Trump, Hegseth, Rubio: a triple threat to global stability
The Indo-Pacific cannot afford to become collateral damage in America's descent from diplomacy into dysfunction – a decline embodied by Defence Secretary Peter Hegseth's sabre-rattling and Secretary of State and National Security Adviser Marco Rubio's overreach.
South Korea ,
At the recent
Shangri-La Dialogue in
Singapore , Hegseth stunned Asia's defence and diplomatic elite by demanding that Indo-Pacific countries raise defence spending to 5 per cent of gross domestic product to 'counter China'. The proposal was not just tone-deaf; it was combustible. No country in the region, save for outliers, comes close to that threshold.
Japan
Australia – and certainly Southeast Asia, where military spending averages just 1.5 per cent of GDP – are in no position to meet such a demand.
What Hegseth delivered was not a strategy, but an ultimatum. And in doing so, he risked catalysing the very action-reaction cycle Washington once sought to avoid: a region arming in anticipation, while Beijing accelerates its military posture in the
South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait.
Asean , already reeling from intensifying great power rivalries, finds itself caught in the crossfire of an American foreign policy that confuses coercion with clarity, and escalation with influence. Former US president Richard Nixon and then-secretary of state Henry Kissinger wielded ambiguity to signal strategic intent. By contrast, Hegseth, Rubio and US President Donald Trump offer only confusion and contradiction – wielded like a cudgel, fracturing the very alliances they claim to reinforce.
In this environment, diplomacy is no longer the art of restraining power. It has become the art of surviving it.
A cabinet without guardrails
The Hegseth doctrine – if it can be called one – illustrates a deeper unravelling within Trump's second administration: the near-total removal of institutional counterweights. The National Security Council is diminished. The State Department's career corps, once the backbone of US diplomacy, has been hollowed out. What remains is a cabinet of loyalists, not strategists.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
34 minutes ago
- South China Morning Post
Hong Kong's role in nation's war of resistance against Japan to be commemorated
Hong Kong's contributions to the nation's fight against Japanese forces during the Second Sino-Japanese War will be a major theme in a series of coming activities to mark the 80th anniversary of victory in the War of Resistance this year. Major battlefield trails in the countryside will get a facelift, with panels to be set up and facilities enhanced to allow hikers and visitors to learn more about the city's participation in the war and its role in rescuing allied troops while they explore wartime relics. The city's No 2 official Eric Chan Kwok-ki said on Monday the government hoped the series of commemorative activities could help boost patriotism. 'Because of its unique geographical location, Hong Kong had supported the motherland in terms of the provision of supplies and materials during wartime,' Chan said. '[We] had also been involved in operations to rescue intellectuals [fleeing from mainland China] and members of the allied army.' Chan said to let more people know about the history and the city's role, the Tourism Commission and the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department would identify and enhance hiking trails with historical significance during the war.
South China Morning Post
an hour ago
- South China Morning Post
EU and China must abandon petty disputes to provide global leadership
I've tracked relations between China and the European Union for nearly three decades, reporting and commenting on the highs and lows of a relationship that, despite its volatility, has lasted 50 years. Most of the time, I could make sense of it and understand what made European and Chinese policymakers tick. It was clear that China sought recognition as a major strategic partner of the EU and hoped Europe could act as a counterbalance to the United States. The EU was determined to secure more and better access to Chinese markets, urging faster trade liberalisation and economic reform. Fast forward to mid-2025, and for the first time, I cannot make head or tail of the state of EU–China ties. Brussels and Beijing have become trapped in a confusing, contradictory and often chaotic relationship. Their frequent meetings have been reduced to rituals of mixed messages while tit-for-tat feuds offer endless fodder for think tanks, lawyers, academics and self-anointed geopolitical gurus. Despite the diplomatic gloss of 'strategic partnership,' the relationship has always been transactional. EU officials may bristle at the comparison but as the late Princess Diana famously said about her troubled marriage: 'There were always three of us'. In this case, the third partner is the US.
South China Morning Post
an hour ago
- South China Morning Post
Can China build on eased trade tensions with US amid Trump's many distractions?
While the US-China talks in London earlier this month suggested Beijing had the negotiating edge over Washington's other major trading partners, observers warn that China may need to temper expectations of a restoration of senior-level exchanges. Advertisement US President Donald Trump's competing priorities – both domestically and internationally – could distract his administration from the pressing need to establish a lasting agreement on US-China trade relations, they said. But while the Trump administration remains in the early stages of formulating its China policy, Beijing should advance a leader-driven process to stabilise bilateral ties, laying the groundwork for a trade agreement ahead of a potential summit. Sourabh Gupta, a senior policy specialist with the Institute for China-America Studies in Washington, said the framework reached in London was 'a genuine de-escalation of trade tensions'. 'At least, that's how the two sides envision it,' he said, noting that the framework essentially marked a return to last month's Geneva agreement, with both parties having 'a vested interest in getting to 'yes' on a trade deal'. Advertisement According to Gupta, the outcome of the talks – alongside the first call between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Trump since the latter started his second term – has placed China as a 'front-runner' in Washington's negotiations with major trading partners. While the London framework represents a temporary truce rather than a comprehensive deal, no other US trading partner has secured a comparable agreement, despite parallel negotiations with the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Canada, India and others.
