US Defence Secretary, Peter Hegseth recently visited the Philippines and Japan, he met his local counterpart Defence Secretary Gilberto Teodoro, and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Hegseth affirmed US support for Philippines, his statements reinforcing America’s ‘ironclad’ commitment to its defence treaty with the nation. Hegseth discussed deterrence, and US intentions to deploy new advanced capabilities in Philippines.
After visiting Philippines, Hegseth travelled to Japan, reiterating US commitments to the Indo-Pacific. Reinforcing the previous Whitehouse’s commitments to Japan, including development of an integrated war-fighting headquarters in Japan. A project designed to improve the resilience of allied command and control if war breaks out with China.
Japan’s defence focus is rapidly changing from its northern areas and Russia’s claims to the Kuril Islands, to the southwestern region of Japan and China’s activities . The international waters in this area are busy with Chinese activity, including large exercises involving carrier task groups. China claims the Senkaku Island’s that are south of Japan, and would provide useful bases if it blockades Taiwan.
Japan and the US are increasing their military presence in this area, Japan activating a new anti-ship missile regiment (8th Surface to Ship Missile Regiment) equipped with the Type 12 missile. A locally built missile with a range of 200km.
America has deployed sophisticated, long-range MQ-4 Triton surveillance drones and smaller MQ-9 Reaper drones to Okinawa. Additionally, large exercises between the US and Japanese Self Defence Force that used to be run in America or Guam were recently shifted to Japan. Exercise Iron Fist in 2023, and Exercises Resolute Dragon and Valiant Shield in 2024. The joint exercise programme taking on greater seriousness and slowly evolving into rehearsals for conflict.
And, 3rd US Marine Division remains in Okinawa, nearly 30 years after its withdrawal was first agreed between the Japanese and US governments. An indication that Japan is concerned about rising tensions in the area. A recent Japan Times article ‘US Marines start to leave Japan, decades behind schedule, reports a decision’ discusses a recent decision to move a small number of Marines from Okinawa to Guam reminding readers that “The urgency to relocate the Marines has been undermined as China has increasingly made its presence felt with military exercises.”
The aim of Hegseth’s visit is clear, to make sure that America’s key allies in the South and East China Seas know the US is committed to their defence. In a recent Financial Times article, titled ‘Pete Hegseth says US is setting up a ‘war-fighting’ base in Japan’ the author summed the situation up nicely stating that “Trump’s recent comments questioned the validity of long-standing alliances and unsettling Nato allies and reverberated in Asia. Japan, which considers itself Washington’s closest ally in the region, depends heavily on the US security umbrella.”
Essentially, the Trump administration’s current foreign policy is unsettling its allies. If the US is aggressively undermining its long-standing economic and security relationships with NATO; What chance do Indo-Pacific allies have of being treated reasonably?
However, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Philippines are probably shielded from the worst of Trump administration’s foreign policy because they occupy strategic ground, useful in US competition with China. The nations create a ring around China that in a conflict could be used to blockade maritime trade, or prevent Chinese warships entering the wider Pacific. Further, Japan’s location provides bases for preventing Chinese access to the Arctic. And, during peace-time this ring of pro-US states allows America to closely monitor the movements of Chinese warships and submarines. So, while the Whitehouse is focussed on competition with China, the US will probably keep supporting them.
Protecting Japan, Philippines, and Taiwan fits with the new ‘mercenary’ or ‘America First’ Trump administration’s approach to foreign policy. The loss of any one of these nation’s support would impact on America’s ability to compete with China. Therefore, we should expect to see more US forward deployments, exercises and presence in, or around these nations.
However, the loss of trust may be hard for America to reverse. Associated Press recently reported that the trade ministers of China, Japan and South Korea held their first joint discussion in five years. A Chinese state affiliated social media reported the meeting claiming the three countries would work together to respond to American tariffs.
Although, Japan and Korea quickly qualified their positions dismissing the idea of a joint response to American tariffs. Associated Press’s coverage does state that “The countries’ three trade ministers agreed to “closely cooperate for a comprehensive and high-level” talks on a South Korea-Japan-China free trade agreement deal to promote “regional and global trade.”
This meeting may be the first indication of potential security impacts related to the Trump administration’s economic policies. Japan and South Korea are not going to immediately surrender their security alliances with US, but trade is a form of ‘soft power’ and a “South Korea-Japan-China free trade agreement” could provide the basis for greater rapprochement between these nations.
In the short-term, the impact of American economic policies could counter any benefit from Hegseth’s visit. And, looking further into the future the Trump administration needs to carefully reflect on the impact of its rhetoric and economic decisions, especially its new tariff regime.
 |
Japan’s new amphibious warfare unit officially established
On 24 March, Japan officially announced the creation of a new maritime transport unit. The Maritime Transport Group, has been in development for several years as ships were procured and built, and is now an official organisation.
The unit will eventually operate four Nihonbare Class Landing Craft Utilities (LCU), two Yoko Class transport vessels and four smaller support vessels. A Nihonbare LCU is about 80 meters long, and displaces 2,400 tonnes. The Yoko Class is larger, about 120 metres long and displacing about 3,500 tons. LCUs are designed to run aground and disembark soldiers and vehicles on a beach and the larger ships are designed to use docks or transfer their loads to smaller vessels.
The construction of these vessels, and the formation of the Maritime Transport Group is big change in Japanese defence posture. The Japanese Self Defence Force was formed after World War Two with a specific defensive, non-expeditionary role. So, building an amphibious capability indicates an evolution of Japanese doctrine. Although, the capability is presented as defensive; reinforcing and resupplying Japan’s island garrisons, a fleet of amphibious warships enhances Japan’s ability to project power.
Exercise Freedom Shield, South Korea
This month, South Korea and the US conducted Exercise Freedom Shield 2025. A large annual exercise involving military units from the Republic of Korea and the US. The exercise is a large rehearsal for potential conflict, the US 8th Army and Korean military working together to practice an integrated response to North Korean aggression.
North Korea traditionally protests any large exercise, and its Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying “This is a dangerous provocative act of leading the acute situation on the Korean peninsula, which may spark off a physical conflict between the two sides by means of an accidental single shot, to the extreme point.”
Large exercises like Freedom Shield allow allies to practice working together, and to demonstrate their capabilities. Both contribute to deterrence because when North Korean analysts and planners see US and South Korean forces operating seamlessly together, they are less likely to risk conflict. Military planners tend to be conservative, and are less likely to risk confrontation with a well-prepared opponent.
Australia, New Zealand and US work together on aircraft maintenance
South Australia is set to become a maintenance hub for Australia, New Zealand and US aircraft. Australia is building a new Deep Maintenance and Modification Facility, in Adelaide that will service sophisticated P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft and MQ-8 Triton long-range surveillance drones.
America benefits because the Deep Maintenance and Modification Facility provides redundancy in case of conflict. Rather than having to return to the US, American forces in the Pacific now have a sophisticated maintenance facility they can use in Australia.
This decision also demonstrates the high-level of trust the US places in Australia because weapon systems like the P-8 and MQ-8 are highly sophisticated and therefore contain sensitive, secret technology. The fact that the US is allowing Australia to conduct maintenance and modifications indicates a high-level of trust.
This decision is an indication of the increasing integration of these militaries, all three sharing the complex maintenance of new and highly sophisticated aircraft.
Melanesian update
A regular update on the Pacific’s least reported trouble spot; Melanesia.
Vanuatu Prime Minister lashes out at the media
In an interesting incident this week Vanuatu’s Prime Minister Jotham Napat, attacked the media. An attack criticised by the International Federation of Journalists. Napat was upset at an investigative news article titled ‘From paradise to peril,’ published by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation(ABC) on 21 March.
This incident is noteworthy because it indicates that there may be issues with the governance of Vanuatu’s building regulations. Small nations like Vanuatu may have weak state regulators that can be influenced. ABC is a credible and well-respected source, making it more likely that there is an issue that needs to be addressed. And, Napat’s statement could be interpreted as trying to divert discussion away from this issue and by attacking the media. However, the Prime Minister’s reaction could also indicate local concerns about Australian influence in the nation.
This incident is noteworthy because it indicates that there may be issues with the governance of Vanuatu’s building regulations. Small nations like Vanuatu may have weak state regulators that can be influenced. ABC is a credible and well-respected source, making it more likely that there is an issue that needs to be addressed. And, Napat’s statement could be interpreted as trying to divert discussion away from this issue by attacking the media. However, the Prime Minister’s reaction could also indicate local concerns about Australian influence in the nation.
Bougainville independence process
This week, New Zealand news service One News reported Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister, James Marape’s concerns about the progress of Bougainville’s independence mediation process. The Prime Minister is worried about the precedent that could be set, and that other provinces may be encouraged to secede.
Marape’s statements support my previous assessments that Papua New Guinea is unlikely to allow the province to breakaway.
Bougainville fought a long war to break away from Papua New Guinea during the 1980s and 90s. The war finished with a settlement that included an agreed process to consider Bougainville’s independence. The process included a referendum on independence followed by a decision in Papua New Guinea’s parliament. The process is stalled as Papua New Guinea’s parliament debates the type of majority required to authorise independence.
Currently, Papua New Guinea and Bougainville’s representatives are involved in mediation process led by New Zealander, Sir Jerry Mateparae to re-start the stalled process.
Ben Morgan is a bored Gen Xer, a former Officer in NZDF and TDBs Military Blogger – his work is on substack
Sub, eh! one release understand, a place like Wanganui, one, all gone
Traitors like Ben are conspiring to make us believe that letting US cockroaches continue to parasite NZ is acceptable.
It isn’t. EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN MUST GO. From the spy bases, to filthy rats who bought fake citizenship like Peter Thiel.
Are tariffs a problem for China? Read this somewhere.
China’s exports to the United States account for a relatively small portion of its overall GDP.
In 2023, China’s total exports were valued at approximately $3.38 trillion USD, with exports to the U.S. amounting to $436 billion USD. China’s GDP in 2023 was around $17.79 trillion USD.
Calculating the percentage:
Exports to the U.S.: $436 billion
Total GDP: $17,790 billion
Percentage = ($436 / $17,790) × 100 ≈ 2.45%
So, exports to the U.S. made up about 2.45% of China’s GDP in 2023. This figure aligns with the trend in recent years, where exports to the U.S. have typically ranged between 2% and 3% of China’s GDP, depending on annual trade fluctuations and economic conditions. This relatively low percentage reflects China’s large and diverse economy, where domestic consumption and other export markets also play significant roles.
“Ours is not to reason why ours is but to do or die.”
Full Hearing: U.S. Military Posture and National Security Challenges in the Indo-Pacific
2,868 views Streamed live on April 10
Adorned with fruit salad on their chests and boy scout badges on their sleeves, the gathered stony faced ‘mission focused’ US military top leaders endorse the Trump administration’s trade war.
They have no idea why they are preparing to go to war with China, or why China is going to war with them. Claiming, “Such issues are outside our purview.”
Hear them give their tacit support to imposing punitive tariffs even on their closest allies.
Hear them say how they will “defeat China” before correcting themselves, to say “deter China”.
Hear them argue for greater military industrial production to put America on a better war footing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6tuVhHLTko
Apart for some childish shit about ‘Evil Doers’.
Not one of these arrayed phalanx of US generals, admirals and war planners, has a clue about what they are going to war for.
In their minds China is the villain, America is the hero.
On children’s Daytime TV week after week, for no obvious reason that anyone can discern, the villain repeatedly attacks the innocent hero.
Unlike children’s daytime TV there is a real world reason for the Chinese and American two super powers to be at each other’s throats.
“No one wins a trade war.”
But they can win a real war. That’s the point. That’s the key to the reason for all the global economic mayhem unleashed by Trump’s tariffs.
“fight to the end”
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/09/the-guardian-view-on-trumps-trade-war-no-one-will-win-but-china-is-taking-the-long-view
No one wins in a trade war but one side can win a real war, but no power can prevail in a real war, not without a large industrial manufacturing base, more powerful than that of their protagonist.
The Trump administration are putting the American economy on a war footing for the coming war with China. (or any other economic rival that threatens US global hegemony)
Bringing home the industrial production needed for a war economy, is what the Trump administration’s tariffs are meant to achieve.
All talk about rearming for deterrence, is bullshit. China will not be deterred. Expansion is an economic imperative for China, the alternative to economic expansion for China is economic collapse, mass unemployment, leading to poverty, social unrest, possibly even civil war.
History tells us that when the economic expansion of a major power is constrained by its rivals, the imperative is to force the issue.
Which option do you think is more palatable to the ruling elites in China, civil war at home, or instigate a great patriotic war against the evil Gweilo, unfairly strangling the Chinese economy, and provenly committing genocide in the Middle East?
If the choice is between winding up on the wrong end of a metaphorical pitchfork.
If you you were the dictator of China which option would you choose?
Same for the billionaires atop the US economy.
Into the valley of death rode the 6 billion
Capitalism, what its fear, always. lies , how, your home debt, allow fear.
Modern wars are won and lost in the factories. No modern power can win a war without a powerful manufacuring base.
Donald Trump’s tariffs are designed to bring ‘manufacturing back to the US’, so that the US can fight a war against China.
NZDF rushes to sign up to this dumpster fire.