US Military Strategy: Flaunting Power with Empty Pockets

The new military strategy of the United States shows that its national strength is in a state of increasing decline and that it has no choice but to adjust its strategic objectives and the scale of its armed forces. Its strategy also demonstrates strongly that it wants to safeguard its superior military position and obstinate world supremacy. The U.S. will have to attempt to extricate itself as soon as possible from the wars it cannot afford to drag out, while very unwisely aiming their strategic spearhead at the peaceful development of alleged "potential adversaries."

The U.S. has finally figured out that to make war, and to maintain an enormous military force, is to spend money. While the White House does feel more and more that it has long been living beyond its means, to make ends meet it has resorted to stopgap measures that can't completely solve the problem and are still inadequate and difficult to maintain.

The U.S. Wants to Downsize While Displaying its Power at the Same Time

This forces it to make adjustments: instead of winning two wars simultaneously, it will participate and secure a victory in one, while interfering with and disrupting the enemy's actions in the other. Correspondingly, the U.S. will have no choice but to downsize its military forces: the Army and Navy will lay off tens of thousands of people, and its presence in Europe will have to be reduced. But old institutions die hard, and America's military is still a long way away from its demise. They will never give up the pillars of their hegemonic power, and will continue to stubbornly maintain their absolute superiority. When they want to make a move, they won’t hesitate to do so, and when they want to awe, they can display power with impunity.

In order to break free from financial difficulties, America's new military strategy clearly shows that they are willing to turn the page on the 10-year War on Terror. They no longer expect to waste time and effort on the massively expensive Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, but will use "smart power" and skillful warfare to solve the problem instead.

German strategy critic Herfried Münkler has written a very in-depth book, titled "The New Wars." He believes that although inter-state wars with dated characteristics are not yet fully obsolete, it is obvious that for the past 10 to 20 years, states have no longer been the main protagonists of armed conflict. They have been replaced in areas on the verge of collapse within a few large countries, where various religious, ethnic, cultural and economic conflicts intertwine to cause civil war, as well as related terrorism. The true monopolists of these wars include local warlords, mercenary companies spread throughout the world and international terrorist organizations, "Many of whom are war entrepreneurs, who go to war for their own interests and employ different methods of obtaining the necessary funds." Regarding these wars, which are unlikely to disappear in the short-term, can the U.S. do without intervening and getting involved? Will this new type of war change its form in accordance with America's wishful thinking? I'm afraid it cannot be so.

Pointing the Sword Toward China is Just the Same Old Story

Needless to say, an important subject included in America's new military strategy is aiming its military strength toward China, and although they have not stated this outright, their villainous design is quite obvious.

This is not surprising. Prior to this, the United States declared a high-profile return to Asia to make the Asia-Pacific region a strategic focal point, and later on, again publicized a highly targeted Air/Sea Battle plan. This is just the same old story again, but with added improvements.

Of course, we do not wish the U.S. to treat China as such, but because they stubbornly insist on having their way it isn't necessary for us to conceal it for their sake. Furthermore, there is no need to panic. America's strategy is nothing more than containment so that it can piece together and win over allies, and compress our country's strategic space. We have experienced this in the past, and there is nothing remarkable about it.