Overview
The unclassified US National Defense Strategy (NDS) released last week marks a shift from US military primacy to strategic management in the Indo-Pacific to enable a focus on securing the homeland. China is no longer framed as the priority threat, and the region is seen as an economic and strategic hub rather than the central arena of confrontation. The strategy emphasizes stability over escalation, greater ally burden‑sharing, and deeper integration of partner defense spending with US industrial capacity—linking economic openness, military balance, and collective security as core objectives.
The Quiet Downgrade of the Indo-Pacific Theater
In contrast to President Trump’s first term and the Biden administration, defending the homeland and safeguarding US interests in the Western Hemisphere has taken precedence. On the other hand, the Indo-Pacific is increasingly framed as a zone of economic and systemic importance rather than a primary site of forward US military confrontation. The NDS warns that if any state were to dominate this crucial region, it could hinder US access to this economic center of gravity, with lasting consequences for America’s economic prospects.
To guard against such dominance, the strategy calls for maintaining a favorable balance of military power in the region—one designed not to humiliate or strangle China, but to secure a “decent peace” that is open to fair trade. Rather than framing competition with China as an existential or ideological struggle, the NDS emphasizes stability over confrontation. This is reinforced by the document’s notably restrained language on China, which plainly describes it as the second most powerful country in the world with a military capable of projecting power beyond the Western Pacific, rather than as the greatest threat to US security and prosperity.
This emphasis on stability is further reflected in the NDS’s call for a “wider range” of US-China military-to-military communication focused on strategic stability, deconfliction, and de-escalation. The approach builds on Defense Secretary Hegseth’s November announcement that Washington and Beijing had agreed to reboot bilateral military communication channels, resulting in several talks in late 2025. These elements underscore President Trump’s broader reorientation of competition with China—one increasingly defined in economic and technological terms.
Within this framework, the NDS does retain a call for a strong denial defense along the First Island Chain—which is widely recognized to include the Taiwan Strait, the Senkaku Islands, and the South China Sea—signaling a continued willingness to project strength and deter aggression while avoiding offensive escalation with China. This posture reflects a dual-track approach: acknowledging the persistent challenge posed by China’s military capabilities while simultaneously seeking to reassure Beijing that US objectives remain limited and defensive. Notably, the NDS avoids direct reference to Taiwan or other specific regional flashpoints. The absence of explicit Taiwan or South China Sea language in the NDS—despite its prominence in the December’s National Security Strategy—suggests a deliberate narrowing of emphasis on contested issues, consistent with the administration’s effort to avoid confrontation and focus on stability.
Alliance Management in the Indo-Pacific
For allies, the NDS reinforces the Trump administration’s repeated calls for greater burden-sharing to deter regional threats. As Washington prioritizes defense of the homeland and competition with China, the strategy calls on allies and partners to “deal” with other persistent threats—those “less severe for [the US] and more so for them,” namely Russia’s threat to European NATO allies—with the US providing critical but more limited support. For the Trump administration, this approach centers on pushing global allies and partners to increase defense spending to a new NATO-standard of 5% of GDP, redefining alliance credibility around measurable contributions rather than forward US primacy. The administration frames this level of investment as sufficient for allies to effectively deploy and maintain military forces necessary to deter or defeat potential adversaries in their respective regions.
In the Indo-Pacific, the NDS explicitly emphasizes increased burden-sharing on the Korean Peninsula. It identifies North Korea as a direct threat to both South Korea and Japan and calls on Seoul to assume “primary responsibility” for deterring Pyongyang, with the US providing critical but more limited support. The strategy also signals a possible update to US force posture on the Peninsula. Though details remain vague, the language suggests greater operational flexibility for US Forces Korea (USFK) personnel who could be redeployed to other parts of the region that align with US defense priorities. Notably, while the NDS does not reiterate commitment to North Korea’s denuclearization, it emphasizes that Pyongyang’s nuclear forces are “increasingly capable of threatening the US homeland.” This signals continued US extended deterrence for South Korea under the nuclear umbrella while expecting Seoul to assume greater responsibility for conventional deterrence against North Korea.
Even amid tariff pressures and shifting US security commitments, President Lee has taken a calm, pragmatic approach, framing greater self-reliance in defense as the “most basic of basics.” South Korea became the first non‑NATO treaty ally to commit to raising defense spending to 3.5% of GDP, earning praise from Washington as a “model ally.” Lee has presented this shift not as a concession to US pressure, but as a prerequisite for economic stability and strategic autonomy.
This momentum is mirrored elsewhere, as allies such as Japan and Taiwan ramp up defense budgets to meet US expectations. Since taking office, Prime Minister Takaichi has embraced US calls for increased defense spending, announcing plans to raise Japan’s defense budget to 2% of GDP by 2026—a record allocation—and in late December, Japan’s Cabinet approved a record $58 billion budget for the following year. Taiwan has also approved substantial increases, approving increases to 3.3% by 2026 and targeting 5% of GDP by 2030. While this is below earlier calls from the Trump administration of raising its defense budget to 10%, this marks the largest growth in Taiwan’s history. These moves, alongside Seoul’s commitments, reflect Washington’s shift toward measuring alliance credibility by partner contributions.
Implications for Revised US Defense Priorities in the Indo-Pacific
The new politics of the Indo-Pacific underscore that economic and security ties are no longer separable. The reframing of the region as essential to global economic continuity—and of China as a central actor in regional stability—reflects US commitment to safeguarding the region for economic development and preserving a trade truce with China. Ahead of President Trump’s expected visit to Beijing, the NDS’s recasting of US policy toward China signals a broader effort to stabilize the bilateral relationship in ways favorable to US interests, even as strategic competition persists. At the same time, as Washington prioritizes managing relations with China, US allies are increasingly deepening economic engagement with Beijing, raising the risk that trade disputes—such as the tariff threats previously directed at allies like Canada—could reemerge.
As Washington presses allies to increase defense spending in the name of burden-sharing, rising allied defense budgets also carry important implications for the US defense industrial base (DIB). As outlined in the NDS, the US seeks to revitalize its production capacity at scale, both to meet its own defense requirements and to support allies and partners. This creates incentives for allies to translate higher defense budgets into procurement commitments tied to US systems. South Korea has already committed to purchasing $25 billion in US military equipment by 2030 and providing $33 billion in comprehensive support for US Forces Korea over the next decade. Taiwan’s revised defense budget has similarly been welcomed by Washington, with the US announcing an $11.1 billion arms sale in December—the largest weapons package to Taipei to date. Taken together, these commitments signal a deepening integration of allied defense planning with US production capacity, extending alliance cooperation beyond force posture into industrial and supply-chain domains.
This emphasis on revitalizing the defense industrial base comes as it shows clear signs of strain. Delivery delays affecting allies such as Japan—where an estimated $6.9 billion in military purchases remain outstanding—highlight US capacity constraints driven by workforce shortages and limited surge production. In response, some Indo-Pacific partners have emerged as viable alternatives for defense procurement: South Korea, now the world’s tenth-largest arms exporter, has expanded defense exports to European markets, while defense firms in Japan, India, Taiwan, Singapore, and Indonesia have also seen notable revenue growth in the past year. Yet despite this expansion, Asian defense industries continue to lag behind US firms in cutting-edge technologies, limiting the extent to which partners can fully substitute for US capabilities.
