Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stunned U.S. adversaries and allies at this year’s Shangri-La Dialogue of defense officials in Singapore. He did it in the most unexpected way: by delivering a thoughtful and sensible speech on the future of American defense policy in Asia.
With the Washington press obsessed with stories about rivalries inside the Pentagon as well as surprising and controversial personnel changes in the military hierarchy, many were unprepared for the professionalism and focus the secretary showed in Singapore. After the speech, Mr. Hegseth stayed on message, delivering coherent and well-informed answers to questioners from large and small powers across the region.
In his telling, America’s goal in the region is “a favorable but durable balance of power in which no state, including China, can impose its hegemony and hold the security or prosperity of our nation and our allies in question.” Washington, he said, will pursue that vision with “strength that is disciplined, resolve that is steady, and leadership that is confident enough to speak and walk softly while carrying a big stick.”
What is likely to matter most to American allies (and adversaries) is Mr. Hegseth’s commitment to increase both the quantity of American defense spending and its effectiveness. Hailing what he called President Trump’s “generational investment” of $1.5 trillion in defense spending requested in the fiscal 2027 budget, the secretary pledged “a historic national manufacturing mobilization of our defense industrial base” that would deliver better weapons in greater quantities at better prices than any country in the world can match.
What does America want with all this investment? Stability. “The United States seeks to preserve the conditions that have long underwritten peace and prosperity in this region. . . . Our interests in the Pacific are significant, but they are also scoped and reasonable, defined by a favorable balance of power in which sovereignty is respected, commerce flows freely, and nations retain the freedom to make their own choices.”
Conceptually at least, this approach is significantly more useful than Joe Biden’s emphasis on human rights and democracy promotion. The Trump administration’s approach to the region has its problems, some severe, but an approach incorporating moralistic posturing at the expense of important allies, aggressive rhetoric toward Beijing, and a steadfast refusal to match China’s steady military buildup was unlikely to end well.
Not without reason, Mr. Hegseth projected optimism about the ability of the American alliance system to survive the Trump administration’s emphasis on military burden-sharing. In an era when even New Zealand is looking to increase defense spending, calling on Pacific partners to take on more of the defense burden is pushing on an open door. Increasingly Pacific nations understand that defense spending is more than a necessary bulwark of national security. The rapidly evolving military technology needed to create new weapon systems requires research-and-development projects that can bolster the domestic economy. Given this background, the defense secretary’s vague but enticing assurance that allies that step up their spending can expect benefits including “expedited arms sales, deep industrial base collaboration, expanded intelligence sharing, the list goes on” will elicit significant interest.
So far, so good. But many Asian allies were left wondering how far Washington will back Mr. Hegseth’s soothing words with serious deeds. How does the secretary reconcile the value of speaking softly with his boss’s social-media presence? Does introducing uncertainty into American arms sales to Taiwan increase stability in the region? How does a mercurial trade policy contribute to the stable prosperity the Trump administration ostensibly seeks? Is America under Mr. Trump’s leadership the farseeing custodian of the international balance of power or the bull in the china shop of a precarious world order?
Mr. Hegseth’s speech was silent on the subject on most of his audience’s minds: the U.S.-Iran war, which has closed the Strait of Hormuz to the sea traffic on which most of the region’s economies depend. Fuel and fertilizer price hikes are creating political and economic stress across the region. Remittances from Gulf-based workers in countries ranging from the Philippines to Pakistan provide vital support to families and economies. Asian views of the Trump administration will be shaped far more by the outcome of the conflict in the Gulf than by anything Mr. Hegseth or any other American official says in forums.
One thinks of the Earl of Rochester’s epigram about King Charles II: “Here lies our Sovereign Lord, the King / Whose word no man relies on / Who never said a foolish thing / Nor ever did a wise one.” Mr. Hegseth’s speech was a strong one, and it deserves a wide audience. The question is whether his deeds, and those of his president, can live up to it.