Of course, Trump’s Secretary of Defense wants the name of Harvey Milk, the murdered gay rights pioneer, stripped from a ship.
Never mind that Milk served in the Korean War as a diving instructor, eventually discharged because of his sexual orientation. Or that he had exhibited courage in facing down haters as the nation’s first publicly out elected official. After all, when Pete Hegseth’s not sending confidential war plans via Signal to people who shouldn’t be privy to them, he’s busy bloviating about the “warrior ethos.”
Hegseth is a military veteran, a National Guardsman who did tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. But he’s also someone who has made a career out of telling Americans he, above everyone else, knows what our veterans need and what our armed forces need to defend the U.S. in an increasingly volatile world. So Hegseth may know something about warriors and fighting. So did Milk.
But Hegseth is too busy playing Rambo to recognize it. Instead, he’s weaponizing bigotry to remake the U.S. military as a scorched-earth, hetero-Christian outfit ready to stamp out liberal heretics here and abroad. That’s not befitting anyone who calls themselves a warrior, no matter how many pseudo-patriotic tattoos and American flag items of clothing Hegseth loves to sport.
A true warrior follows a code of honor that allows respect to those they disagree with and sometimes even combat. For Hegseth to specifically ask that the USNS Harvey Milk have its name changed during Pride Month — the same month that he’s requiring all trans service people to out themselves and voluntarily leave their positions or be discharged against their will — does not represent the “reestablishing [of] the warrior culture” that the Navy is citing as the reason for the moves.
Instead, it reveals Hegseth’s Achilles heel, one he shares with Trump: a fundamental insecurity about their place in a country that diversified long ago.
CBS News is also reporting the Navy is recommending the renaming of ships named after civil rights icons Medgar Evers, Cesar Chavez, Sojourner Truth and Lucy Stone along with ships that haven’t yet been built but are scheduled to bear the names of Dolores Huerta, Thurgood Marshall, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Harriet Tubman.
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell gave my colleague Kevin Rector the same malarkey he’s giving the rest of the media when asked for comment about this matter: That Hegseth is “committed” to making sure all named military assets “are reflective of the Commander-in-Chief’s priorities, our nation’s history, and the warrior ethos.”
Marine Col. Alison Thompson, left, talks with Jenn Onofrio, center, a White House Fellow to the secretary of the Navy and Patrik Gallineaux, right, of the Richmond/Ermet Aid Foundation prior to the launching of the USNS Harvey Milk, a fleet replenishment oiler ship named after the first openly gay elected official in 2021 in San Diego.
(Alex Gallardo / Associated Press)
I can understand the argument can be made that naval ships should be named only after those who served, which would eliminate people like Huerta, Ginsburg and Truth. But there was a beauty in the idea of having the names of civil rights heroes adorn ships in the so-called John Lewis class, oilers named after the late congressman. It was a reminder that wars don’t just happen on the front lines but also on the home front. That those who serve to defend our democracy don’t just do it through the military. That winning doesn’t just happen with bullets and bombs.
That sometimes, the biggest threat to our nation hasn’t been the enemy abroad, but the enemy within. It’s not just my wokoso opinion, either — the oath that all Navy newcomers and newly minted officers must take have them swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
You might not associate Huerta, Truth, and Marshall with the military — indeed, I was surprised the Navy had honored them, period. But I and millions of Americans do remember them for fierceness in their respective battlegrounds, a steeliness any sailor should aspire to. For anyone in Hegseth’s world to even think about erasing their name is a disgrace to the Stars and Stripes — but what else should we expect from a department whose boss evaded military service by claiming to have debilitating bone spurs?
The striking of Milk’s name from an oiler, and proposed renaming of dry cargo ships named for Evers and Chavez, is particularly vile.
Milk joined the Navy in the footsteps of his parents. He was so proud of his military background that he was wearing a belt buckle with his Navy diver’s insignia the night he was assassinated. Evers was inspired to fight Jim Crow after serving in a segregated Army unit during World War II. Chavez, meanwhile, was stationed in the western Pacific shortly after the Good War during his two-year Navy stint.
I called up Andres Chavez, executive director of the National Chavez Center and grandson of Cesar, to hear how he was feeling about this mess. Andres was there in 2012 when the USNS Cesar Chavez was launched in San Diego, christened with a champagne bottle by Helen Chavez, Cesar’s widow and Andres’ grandmother. He said “it was probably the second-most memorable commemoration I’ve seen of my Tata after Obama” dedicated the Cesar E. Chavez National Monument in the Central Valley that year.
The USNS Cesar Chavez was the last of the Navy’s Lewis and Clark class of boats, all named after pioneers and explorers. Andres said his family was initially “hesitant” to have a naval ship named in honor of their patriarch “because so much of Cesar’s identity is wrapped up in nonviolence” but accepted when they found out the push came from shipyard workers from San Diego’s Barrio Logan.
“And there’s been so many Latinos who have served in the military in this country, so we accepted on behalf of them as well,” he said.
The Chavez family found out about the possibility of the USNS Cesar Chavez losing its name from reporters.
“We’re just gonna wait and see what’s next, but we’re not surprised by this administration anymore,” Andres said. “It’s just not an affront to Cesar; it’s an affront to all the Latino veterans of this country.”
He pushed back on Hegseth’s definition of what a warrior is by bringing up the work of his grandfather and Milk. The two supported each other’s causes in the 1970s and met “numerous” times, according to Andres.
“They served by creating more opportunities for other people and fighting for their respect,” he concluded. “That’s the definition of a warrior.”
California leaders denounced reports Tuesday that the Trump administration is preparing to strip the name of slain gay rights leader Harvey Milk from a naval ship honoring his legacy, calling it a slap in the face for the LGBTQ+ community just as Pride month begins.
Milk was elected as a San Francisco supervisor in the 1970s, becoming one of the first openly gay elected officials in the country. After he was assassinated in San Francisco City Hall in 1978, he became an icon of the gay rights movement, with images of his face becoming synonymous with the struggle for gay rights.
Milk had served in the Navy prior to becoming an activist and political figure, and LGBTQ+ advocates and service members fought for years to have his legacy formally recognized by the Navy.
The outlet Military.com first reported Tuesday afternoon that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had ordered the Navy to rename the USNS Harvey Milk, an oiler built in San Diego as part of a series of vessels named for civil rights leaders. It was launched in 2021.
The Pentagon would not confirm or deny that the ship would be renamed.
In a statement to The Times, chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said Hegseth “is committed to ensuring that the names attached to all [Department of Defense] installations and assets are reflective of the Commander-in-Chief’s priorities, our nation’s history, and the warrior ethos,” and that “any potential renaming(s) will be announced after internal reviews are complete.”
The Pentagon would not say whether such a review had been launched for the USNS Harvey Milk. The Navy referred questions to the Pentagon.
The removal of Milk’s name would be in line with a broader push by Hegseth and other leaders in the Trump administration to remove formal acknowledgments of queer rights and other programs or messages promoting diversity, equity and inclusion across the federal government.
Leaders in California — where Milk is often hailed as a hero — were quick to denounce the idea of stripping his name from the vessel.
San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk speaks to reporters in October 1978, weeks before he was assassinated.
(James Palmer / Associated Press)
Trump and Hegseth have also issued a sweeping ban on transgender people serving in the military.
“Harvey Milk wasn’t just a civil rights icon — he was a Korean War combat veteran whose commander called him ‘outstanding,’” Newsom said. “Stripping his name from a Navy ship won’t erase his legacy as an American icon, but it does reveal Trump’s contempt for the very values our veterans fight to protect.”
“Our military is the most powerful in the world — but this spiteful move does not strengthen our national security or the ‘warrior’ ethos,” she wrote. “It is a shameful, vindictive erasure of those who fought to break down barriers for all to chase the American Dream.”
State Sen. Scott Wiener, who is gay and once represented the same district as Milk on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, said in an interview with The Times that the move was all “part of Trump’s systematic campaign to eliminate LGBTQ people from public life.”
“They want us to go away, to go back in the closet, not to be part of public life,” Wiener said. “And we’re not going anywhere.”
After graduating from college, Milk enlisted in the Navy in 1951 and was stationed in San Diego. According to the Harvey Milk Foundation, he resigned at the rank of lieutenant junior grade in 1955 “after being officially questioned about his sexual orientation.”
He moved to San Francisco in 1972, opened a camera shop on Castro Street, and quickly got into politics — rallying the growing local gay community to fight for rights and build strategic alliances with other groups, including organized labor and the city’s large Asian and Pacific Islander community.
Milk was elected to the Board of Supervisors in 1977, and helped lead efforts to defeat a 1978 ballot initiative that would have barred gay and lesbian people from teaching in public schools statewide — a major political win for the LGBTQ+ community.
Wiener called Milk “an absolute hero” who “died for our community” and deserves the honor of having a naval vessel named after him.
“A group of LGBTQ veterans worked for years and years to achieve this goal of naming a ship for Harvey, and to have that taken away so casually, right during Pride month, is heartbreaking and painful,” Wiener said.
Removing his name would mean more than scrubbing a stenciling off the side of a ship, Wiener said, “especially now with the attacks on our community, and so many young LGBTQ people [seeing] so much negativity towards our community.”
Milk was a “very visible role model for young queer people, and he gave people hope in a way that hadn’t happened before from any high-profile queer leader, and he was murdered because of his visibility and leadership for our community,” Wiener said, and for young queer people today “to see the name of a gay man on the side of a military vessel, it’s very, very powerful.”
U.S. officials first announced in 2016 that a ship would be named for Milk, as well as for abolitionist Sojourner Truth, Chief Justice of the United States Earl Warren, Atty. Gen. Robert F. Kennedy, suffragist Lucy Stone and U.S. Rep. John Lewis.
At an event marking the start of construction on the ship in 2019, Milk’s nephew Stuart Milk said the naming of the ship after his uncle “sends a global message of inclusion” that did not just say the U.S. will “tolerate everyone,” but that “we celebrate everyone.”
June 1 (UPI) — China criticized the United States on Sunday for having a “Cold War mentality” after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth appeared to warn that the U.S. is prepared to go to war to prevent China from dominating the Indo-Pacific region in a speech Saturday.
“Hegseth deliberately ignored the call for peace and development by countries in the region, and instead touted the Cold War mentality for bloc confrontation, vilified China with defamatory allegations, and falsely called China a ‘threat,'” a spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
“The remarks were filled with provocations and intended to sow discord. China deplores and firmly opposes them and has protested strongly to the U.S.”
Hegseth had delivered his remarks during the International Institute for Strategic Studies Shangri-La Dialogue event in Singapore. He said the Indo-Pacific region is the United States’ “priority theater” and won’t allow China to push it and its allies out of the region.
China retorted Sunday that “no country in the world deserves to be called a hegemonic power other than the U.S. itself.”
“To perpetuate its hegemony and advance the so-called ‘Indo-Pacific strategy,’ the U.S. has deployed offensive weaponry in the South China Sea and kept stoking flames and creating tensions in the Asia-Pacific, which are turning the region into a powder keg and making countries in the region deeply concerned,” the Foreign Ministry spokesperson said.
Hegseth had also said that China was “preparing to use military force” to alter the balance of power in the region and appeared to indicate that the United States would step in to defend Taiwan if China were to attack it.
Mainland China and the island of Taiwan, among other islands, were ruled by the Republic of China before the ROC lost the Chinese Civil War in the early 20th century to the Chinese Communist Party, which established the new government of the People’s Republic of China in October 1949.
The ROC in turn established a temporary capital in Taipei on the island of Taiwan, a former Japanese territory, in December 1949 that served as the seat for China at the United Nations until it was replaced by the People’s Republic of China in 1971 when foreign countries switched their diplomatic relations.
China views self-governed Taiwan and its 23 million residents as a wayward province and has vowed to retake it by force, if necessary. Many supporters of Taiwan have since argued that it is already an independent sovereign state separate from mainland China, which has never controlled Taiwan.
Tensions between the United States and China started to grow during the administration of President Joe Biden in 2022 when then-U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosivisited Taiwan, sparking a military response from the Chinese government and increased drills in the Taiwan Strait. In 2022, a four-star general predicted that the U.S. and China could be at war by the end of this year.
After returning for his second term, President Donald Trump‘s administration has escalated tensions with China, particularly related to trade tariffs that appear now to be expanding into broader military and diplomatic arenas.
For example, the Pentagon has increased naval patrols in contested areas of the South China Sea and bolstered military partnerships with allies including Japan, Australia, and the Philippines.
“The Taiwan question is entirely China’s internal affair. No country is in a position to interfere. The U.S. should never imagine it could use the Taiwan question as leverage against China,” the Foreign Ministry spokesperson said. “The U.S. must never play with fire on this question.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says nations must prepare for war to ensure peace amid Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific region during the International Institute for Strategic Studies Shangri-la Dialogue Defence Summit in Singapore on Saturday. Photo by How Hwee Young/EPA-EFE
May 31 (UPI) — The United States and its allies won’t allow China to dominate the Indo-Pacific region, but do not seek war, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Saturday morning in Singapore.
He addressed regional concerns while speaking during the International Institute for Strategic Studies Shangri-La Dialogue event in Singapore.
Hegseth said the Indo-Pacific region is the United States’ “priority theater” and won’t allow China to push the United States and its allies out of the region, the Department of Defense announced Friday in a news release.
Instead, deterrence will be the primary tool by which the United States and its allies will counter any aggressive moves made by China, particularly in the South China Sea and against Taiwan.
“As our allies share the burden, we can increase our focus on the Indo-Pacific,” Hegseth said, adding that the region is the nation’s “priority theater.”
He said the futures of the United States and its allies in the Indo-Pacific depend on each other.
“We share a vision of peace and stability, of prosperity and security,” Hegseth said, “and we are here to stay.”
Common sense and national interests with guide policy making in the region, while respecting mutual self-interests.
President Donald Trump is working to get European nations to do more to increase their respective national security interests instead of largely relying on the United States.
As European nations do more to protect themselves, Hegseth said the United States will be better able to focus on matters in the Indo-Pacific region and do more to thwart Chinese aggression.
“This enables all of us to benefit from the peace and stability that comes with a lasting and strong American presence here in the Indo-Pacific,” Hegseth said.
That presence won’t come at a cost for the nation’s allies, though.
“We are not here to pressure other countries to embrace and adopt our politics or ideology,” Hegseth told the audience. “We are all sovereign nations.”
He said the United States does not “seek conflict with communist China.”
But the United States “will not be pushed out of this critical region,” Hegseth added. “And we will not let our allies and partners be subordinated and intimidated.”
He said China’s leaders are “preparing to use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific,” including occupying Taiwan.
Any move by China to take over Taiwan, which China has claimed as part of its sovereign state, would trigger “devastating consequences” for the region and the world, Hegseth told the audience.
“The threat China poses is real, and it could be imminent,” he said, adding that the United States and its allies must be prepared with “urgency and vigilance.”
If deterrence doesn’t work and a fighting war is inevitable, “we are prepared to do what the Department of Defense does best: to fight and win decisively,” Hegseth said.
The best way to ensure peace is to prepare for war, “but we have to do this quickly,” he said. “We have no time to waste.”
The US defense secretary warned that China poses a real threat to Taiwan
US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has warned of China posing an “imminent” threat to Taiwan, while urging Asian countries to boost defence spending and work with the US to deter war.
Hegseth also said that while the US does not “seek to dominate or strangle China”, the US would not be pushed out of Asia and would not allow intimidation of allies.
He was addressing top Asian military officials at the Shangri-la Dialogue, a high-level defence summit held annually in Singapore.
Many in Asia fear potential instability if China invades Taiwan, a self-governing island claimed by Beijing. China has not ruled out the use of force.
In his speech, Hegseth characterised China as seeking to become a “hegemonic power” that “hopes to dominate and control too many parts” of Asia. China has clashed with several neighbours over competing territorial claims in the South China Sea.
He said that Beijing was “credibly preparing to potentially use military force to alter the balance of power” in Asia, and referred to a 2027 deadline that President Xi Jinping has allegedly given for China’s military to be capable to invade Taiwan.
This is a date put forth by US officials and generals for years, but has never been confirmed by Beijing.
China “is building the military needed to do it, training for it, every day and rehearsing for the real deal”, Hegseth said.
“Let me be clear: any attempt by Communist China to conquer Taiwan by force would result in devastating consequences for the Indo-Pacific and the world. There’s no reason to sugarcoat it. The threat China poses is real. And it could be imminent. We hope not but certainly could be.”
Getty Images
Chinese fighter jets have been intruding in Taiwan’s airspace in what’s been termed as greyzone tactics
The US does not seek war or conflict with China, Hegseth added.
“We do not seek to dominate or strangle China, to encircle or provoke. We do not seek regime change… but we must ensure that China cannot dominate us or our allies and partners,” he said, adding “we will not be pushed out of this critical region.”
Beijing’s lack of response comes amid a deliberately diminished presence at the dialogue.
The event has traditionally served as a platform for the US and China to make their pitches to Asian countries as the superpowers jostle for influence.
But while this year the US has sent one of its largest delegations ever, China instead has sent a notably lower-level team and scrapped its planned speech on Sunday. No explanation has been given for this.
‘Deterrence doesn’t come cheap’
To prevent war, the US wants “a strong shield of deterrence” forged with allies, said Hegseth, who promised the US would “continue to wrap our arms around our friends and find new ways to work together”.
But he stressed that “deterrence does not come cheap” and urged Asian countries to ramp up their defence spending, pointing to Europe as an example.
US President Donald Trump has demanded members of the Western alliance Nato spend more on defence, at least 5% of their GDPs – an approach Hegseth called “tough love, but love nonetheless”. Some countries like Estonia have moved quickly to do so, while others like Germany have signalled an openness to comply.
“How can it make sense for countries in Europe to do that while key allies and partners in Asia spend less in the face of a more formidable threat?” he said with reference to China, adding that North Korea was a threat as well.
“Europe is stepping up. US allies in the Indo-Pacific can, and should, follow by quickly upgrading their own defences,” he insisted, saying they should be “partners, not dependents” on the US.
He touted US military hardware and also pointed to a new Indo-Pacific partnership for defence industrial resilience. Its first projects are establishing a radar repair centre in Australia for US maritime patrol aircraft purchased by allies, and aiding the production of unmanned drones in the region.
He also warned Asian countries against seeking economic ties with China, saying Beijing would use it as “leverage” to deepen their “malign influence”, complicating US defence decisions.
Answering a question about Macron’s proposal, he said the US “would much prefer that the overwhelming balance of European investment be on that continent” so that the US could use its “comparative advantage” in the Indo-Pacific.
‘Common sense’ vision
Hegseth also sold Trump’s vision of “common sense” in dealing with the rest of the world, where “America does not have or seek permanent enemies”.
He compared the US President to the late Singaporean statesman Lee Kuan Yew, who was famous for his pragmatic realpolitik in foreign relations.
“The United States is not interested in the moralistic and preachy approach to foreign policy of the past. We are not here to pressure other countries to embrace and adopt policies or ideologies. We are not here to preach to you about climate change or cultural issues. We are not here to impose our will on you,” he said.
It was an approach that Democratic Party Senator Tammy Duckworth, who was part of the US delegation in Singapore, criticised.
Speaking separately to reporters at the dialogue, the member of the Senate’s foreign relations committee said Hegseth and Trump’s vision was “inconsistent with the values on which our nation was founded”.
Others “know what we stand for, we stand for basic human rights, we stand for international law and order. And that’s what we are going to continue to push for. And I know that in the Senate we’re going to try to uphold that or else it would be un-American otherwise,” she said.
Duckworth also took aim at Hegseth’s overall message to allies in the region, calling it “patronising”.
“His idea where we wrap ourselves around you – we don’t need that kind of language. We need to stand with our allies, work together, and send the message that America is not asking people to choose between the PRC (People’s Republic of China) and us.”
Other members of the delegation, Republican representatives Brian Mast and John Moolenaar, told the BBC the speech sent a clear message of China’s threat and it was welcomed by many Asian countries, according to meetings they had with officials.
“The message I’ve heard is that people want to see freedom of navigation and respect for neighbours, but feel intimidated by some of the aggressive actions that China has displayed,” said Moolenaar, who is chairman of a House committee on competition between US and China.
“So the presence of the US is welcome and encouraged. And the message was to continue to be present.”
Singapore – Of the many military officials darting across the lobby of Singapore’s Shangri-La Hotel this weekend, there has been one significant absence.
China’s Defence Minister Dong Jun skipped the annual Shangri-La Dialogue, Asia’s premier security forum, with Beijing sending a delegation of lower-ranking representatives instead.
It was the first time since 2019 that China has not dispatched its defence minister to the high-level dialogue on regional defence, except when the event was cancelled in 2020 and 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Beijing’s decision raised eyebrows in Singapore, coming at a time of heightened tensions between China and the United States – the world’s two biggest superpowers.
Dong’s absence meant there was no face-to-face meeting with his US counterpart, Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth, who had the floor to himself on Saturday when he told the defence forum that the military threat posed by China was potentially imminent.
“It has to be clear to all that Beijing is credibly preparing to potentially use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific,” Hegseth told delegates in Singapore.
Pointing to China’s regular military drills around Taiwan as well as increasingly frequent skirmishes in the South China Sea, Hegseth said Beijing was proactively harassing its neighbours.
“There’s no reason to sugar-coat it. The threat China poses is real, and it could be imminent,” Hegseth said.
He also pointed to China’s growing military assertiveness as a reason for Asian nations to boost their defence spending, pointing to Germany, which has pledged to move towards spending 5 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence.
“It doesn’t make sense for countries in Europe to do that while key allies in Asia spend less on defence in the face of an even more formidable threat,” Hegseth said.
The defence chief also looked to reassure Asian allies that Washington was committed to Asia Pacific security despite strained ties in recent months as US President Donald Trump targeted some close allies with hefty trade tariffs.
“America is proud to be back in the Indo-Pacific, and we’re here to stay,” he said, opening his speech.
Some analysts were quick to play down the severity of Hegseth’s warnings about China.
“Short of a very few countries, not many in this part of the world see China as an imminent threat and would up their [defence] spending,” said Dylan Loh, assistant professor in the public policy and global affairs programme at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University.
China tight-lipped on defence chief’s absence
In previous years, the Shangri-La Dialogue had provided a rare platform for meetings between Chinese and US officials in the more informal surroundings that the summit could offer.
The structure of the schedule also allowed Beijing’s military chiefs to directly respond to the keynote speech from the US defence secretary and to present their narrative to other members of the Asia Pacific.
Beijing has remained tight-lipped on the reason for Defence Minister Dong’s absence from the forum, fuelling an information void that has been filled by speculation.
One theory is that China did not want to send a high-profile delegate to the event at such a sensitive time as Beijing navigates the tariff war with the Trump administration.
“Any sort of faux pas or comments that may go off script can be picked up and picked apart or misconstrued,” said Loh, of Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University.
“So the question is why take the risk when US-China relations are at a very delicate point at this moment,” Loh told Al Jazeera.
Chinese Defence Minister Dong Jun attends the Beijing Xiangshan Forum in China in September 2024 [Florence Lo/Reuters]
The Shangri-La Dialogue weekend has not always been the easiest occasion for Chinese defence ministers. In recent years, they have faced difficult questions from their counterparts in other countries, who are unhappy with Beijing’s increasing assertiveness in the Asia Pacific region.
Loh said this could be another factor in Dong’s absence from the high-profile event.
“Any Chinese defence minister coming to Singapore now will be exposing himself and the country to political risk,” he said. “Themes like the South China Sea and possibly Taiwan will emerge, which makes China a convenient target,” Loh added.
Dong was appointed as China’s defence minister in late 2023, after his predecessor, Li Shangfu, was removed from office.
Less than a year into the job, there was speculation surrounding Dong’s new position following media reports that he was under investigation as part of a wider investigation into corruption in the Chinese military. Beijing denied the reports, with the minister continuing to maintain a public profile despite the allegations.
There has also been intense scrutiny of China’s military, following reports of an apparent purge of top-level officials by President Xi Jinping.
One of Beijing’s most senior generals, He Weidong, was missing from a high-profile political meeting in April, adding to rumours surrounding a possible restructuring in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
Ian Chong, a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie China research centre, said such speculation could be a factor in Dong’s no-show in Singapore.
“Because of the domestic turmoil with China’s senior military, they perhaps don’t want to, or the PLA itself feels that it’s not in a position to send somebody senior,” Chong told Al Jazeera.
Announcing Dong’s absence at a news conference before the summit, Chinese military spokesperson Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang maintained that communication channels were still open between defence officials in Washington and Beijing.
“China places great importance on US-China military ties, and is open to communication at different levels,” Zhang said.
Commentary: Hegseth’s move on USNS Harvey Milk is a stain on military’s ‘warrior ethos’
Of course, Trump’s Secretary of Defense wants the name of Harvey Milk, the murdered gay rights pioneer, stripped from a ship.
Never mind that Milk served in the Korean War as a diving instructor, eventually discharged because of his sexual orientation. Or that he had exhibited courage in facing down haters as the nation’s first publicly out elected official. After all, when Pete Hegseth’s not sending confidential war plans via Signal to people who shouldn’t be privy to them, he’s busy bloviating about the “warrior ethos.”
Hegseth is a military veteran, a National Guardsman who did tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. But he’s also someone who has made a career out of telling Americans he, above everyone else, knows what our veterans need and what our armed forces need to defend the U.S. in an increasingly volatile world. So Hegseth may know something about warriors and fighting. So did Milk.
But Hegseth is too busy playing Rambo to recognize it. Instead, he’s weaponizing bigotry to remake the U.S. military as a scorched-earth, hetero-Christian outfit ready to stamp out liberal heretics here and abroad. That’s not befitting anyone who calls themselves a warrior, no matter how many pseudo-patriotic tattoos and American flag items of clothing Hegseth loves to sport.
A true warrior follows a code of honor that allows respect to those they disagree with and sometimes even combat. For Hegseth to specifically ask that the USNS Harvey Milk have its name changed during Pride Month — the same month that he’s requiring all trans service people to out themselves and voluntarily leave their positions or be discharged against their will — does not represent the “reestablishing [of] the warrior culture” that the Navy is citing as the reason for the moves.
Instead, it reveals Hegseth’s Achilles heel, one he shares with Trump: a fundamental insecurity about their place in a country that diversified long ago.
CBS News is also reporting the Navy is recommending the renaming of ships named after civil rights icons Medgar Evers, Cesar Chavez, Sojourner Truth and Lucy Stone along with ships that haven’t yet been built but are scheduled to bear the names of Dolores Huerta, Thurgood Marshall, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Harriet Tubman.
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell gave my colleague Kevin Rector the same malarkey he’s giving the rest of the media when asked for comment about this matter: That Hegseth is “committed” to making sure all named military assets “are reflective of the Commander-in-Chief’s priorities, our nation’s history, and the warrior ethos.”
Marine Col. Alison Thompson, left, talks with Jenn Onofrio, center, a White House Fellow to the secretary of the Navy and Patrik Gallineaux, right, of the Richmond/Ermet Aid Foundation prior to the launching of the USNS Harvey Milk, a fleet replenishment oiler ship named after the first openly gay elected official in 2021 in San Diego.
(Alex Gallardo / Associated Press)
I can understand the argument can be made that naval ships should be named only after those who served, which would eliminate people like Huerta, Ginsburg and Truth. But there was a beauty in the idea of having the names of civil rights heroes adorn ships in the so-called John Lewis class, oilers named after the late congressman. It was a reminder that wars don’t just happen on the front lines but also on the home front. That those who serve to defend our democracy don’t just do it through the military. That winning doesn’t just happen with bullets and bombs.
That sometimes, the biggest threat to our nation hasn’t been the enemy abroad, but the enemy within. It’s not just my wokoso opinion, either — the oath that all Navy newcomers and newly minted officers must take have them swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
You might not associate Huerta, Truth, and Marshall with the military — indeed, I was surprised the Navy had honored them, period. But I and millions of Americans do remember them for fierceness in their respective battlegrounds, a steeliness any sailor should aspire to. For anyone in Hegseth’s world to even think about erasing their name is a disgrace to the Stars and Stripes — but what else should we expect from a department whose boss evaded military service by claiming to have debilitating bone spurs?
The striking of Milk’s name from an oiler, and proposed renaming of dry cargo ships named for Evers and Chavez, is particularly vile.
Milk joined the Navy in the footsteps of his parents. He was so proud of his military background that he was wearing a belt buckle with his Navy diver’s insignia the night he was assassinated. Evers was inspired to fight Jim Crow after serving in a segregated Army unit during World War II. Chavez, meanwhile, was stationed in the western Pacific shortly after the Good War during his two-year Navy stint.
I called up Andres Chavez, executive director of the National Chavez Center and grandson of Cesar, to hear how he was feeling about this mess. Andres was there in 2012 when the USNS Cesar Chavez was launched in San Diego, christened with a champagne bottle by Helen Chavez, Cesar’s widow and Andres’ grandmother. He said “it was probably the second-most memorable commemoration I’ve seen of my Tata after Obama” dedicated the Cesar E. Chavez National Monument in the Central Valley that year.
The USNS Cesar Chavez was the last of the Navy’s Lewis and Clark class of boats, all named after pioneers and explorers. Andres said his family was initially “hesitant” to have a naval ship named in honor of their patriarch “because so much of Cesar’s identity is wrapped up in nonviolence” but accepted when they found out the push came from shipyard workers from San Diego’s Barrio Logan.
“And there’s been so many Latinos who have served in the military in this country, so we accepted on behalf of them as well,” he said.
The Chavez family found out about the possibility of the USNS Cesar Chavez losing its name from reporters.
“We’re just gonna wait and see what’s next, but we’re not surprised by this administration anymore,” Andres said. “It’s just not an affront to Cesar; it’s an affront to all the Latino veterans of this country.”
He pushed back on Hegseth’s definition of what a warrior is by bringing up the work of his grandfather and Milk. The two supported each other’s causes in the 1970s and met “numerous” times, according to Andres.
“They served by creating more opportunities for other people and fighting for their respect,” he concluded. “That’s the definition of a warrior.”
Source link
The Navy reportedly wants to rename the USNS Harvey Milk
California leaders denounced reports Tuesday that the Trump administration is preparing to strip the name of slain gay rights leader Harvey Milk from a naval ship honoring his legacy, calling it a slap in the face for the LGBTQ+ community just as Pride month begins.
Milk was elected as a San Francisco supervisor in the 1970s, becoming one of the first openly gay elected officials in the country. After he was assassinated in San Francisco City Hall in 1978, he became an icon of the gay rights movement, with images of his face becoming synonymous with the struggle for gay rights.
Milk had served in the Navy prior to becoming an activist and political figure, and LGBTQ+ advocates and service members fought for years to have his legacy formally recognized by the Navy.
The outlet Military.com first reported Tuesday afternoon that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth had ordered the Navy to rename the USNS Harvey Milk, an oiler built in San Diego as part of a series of vessels named for civil rights leaders. It was launched in 2021.
The Pentagon would not confirm or deny that the ship would be renamed.
In a statement to The Times, chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said Hegseth “is committed to ensuring that the names attached to all [Department of Defense] installations and assets are reflective of the Commander-in-Chief’s priorities, our nation’s history, and the warrior ethos,” and that “any potential renaming(s) will be announced after internal reviews are complete.”
The Pentagon would not say whether such a review had been launched for the USNS Harvey Milk. The Navy referred questions to the Pentagon.
The removal of Milk’s name would be in line with a broader push by Hegseth and other leaders in the Trump administration to remove formal acknowledgments of queer rights and other programs or messages promoting diversity, equity and inclusion across the federal government.
Leaders in California — where Milk is often hailed as a hero — were quick to denounce the idea of stripping his name from the vessel.
Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote on the social media platform X that Trump’s “assault on veterans has hit a new low.”
San Francisco Supervisor Harvey Milk speaks to reporters in October 1978, weeks before he was assassinated.
(James Palmer / Associated Press)
Trump and Hegseth have also issued a sweeping ban on transgender people serving in the military.
“Harvey Milk wasn’t just a civil rights icon — he was a Korean War combat veteran whose commander called him ‘outstanding,’” Newsom said. “Stripping his name from a Navy ship won’t erase his legacy as an American icon, but it does reveal Trump’s contempt for the very values our veterans fight to protect.”
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) echoed Newsom with her own comment on X.
“Our military is the most powerful in the world — but this spiteful move does not strengthen our national security or the ‘warrior’ ethos,” she wrote. “It is a shameful, vindictive erasure of those who fought to break down barriers for all to chase the American Dream.”
State Sen. Scott Wiener, who is gay and once represented the same district as Milk on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, said in an interview with The Times that the move was all “part of Trump’s systematic campaign to eliminate LGBTQ people from public life.”
“They want us to go away, to go back in the closet, not to be part of public life,” Wiener said. “And we’re not going anywhere.”
After graduating from college, Milk enlisted in the Navy in 1951 and was stationed in San Diego. According to the Harvey Milk Foundation, he resigned at the rank of lieutenant junior grade in 1955 “after being officially questioned about his sexual orientation.”
He moved to San Francisco in 1972, opened a camera shop on Castro Street, and quickly got into politics — rallying the growing local gay community to fight for rights and build strategic alliances with other groups, including organized labor and the city’s large Asian and Pacific Islander community.
Milk was elected to the Board of Supervisors in 1977, and helped lead efforts to defeat a 1978 ballot initiative that would have barred gay and lesbian people from teaching in public schools statewide — a major political win for the LGBTQ+ community.
That same year, Milk was assassinated alongside Mayor George Moscone at City Hall by former Supervisor Dan White. His killing cemented his status as an icon of the gay rights movement.
Wiener called Milk “an absolute hero” who “died for our community” and deserves the honor of having a naval vessel named after him.
“A group of LGBTQ veterans worked for years and years to achieve this goal of naming a ship for Harvey, and to have that taken away so casually, right during Pride month, is heartbreaking and painful,” Wiener said.
Removing his name would mean more than scrubbing a stenciling off the side of a ship, Wiener said, “especially now with the attacks on our community, and so many young LGBTQ people [seeing] so much negativity towards our community.”
Milk was a “very visible role model for young queer people, and he gave people hope in a way that hadn’t happened before from any high-profile queer leader, and he was murdered because of his visibility and leadership for our community,” Wiener said, and for young queer people today “to see the name of a gay man on the side of a military vessel, it’s very, very powerful.”
U.S. officials first announced in 2016 that a ship would be named for Milk, as well as for abolitionist Sojourner Truth, Chief Justice of the United States Earl Warren, Atty. Gen. Robert F. Kennedy, suffragist Lucy Stone and U.S. Rep. John Lewis.
At an event marking the start of construction on the ship in 2019, Milk’s nephew Stuart Milk said the naming of the ship after his uncle “sends a global message of inclusion” that did not just say the U.S. will “tolerate everyone,” but that “we celebrate everyone.”
Source link
China responds after Hegseth warns to prepare for war
June 1 (UPI) — China criticized the United States on Sunday for having a “Cold War mentality” after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth appeared to warn that the U.S. is prepared to go to war to prevent China from dominating the Indo-Pacific region in a speech Saturday.
“Hegseth deliberately ignored the call for peace and development by countries in the region, and instead touted the Cold War mentality for bloc confrontation, vilified China with defamatory allegations, and falsely called China a ‘threat,'” a spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.
“The remarks were filled with provocations and intended to sow discord. China deplores and firmly opposes them and has protested strongly to the U.S.”
Hegseth had delivered his remarks during the International Institute for Strategic Studies Shangri-La Dialogue event in Singapore. He said the Indo-Pacific region is the United States’ “priority theater” and won’t allow China to push it and its allies out of the region.
China retorted Sunday that “no country in the world deserves to be called a hegemonic power other than the U.S. itself.”
“To perpetuate its hegemony and advance the so-called ‘Indo-Pacific strategy,’ the U.S. has deployed offensive weaponry in the South China Sea and kept stoking flames and creating tensions in the Asia-Pacific, which are turning the region into a powder keg and making countries in the region deeply concerned,” the Foreign Ministry spokesperson said.
Hegseth had also said that China was “preparing to use military force” to alter the balance of power in the region and appeared to indicate that the United States would step in to defend Taiwan if China were to attack it.
Mainland China and the island of Taiwan, among other islands, were ruled by the Republic of China before the ROC lost the Chinese Civil War in the early 20th century to the Chinese Communist Party, which established the new government of the People’s Republic of China in October 1949.
The ROC in turn established a temporary capital in Taipei on the island of Taiwan, a former Japanese territory, in December 1949 that served as the seat for China at the United Nations until it was replaced by the People’s Republic of China in 1971 when foreign countries switched their diplomatic relations.
China views self-governed Taiwan and its 23 million residents as a wayward province and has vowed to retake it by force, if necessary. Many supporters of Taiwan have since argued that it is already an independent sovereign state separate from mainland China, which has never controlled Taiwan.
Tensions between the United States and China started to grow during the administration of President Joe Biden in 2022 when then-U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan, sparking a military response from the Chinese government and increased drills in the Taiwan Strait. In 2022, a four-star general predicted that the U.S. and China could be at war by the end of this year.
After returning for his second term, President Donald Trump‘s administration has escalated tensions with China, particularly related to trade tariffs that appear now to be expanding into broader military and diplomatic arenas.
For example, the Pentagon has increased naval patrols in contested areas of the South China Sea and bolstered military partnerships with allies including Japan, Australia, and the Philippines.
“The Taiwan question is entirely China’s internal affair. No country is in a position to interfere. The U.S. should never imagine it could use the Taiwan question as leverage against China,” the Foreign Ministry spokesperson said. “The U.S. must never play with fire on this question.”
Source link
Hegseth: Prepare for war to ensure Indo-Pacific peace
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says nations must prepare for war to ensure peace amid Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific region during the International Institute for Strategic Studies Shangri-la Dialogue Defence Summit in Singapore on Saturday. Photo by How Hwee Young/EPA-EFE
May 31 (UPI) — The United States and its allies won’t allow China to dominate the Indo-Pacific region, but do not seek war, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Saturday morning in Singapore.
He addressed regional concerns while speaking during the International Institute for Strategic Studies Shangri-La Dialogue event in Singapore.
Hegseth said the Indo-Pacific region is the United States’ “priority theater” and won’t allow China to push the United States and its allies out of the region, the Department of Defense announced Friday in a news release.
Instead, deterrence will be the primary tool by which the United States and its allies will counter any aggressive moves made by China, particularly in the South China Sea and against Taiwan.
“As our allies share the burden, we can increase our focus on the Indo-Pacific,” Hegseth said, adding that the region is the nation’s “priority theater.”
He said the futures of the United States and its allies in the Indo-Pacific depend on each other.
“We share a vision of peace and stability, of prosperity and security,” Hegseth said, “and we are here to stay.”
Common sense and national interests with guide policy making in the region, while respecting mutual self-interests.
President Donald Trump is working to get European nations to do more to increase their respective national security interests instead of largely relying on the United States.
As European nations do more to protect themselves, Hegseth said the United States will be better able to focus on matters in the Indo-Pacific region and do more to thwart Chinese aggression.
“This enables all of us to benefit from the peace and stability that comes with a lasting and strong American presence here in the Indo-Pacific,” Hegseth said.
That presence won’t come at a cost for the nation’s allies, though.
“We are not here to pressure other countries to embrace and adopt our politics or ideology,” Hegseth told the audience. “We are all sovereign nations.”
He said the United States does not “seek conflict with communist China.”
But the United States “will not be pushed out of this critical region,” Hegseth added. “And we will not let our allies and partners be subordinated and intimidated.”
He said China’s leaders are “preparing to use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific,” including occupying Taiwan.
Any move by China to take over Taiwan, which China has claimed as part of its sovereign state, would trigger “devastating consequences” for the region and the world, Hegseth told the audience.
“The threat China poses is real, and it could be imminent,” he said, adding that the United States and its allies must be prepared with “urgency and vigilance.”
If deterrence doesn’t work and a fighting war is inevitable, “we are prepared to do what the Department of Defense does best: to fight and win decisively,” Hegseth said.
The best way to ensure peace is to prepare for war, “but we have to do this quickly,” he said. “We have no time to waste.”
Source link
Pete Hegseth urges Asia to boost defence against China’s ‘imminent’ threat to Taiwan
US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has warned of China posing an “imminent” threat to Taiwan, while urging Asian countries to boost defence spending and work with the US to deter war.
Hegseth also said that while the US does not “seek to dominate or strangle China”, the US would not be pushed out of Asia and would not allow intimidation of allies.
He was addressing top Asian military officials at the Shangri-la Dialogue, a high-level defence summit held annually in Singapore.
Many in Asia fear potential instability if China invades Taiwan, a self-governing island claimed by Beijing. China has not ruled out the use of force.
In his speech, Hegseth characterised China as seeking to become a “hegemonic power” that “hopes to dominate and control too many parts” of Asia. China has clashed with several neighbours over competing territorial claims in the South China Sea.
He said that Beijing was “credibly preparing to potentially use military force to alter the balance of power” in Asia, and referred to a 2027 deadline that President Xi Jinping has allegedly given for China’s military to be capable to invade Taiwan.
This is a date put forth by US officials and generals for years, but has never been confirmed by Beijing.
China “is building the military needed to do it, training for it, every day and rehearsing for the real deal”, Hegseth said.
“Let me be clear: any attempt by Communist China to conquer Taiwan by force would result in devastating consequences for the Indo-Pacific and the world. There’s no reason to sugarcoat it. The threat China poses is real. And it could be imminent. We hope not but certainly could be.”
The US does not seek war or conflict with China, Hegseth added.
“We do not seek to dominate or strangle China, to encircle or provoke. We do not seek regime change… but we must ensure that China cannot dominate us or our allies and partners,” he said, adding “we will not be pushed out of this critical region.”
Beijing’s lack of response comes amid a deliberately diminished presence at the dialogue.
The event has traditionally served as a platform for the US and China to make their pitches to Asian countries as the superpowers jostle for influence.
But while this year the US has sent one of its largest delegations ever, China instead has sent a notably lower-level team and scrapped its planned speech on Sunday. No explanation has been given for this.
‘Deterrence doesn’t come cheap’
To prevent war, the US wants “a strong shield of deterrence” forged with allies, said Hegseth, who promised the US would “continue to wrap our arms around our friends and find new ways to work together”.
But he stressed that “deterrence does not come cheap” and urged Asian countries to ramp up their defence spending, pointing to Europe as an example.
US President Donald Trump has demanded members of the Western alliance Nato spend more on defence, at least 5% of their GDPs – an approach Hegseth called “tough love, but love nonetheless”. Some countries like Estonia have moved quickly to do so, while others like Germany have signalled an openness to comply.
“How can it make sense for countries in Europe to do that while key allies and partners in Asia spend less in the face of a more formidable threat?” he said with reference to China, adding that North Korea was a threat as well.
“Europe is stepping up. US allies in the Indo-Pacific can, and should, follow by quickly upgrading their own defences,” he insisted, saying they should be “partners, not dependents” on the US.
He touted US military hardware and also pointed to a new Indo-Pacific partnership for defence industrial resilience. Its first projects are establishing a radar repair centre in Australia for US maritime patrol aircraft purchased by allies, and aiding the production of unmanned drones in the region.
He also warned Asian countries against seeking economic ties with China, saying Beijing would use it as “leverage” to deepen their “malign influence”, complicating US defence decisions.
Hegseth’s speech came a day after French President Emmanuel Macron’s pitch at the same dialogue for Europe to be Asia’s ally as well.
Answering a question about Macron’s proposal, he said the US “would much prefer that the overwhelming balance of European investment be on that continent” so that the US could use its “comparative advantage” in the Indo-Pacific.
‘Common sense’ vision
Hegseth also sold Trump’s vision of “common sense” in dealing with the rest of the world, where “America does not have or seek permanent enemies”.
He compared the US President to the late Singaporean statesman Lee Kuan Yew, who was famous for his pragmatic realpolitik in foreign relations.
“The United States is not interested in the moralistic and preachy approach to foreign policy of the past. We are not here to pressure other countries to embrace and adopt policies or ideologies. We are not here to preach to you about climate change or cultural issues. We are not here to impose our will on you,” he said.
It was an approach that Democratic Party Senator Tammy Duckworth, who was part of the US delegation in Singapore, criticised.
Speaking separately to reporters at the dialogue, the member of the Senate’s foreign relations committee said Hegseth and Trump’s vision was “inconsistent with the values on which our nation was founded”.
Others “know what we stand for, we stand for basic human rights, we stand for international law and order. And that’s what we are going to continue to push for. And I know that in the Senate we’re going to try to uphold that or else it would be un-American otherwise,” she said.
Duckworth also took aim at Hegseth’s overall message to allies in the region, calling it “patronising”.
“His idea where we wrap ourselves around you – we don’t need that kind of language. We need to stand with our allies, work together, and send the message that America is not asking people to choose between the PRC (People’s Republic of China) and us.”
Other members of the delegation, Republican representatives Brian Mast and John Moolenaar, told the BBC the speech sent a clear message of China’s threat and it was welcomed by many Asian countries, according to meetings they had with officials.
“The message I’ve heard is that people want to see freedom of navigation and respect for neighbours, but feel intimidated by some of the aggressive actions that China has displayed,” said Moolenaar, who is chairman of a House committee on competition between US and China.
“So the presence of the US is welcome and encouraged. And the message was to continue to be present.”
Source link
Hegseth warns of China threat as Beijing’s top brass skip Singapore summit | Military News
Singapore – Of the many military officials darting across the lobby of Singapore’s Shangri-La Hotel this weekend, there has been one significant absence.
China’s Defence Minister Dong Jun skipped the annual Shangri-La Dialogue, Asia’s premier security forum, with Beijing sending a delegation of lower-ranking representatives instead.
It was the first time since 2019 that China has not dispatched its defence minister to the high-level dialogue on regional defence, except when the event was cancelled in 2020 and 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Beijing’s decision raised eyebrows in Singapore, coming at a time of heightened tensions between China and the United States – the world’s two biggest superpowers.
Dong’s absence meant there was no face-to-face meeting with his US counterpart, Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth, who had the floor to himself on Saturday when he told the defence forum that the military threat posed by China was potentially imminent.
“It has to be clear to all that Beijing is credibly preparing to potentially use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific,” Hegseth told delegates in Singapore.
Pointing to China’s regular military drills around Taiwan as well as increasingly frequent skirmishes in the South China Sea, Hegseth said Beijing was proactively harassing its neighbours.
“There’s no reason to sugar-coat it. The threat China poses is real, and it could be imminent,” Hegseth said.
He also pointed to China’s growing military assertiveness as a reason for Asian nations to boost their defence spending, pointing to Germany, which has pledged to move towards spending 5 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence.
“It doesn’t make sense for countries in Europe to do that while key allies in Asia spend less on defence in the face of an even more formidable threat,” Hegseth said.
The defence chief also looked to reassure Asian allies that Washington was committed to Asia Pacific security despite strained ties in recent months as US President Donald Trump targeted some close allies with hefty trade tariffs.
“America is proud to be back in the Indo-Pacific, and we’re here to stay,” he said, opening his speech.
Some analysts were quick to play down the severity of Hegseth’s warnings about China.
“Short of a very few countries, not many in this part of the world see China as an imminent threat and would up their [defence] spending,” said Dylan Loh, assistant professor in the public policy and global affairs programme at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University.
China tight-lipped on defence chief’s absence
In previous years, the Shangri-La Dialogue had provided a rare platform for meetings between Chinese and US officials in the more informal surroundings that the summit could offer.
The structure of the schedule also allowed Beijing’s military chiefs to directly respond to the keynote speech from the US defence secretary and to present their narrative to other members of the Asia Pacific.
Beijing has remained tight-lipped on the reason for Defence Minister Dong’s absence from the forum, fuelling an information void that has been filled by speculation.
One theory is that China did not want to send a high-profile delegate to the event at such a sensitive time as Beijing navigates the tariff war with the Trump administration.
“Any sort of faux pas or comments that may go off script can be picked up and picked apart or misconstrued,” said Loh, of Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University.
“So the question is why take the risk when US-China relations are at a very delicate point at this moment,” Loh told Al Jazeera.
The Shangri-La Dialogue weekend has not always been the easiest occasion for Chinese defence ministers. In recent years, they have faced difficult questions from their counterparts in other countries, who are unhappy with Beijing’s increasing assertiveness in the Asia Pacific region.
Loh said this could be another factor in Dong’s absence from the high-profile event.
“Any Chinese defence minister coming to Singapore now will be exposing himself and the country to political risk,” he said. “Themes like the South China Sea and possibly Taiwan will emerge, which makes China a convenient target,” Loh added.
Dong was appointed as China’s defence minister in late 2023, after his predecessor, Li Shangfu, was removed from office.
Less than a year into the job, there was speculation surrounding Dong’s new position following media reports that he was under investigation as part of a wider investigation into corruption in the Chinese military. Beijing denied the reports, with the minister continuing to maintain a public profile despite the allegations.
There has also been intense scrutiny of China’s military, following reports of an apparent purge of top-level officials by President Xi Jinping.
One of Beijing’s most senior generals, He Weidong, was missing from a high-profile political meeting in April, adding to rumours surrounding a possible restructuring in the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
Ian Chong, a nonresident scholar at the Carnegie China research centre, said such speculation could be a factor in Dong’s no-show in Singapore.
“Because of the domestic turmoil with China’s senior military, they perhaps don’t want to, or the PLA itself feels that it’s not in a position to send somebody senior,” Chong told Al Jazeera.
Announcing Dong’s absence at a news conference before the summit, Chinese military spokesperson Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang maintained that communication channels were still open between defence officials in Washington and Beijing.
“China places great importance on US-China military ties, and is open to communication at different levels,” Zhang said.
Source link