sailors without places to sleep. Meanwhile, the Lincoln has spent a record uninterrupted time at sea of more than 240 days. Democratic lawmakers have been calling for investigations and greater visibility into conditions aboard the ship.
Warships and their crews can only handle so much, said Robert Farley, who teaches national security and diplomacy at the University of Kentucky and often writes about aircraft carriers.
"People don't get enough rest. It's psychologically exhausting. And R&R is part of keeping the crew healthy," Farley said. "Sometimes it's framed as, 'These people haven't had a vacation.' But we are dealing with well-known limits on the capacity of a crew to operate at top efficiency over time. And that just declines."
Clark, of the Hudson Institute, said the squeeze on the nation's aircraft carriers stems from the lack of preparation and planning for the Iran war.
"If we were going to mobilize to do this kind of conflict, and we anticipated it might go this long, we might have done some changes to the carrier schedule to make sure more would be available," Clark said.
Clark said the Navy has 11 aircraft carriers and typically deploys two or three at a time. But it could soon deploy four if the USS Theodore Roosevelt leaves San Diego for the Middle East, allowing the Washington to return to Pacific.
But the massive warships will need maintenance, likely causing a bottleneck at the nation's only two carrier shipyards.
"We'll end up with a maintenance debt that needs to be paid for the next few years," Clark said. "We'll probably have less carrier presence than we've had in the previous years because carriers will be lined up to get into the shipyard."
There are questions about the use of aircraft carriers in modern warfare
Michael Swaine, a senior research fellow in the Quincy Institute's East Asia Program, questions the future need for aircraft carriers as warfare rapidly changes.
Carriers can be more easily targeted with drones and missiles, particularly by an adversary such as China, Swaine said, while smaller ships and submarines can be as effective in striking targets as the fighter jets that launch off a carrier.
Top Navy officials have indicated a desire to move away from a heavy reliance on carriers. Adm. Daryl Caudle, chief of naval operations, told The Associated Press in February that he wants to convince commanders to use smaller, newer ships and other assets instead of consistently turning to huge aircraft carriers.
Associated Press writer Jim Gomez in Manila, Philippines, contributed to this report.
本文於 修改第 1 次
|
|
麥加協議：沙、土、巴聯防 -- Timour Azhari等
|
|
|
推薦1 |
|
|
|
請參考：
* The Strategic Rationale for the Mecca Pact
* The Houthis could be first big test for Mecca mutual defense pact
* ‘Muslim Nato’ could see Saudia Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan clash with Israel or Iran
這個「聯防協議」只是虛晃一槍，說來聽聽；不可能有任何實際聯防作用。
Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Pakistan pledge mutual defence as Middle East turmoil escalates
Timour Azhari/Ariba Shahid/Tuvan Gumrukcu, 08/07/26
Summary
* Pact says armed attack on one signatory would count as attack on all
* Statement gives no specifics on commitments or defence obligations
* Agreement follows nearly a year of negotiations, Reuters reported in January
RIYADH/KARACHI/ANKARA, Aug 7 - Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey signed a joint defence agreement in Mecca on Friday, wedding Sunni Muslim U.S. allies alarmed at a regional conflagration that has brought Iranian missile fire onto Gulf oil exporters.
Iran and its allies have been firing on Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states, and blockading their energy shipments, since the U.S. and Israel attacked it on February 28 in a major escalation after years of regional tumult.
The "Mecca Joint Defence Agreement" is intended to strengthen collective deterrence against any act of aggression and stipulates that an armed attack against any of the three would be regarded as an attack on all, they said in a joint statement.
However, the statement did not give specifics on the commitments each had accepted and it was not clear how far their agreement would bind them to any particular military action in each other's defence.
Turkish Vice President Cevdet Yilmaz said the agreement was not aimed at any specific country. A Turkish official added that it was purely defensive and did not abrogate any existing agreements the countries had with other states.
The three nations share concerns about the increasingly aggressive military stances of both Israel and revolutionary Shi'ite Iran, as their longtime U.S. ally struggles to contain regional upheaval that has caused a global energy crisis.
POWERFUL POLITICAL SYMBOLISM
"Three of the Muslim world's most influential states are convening at a moment of heightened uncertainty, demonstrating a growing willingness among regional and middle powers to coordinate more closely on security matters," said Abdulaziz Sager, chairman of the Gulf Research Center, a Saudi-based think tank.
"The trilateral framework could strengthen the three countries' collective diplomatic and defense weight while contributing to the emergence of a more regionally driven security architecture," Sager added.
Turkey has NATO's second-largest military. Saudi Arabia is home to Islam's holiest sites and one of the world's top oil exporters, while Pakistan is the only nuclear-armed Muslim country.
However, Rayed Krimly, Saudi deputy minister for public diplomacy, said in a social media post that the accord does not represent an effort to establish a military axis or a sectarian bloc.
"Nor is it linked to any nuclear ambitions or arms race," he said.
Although Pakistan agreed a mutual defence pact with Saudi Arabia last year, it has not responded to Iran's attacks on the kingdom militarily. It has also played down suggestions its nuclear deterrent might be extended to allies, saying last year of its pact with Saudi Arabia that atomic weapons were "not on the radar".
Both Pakistan and Turkey have also voiced support for a maritime defence coalition Saudi Arabia has announced to protect regional shipping and energy routes.
Friday's pact was signed in Mecca by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and follows nearly a year of negotiations, reported by Reuters in January.
PACT BUILDS ON LONGSTANDING MILITARY TIES
The Middle East has been in flames for nearly three years since the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel.
Israel has waged war in Gaza, invaded southern Lebanon and seized territory in Syria as well as launching two air campaigns against Iran. Tehran has fired on Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Jordan and Israel.
While Turkey and Pakistan, on the fringes of the Middle East, have avoided significant direct attacks, both are anxious to calm conflicts that threaten their own security and economies.
For Saudi Arabia, three years of Middle East conflicts have imperiled its oil exports and ambitious development plans and drawn big questions over the reliability of its longstanding U.S. security umbrella.
Burcu Ozcelik, senior research fellow for Middle East Security at the RUSI think tank, said the agreement was focused on counterbalancing Iranian hegemony in the region and building deterrence against Israel rather than moving towards a confrontation with Tehran.
"I think the objective is very much the opposite," Ozcelik said.
Pakistan has provided training and technical assistance to Saudi forces for decades, while Turkey and Pakistan have exchanged warships and training aircraft. Saudi Arabia is a major purchaser of drones from Turkey.
Pakistan has deployed about 8,000 troops, fighter jets, drones and an air-defence system to the kingdom and opened negotiations with Kuwait to provide security in exchange for energy cooperation and investment.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office declined to comment. A spokesperson for India's Foreign Ministry said the pact was a development that the country was closely following. Iran did not immediately comment.
By Timour Azhari, Ariba Shahid, Tuvan Gumrukcu and Samia Nakhoul; Additional reporting by Daren Butler, Maha El-Dahan, Ramiy Ayyub, Menna Alaa El Din and Saurabh Sharma; Writing by Angus McDowall; Editing by Sharon Singleton
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab
Ariba Shahid is a Reuters correspondent based in Pakistan, reporting on the economy, energy, mining, climate and foreign policy. She previously reported for DealStreetAsia and Profit magazine, and was an OCCRP research fellow in South Asia.
本文於 修改第 2 次
|
|
|
本城市首頁
看回應文章
等級：8
