America Might Spend Big Time to Deter China in South China Sea and over Taiwan

Proposed legislation would fund a “permanent and persistent land-based integrated air and missile defense and associated weapons delivery system on Guam.”
 

The National Interest
Date: June 24, 2020
By: Kris Osborn


What kind of impact would land-based air defenses, increased intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR) operations and more bomber patrols have upon U.S. deterrence efforts in the Pacific theater? Is this question taking on additional relevance and urgency in light of Chinese maneuvers near Taiwan and the South China Sea?

The impact of adding these systems would be both substantial and helpful, according to members of Congress now proposing as much as $6 billion in additional funds for a so-described “Indo Pacific  Deterrence Initiative.” The proposed legislation would fund a “permanent and persistent land-based integrated air and missile defense and associated weapons delivery system on Guam.”

A group of lawmakers, led by House Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas), are requesting this massive plus up in funding for the Pacific, which also includes increased funding for undersea warfare. Such a proposal for the 2021 budget, while first announced in April of this year, seems to take on even more relevance in light of current Chinese maneuvers near Taiwan and the South China Sea. While the proposed legislation of course does not advocate any kind of provocation or military action, it does call for increased U.S.-allied training exercises and specifically cites a need to deter Chinese hostility. The apparent aim of the initiative, it seems clear, would be to increase peace and stability in the region by virtue of increasing a U.S. footprint in the region.

“These are not all new programs but by pulling them together under one policy we will be better able to judge our own commitment here at home, demonstrate our resolve to our allies and partners, and deter China,” Thornberry said in a “discussion draft” statement on the proposal earlier this year.    [FULL  STORY]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I accept the Privacy Policy

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.