As the United States was deploying destroyers, stealth bombers, and missile defense batteries around the Pacific last month as a show of force against North Korea's nuclear provocations, the Pentagon's top leaders said they had little interaction with China, alarming some senators.

But under the radar, U.S. defense and military officials were confident that Beijing understood Washington's intentions, having steadily increased the stream of communications and contact with the People's Liberation Army over the past few years. For the Pentagon's top China policy official, the trend is promising enough to leave him with a "realistic" sense that a page may have been turned and after years of fits and starts, military-to-military relations between Beijing and Washington may be reaching an even keel.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia David Helvey sat with the E-Ring on Wednesday for a rare on-the-record interview about the state of relations between the Pentagon and the PLA, and their joint role in managing the North Korean nuclear standoff of the past two months.

In March, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel used a "hotline" phone to call China's new minister of national defense, Gen. Chang Wanquan, for a 45-minute introductory conversation in which they discussed a range of issues. Hagel, according to Pentagon press secretary George Little, encouraged they keep an open dialogue about North Korea's nuclear ambitions. Helvey said they also discussed other issues. Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey also used the hotline to call China's chief of the General Staff, Gen. Fang Fenghui, prior to his own visit.

"We're really looking to expand the use of this hotline just as a mechanism for direct communication between our senior leaders," Helvey said.

A strong sign of the relationship's health has been China's receptiveness to talk at all, he said.

"The Chinese have shown a willingness to discuss North Korea with us. They've taken some steps to cooperate with the international community," said Helvey, especially at the United Nations Security Council.

"These are real opportunities and interactions."

But by design, he said, during the North Korean tension most U.S. interaction with China occurred through diplomatic channels, not the Pentagon.

"Quite frankly, the military aspects of this is not something that we wanted to highlight," Helvey said.  

"We had communications certainly at my level," he explained. Helvey's job was to convey the administration's message from the Pentagon to the PLA through the Chinese defense attaché in Washington. 

"Part of what we try to do in our military channels in situations like that is to make sure we're providing the same type of message that's occurring through the diplomatic channels, so that we're presenting a unified view to the Chinese," he said, "so the military understands the same thing that the Foreign Ministry is getting."

Helvey, in return, took the People's Liberation Army's view back to Hagel at the Pentagon.

At the time, Pacific Commander Adm. Samuel Locklear raised alarms when he told the Senate Armed Service Committee he had not been on the phone with the PLA Navy to manage tensions. Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-NH, both pressed Locklear to reach out and touch someone in China.

"We're not there yet," Locklear said, at the time.

"Quite frankly it is a challenge in the relationship," Helvey said, "because our military and the Chinese military are structured somewhat differently." The PACOM commander doesn't have a direct counterpart in China, though he explained how top brass have found their way into the PLA.

"The Chinese war-fighting commands, if you were to call it that, are reflected along military regions which are organized along interior lines. So it doesn't go outside of China," he explained. Most militaries, in fact, do not have officers directly comparable to U.S. combatant commanders, who command troops deployed over vast regions of the globe.

Instead, the United States has tried to engage with several parts of the PLA in lieu of "a direct fit" by talking to regional commanders, sending Locklear and others to participate in strategic and economic dialogues, visiting Beijing, and calling on senior Chinese officers.

Since Beijing temporarily cut communications with the Pentagon during 2010, the United States and China's militaries have maintained contacts via several appointments. In 2012, former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, and Adm. Locklear all visited China. Beijing sent their defense minister and a high-level uniformed deputy of strategy to Washington.

Below that senior level, at least 20 exchanges, meetings, and joint exercises occurred between U.S. and PLA military and defense officials -- events that included policy talks, the convening of a maritime working group, and even a meeting between the Pentagon's office for missing POWs and PLA archivists. National Defense University and the PLA's equivalent continued their exchanges and the National War College sent a delegation to China.

Dempsey visited China last month, and later this year Gen. Ray Odernio, Army chief of staff, and Gen. Mark Welsh, Air Force chief of staff, have scheduled China trips. On the docket are port visits, exchanges of military legal teams, a disaster management exercise, and more academic exchanges.

This summer, Under Secretary of Defense Jim Miller, the policy chief, will attend another round of annual consultative talks.

Outside of the bilateral relationship, Helvey said the Pentagon continues to encourage China to participate more in multilateral venues, "to become part of the international system, part of the international framework that supports stability, peace, prosperity."

But so far, it still makes news if China sends even small delegations to major military exercises, like RIMPAC, or conferences, like the Shangri-La Dialogue.

"I think it's been incremental," Helvey said. "It's something that I think we're going to have to continue working."

But he sees opportunity in the PLA's own global plans. PLA leaders have tasked its force to go beyond regional missions, Helvey notes (as does the Pentagon's latest China power report, released last week), from counter-piracy in the Gulf of Aden to evacuating civilians in Libya. China now deploys more U.N. peacekeeping troops than any other permanent Security Council member.

"From our perspective, if China's going to be out there using its military forces -- deploying them farther and farther away from China -- to the extent that we can encourage them to cooperate with the international community, I think that helps to bring us toward that positive outcome in the relationship that we seek."

"We want to be able to develop a positive, cooperative, comprehensive relationship with China. There's a role for having a healthy, stable, reliable military-to-military relationship, and that's what we want to do," he said.

Still, there are skeptics who remain less than eager to lock arms with the PLA. Just last year, China often was painted as a rival, even an enemy, in a heated presidential campaign. But Helvey persists.

"The U.S.-China relationship is complex," he said. "It is very complex, but a critically important relationship. I think the military-to-military relationship has improved, but I think we have very real expectations of what we can get out of it." 

Friction is, he said, "inevitable." 

"The relationship now is probably as good as it's been in recent memory."

The goal remains to be able to weather those storms without another military-to-military blackout.

"We have realistic expectations."

DOD photo by Marine Corps Sgt. Aaron Hostutler

It's déjà vu all over again for the Pentagon's latest annual "China power report" released on Monday, in which Defense Department policy bosses have determined that the People's Liberation Army (PLA) is continuing to expand, modernize, and buy more and weaponry and capabilities mostly designed to keep outside powers like the United States out of its immediate territory. 

"China's military buildup shows no signs of slowing," said Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense David Helvey, at the Pentagon.

What worries Helvey most is that despite increased transparency from China, the United States feels that Beijing continues to keep its plans and intentions for the PLA far too close to the vest and "many uncertainties remain" about the PLA budget

"There's a lot yet that remains to be said," Helvey said. "This report poses a number of questions -- questions to which we don't have answers."

According to the report, China's military is focused on acquiring more missiles, counter-space weapons, and cyberwarfare technology. In fact, in just about every corner of the military toolbox, the PLA is increasing stocks: "nuclear deterrence and long-range conventional strike; advanced fighter aircraft; limited regional power projection, with the commissioning of China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning; integrated air defenses; undersea warfare; improved command and control; and more sophisticated training and exercises across China's air, naval, and land forces."

China's Second Artillery unit, which controls its nuclear arsenal, has been particularly active. "It is developing and testing several new classes and variants of offensive missiles, forming additional missile units, upgrading older missile systems, and developing methods to counter ballistic missile defenses," the report claims.

One quick note: while the world saw China's first aircraft carrier come online last year, the Pentagon expects it will not have an operational air wing until 2015. The Pentagon seems more concerned about the next decade, as the PLA has announced its intention to build its own carriers. The Pentagon expects the first home-built Chinese carrier by the end of this decade, according to the report.

Helvey claimed the administration has achieved "positive" momentum in U.S.-China military-to-military relations, citing a number of high-level visits between Beijing and Washington in 2012. He would not comment further on reports of China's cyber espionage and theft of military secrets. But the true extend of trust in that relationship was bluntly in view during last months' nuclear standoff with North Korea, when Pentagon and Joint Staff officials conceded there was little interaction between top U.S. and Chinese commanders.

Posted By Kevin Baron

Everyone knows that China blocks Internet access to Facebook, but even, it seems, for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey

Dempsey's Facebook status, which usually actively shares the chairman's daily public appearances, has not updated since Sunday, when he was still in Seoul, South Korea.

Dempsey is in the middle of a rare visit to China, but judging from his Facebook page and most mainstream news outlets, you probably wouldn't know it.

Dempsey's visit has been virtually ignored by Western media and barely covered even by the national security press, which in the past two weeks has shifted its blanket attention from North Korea to Boston. But in the past two days, Dempsey, the top U.S. military officer, has met with China's President Xi Jingping, defense chief Gen. Fang Fenghui, and Defense Minister Gen. Chang Wanguan.

True, the chairman rarely travels with press, and this trip was no exception. For his trip to Beijing, the Christian Science Monitor's Anna Mulrine was the lucky Pentagon reporter given a seat on his plane to cover "the highest-level military talks between the two superpowers in two years."

Mulrine is practically the only westerner filing copy about Dempsey's visit. ABC News's Bob Woodruff is also on board and tweeting nice pictures along the way through Alaska and Seoul to Tiananmen Square, here. The New York Times's Beijing correspondent Jane Perlez also covered Dempsey's first day, here.

On Monday, Dempsey and Feng met behind closed doors and emerged to declare their shared fears about cyber attacks, the destructive value of which Feng said could be "as serious a nuclear bomb," Mulrine reported.

Dempsey and Fang later held a press conference in which a Chinese journalist asked why U.S. military exercises are conducted so close to China. Dempsey replied that the concern is at "the core" of why he came to Beijing - alluding to the Pentagon's mission to avoid any military misunderstandings.

So far, there has not been much news to report. Dempsey said the United States had treaty obligations to maintain -- a reference to Taiwan -- while Fang said, "The Pacific Ocean is wide enough to accommodate us both."

Dempsey has two more days of meetings in China, including with Chinese soldiers.

UPDATE: Dempsey's spokesman emailed the E-Ring from China saying that they plan to post one big Facebook status update on China after their visit, instead of daily updates.

When asked if that was a cybersecurity decision, Col. David Lapan replied, "Not at all."

 

Photo by Andy Wong - Pool/Getty Images

Posted By Kevin Baron

In a late addition to next week's Asia tour, Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will visit in South Korea on Sunday, the E-Ring has learned, as tensions between North Korea and U.S. allies show signs of easing. 

Dempsey takes off on Friday for a long-scheduled trip to China, his first visit, and Japan. Pentagon officials wanted to gauge the North Korean standoff closer to his departure date before deciding whether to touch down in Seoul.

The visit gives Dempsey a chance to makeup a face-to-face meeting with South Korea's Joint Chiefs chairman, Gen. Jung Seung-jo, which was supposed to happen this week during U.S.-Republic of Korea talks at the Pentagon. But because of the Korean crisis, Jung remained home on the peninsula, as did U.S. Forces Korea commanding general, Gen. James Thurman, who would have been in Washington for the talks and to appear before the House Armed Services Committee. The bilateral talks instead were conducted as a secure video teleconference, and included the U.S. Pacific commander, Adm. Samuel Locklear. 

In a joint communiqué, Dempsey and Jung declared the U.S.-ROK alliance "stronger than ever," on Wednesday.

"They also reaffirmed that both countries will respond firmly to any provocation by North Korea," according to the document. In October, both sides will seek approval on the specifics for a new command structure for combined forces on the Korean Peninsula. 

Dempsey leaves Washington on Friday and after stopping in Alaska will visit South Korea on Sunday. He then is scheduled to spend four days in China, visiting with his counterpart, Gen. Fang Fenghui, and other senior defense and political officials.

Dempsey may meet China's Presiden Xi Jinping, according to the chairman's staff, but Chinese officials have yet to finalize their schedules. 

Dempsey also will visit several People's Liberation Army units, which officials declined to name, citing security measures.

In his second visit to Japan as chairman, Dempsey will meet his counterpart Shigeru Iwasaki, chief of the Joint Staff, to talk about North Korea and the gamut of "regional issues," a Dempsey spokesman said.

 

DOD photo by D. Myles Cullen

Posted By Kevin Baron

Despite an active threat of nuclear war in East Asia, the top U.S. commander in the Pacific said on Tuesday that he has not talked to his Chinese military counterparts during the ongoing North Korean standoff.

The revelation, made during Tuesday’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, exposes just how broken the U.S.-China military relationship remains despite the Obama administration’s efforts to build stronger ties with Beijing dating to 2009.

Relations between the U.S. military and China’s People’s Liberation Army have thawed in recent years. But U.S. defense leaders and commanders are frustrated that China is not doing more to help calm Pyongyang.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., asked U.S. Pacific Command’s Adm. Samuel Locklear if he thought the same way.

“I think that they could do more,” the four-star commander replied.

Then Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., asked, “Have you had any conversations with your military counterparts in China in the last couple of weeks?” Locklear, the top commander in Asia, replied,  “I have not.”

It was not until much later in the hearing that Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-NH, revived the issue, saying Locklear’s answer “troubled me.”

“It seems to me that we need to be, I would think, clearer with China as to what our expectations are because this is a danger to them,” Ayotte said. “And, also, if there is a provocation between North and South Korea and we are required to engage, or North Korea engages us, that is to the detriment of China's security, as well.”

“So I'm wondering why you haven't had those conversations.”

Locklear, who does not have a direct counterpart in the PLA chain-of-command, noted that Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel was having conversations with China on behalf of the Pentagon. Hagel discussed North Korea with Chinese Minister of National Defense General Chang Wanquan on April 2. Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey spoke in early March with Gen. Fang Fenghui, chief of the General Staff of the People's Liberation Army.  

“I believe that, over time, we'll progress to a state where the PACOM commander can talk to the chief of defense or the chairman can talk there in a real time. We're not there yet.”

Indeed, even the top of the chain is barely talking.

“We're not aware of any recent mil-to-mil contacts with China on DPRK,” said Col. David Lapan, spokesman for Chairman Dempsey. Dempsey is scheduled to visit China later this month.

Hagel’s team also said they knew of no other “high-level interaction” on North Korea. Col. Cathy Wilkinson, Defense Department spokeswoman, said “routine” military coordination has continued “through diplomatic channels.”

Locklear later said he has a hotline with Beijing for crises but not the kind of military-to-military relationships the U.S. enjoys with China’s neighbors.

“But as I've said to my Chinese counterparts, we need to get better at this, because I don't have the same relationship I have with maybe the chief of defense of Japan or of Korea or of the Philippines, where we understand each other. We meet routinely. We talk through security issues. And we need to move that forward with our relationship with China,” he said.

“It's nice to have relationships before the crisis,” replied Sen. Angus King, I-Maine.

Gen. James Thurman, U.S. Forces Korea commander, was supposed to testify alongside Locklear about the North Korea situation, but he skipped the trip to Washington in order to stay on duty in South Korea.

Levin, whose question put Locklear on the hot seat, closed the hearing by throwing the admiral a lifeline and asking if he could try to reach out and touch the Chinese.

“It could add a very important element if this military- to-military communication occurred with your Chinese counterpart,” Levin said.

“Yes, sir.”

“So that's something you could take on?”

“I will explore it. Yes, sir.”

JAY DIRECTO/AFP/GettyImages

Posted By Kevin Baron

China's defense spending is often the cause of heartburn and confusion in Washington, but top analysts argued Monday that the U.S. should spend more time examining the People’s Liberation Army’s rate of growth, its strong commitment to military modernization, and its mixed message to foreign powers about its intentions.

China is spending more on high-tech, yet unproven systems, such as stealth fighers, in an effort to keep up with the Pentagon. But that ambition is eating at its wider budget, said James Mulvenon, director of Defense Group, Inc.’s Center for Intelligence Research and Analysis. Additionally, he said, the cost for PLA personnel has risen from about one-third of its budget to roughly one-half, in an effort to increase the quality of the Chinese force.

China, last month, released its annual public disclosure of its military spending at $119 billion. That compares to roughly $526 billion in defense spending that President Obama reportedly will request for fiscal 2014, according to Bloomberg. There was little fear on Monday about what China plans to do with its military, and even a tepid appreciation that China has become more transparent and willing to talk about its intentions. But U.S. analysts remain frustrated that Beijing continues to say one thing, but do another, with the PLA.

“The defense budget issue is just one of dozens of examples where Chinese strategic communications have failed to ameliorate its regional neighbors, to ameliorate the concerns the United States has,” Mulvenon said, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “In fact, I would argue that never before has there been greater cognitive dissonance in our relationship with China.”

Mulvenon said China is “completely outdated” in not matching its messaging with its deeds, especially in today's in modern media world.

“It is difficult to maintain an anti-piracy task force in [the Horn of Africa], and yet continue to claim stridently that you will never have overseas bases, when clearly the replenishment requirements of doing that require you to find some sort of a hybrid solution.”

“We’re looking at an explosion of naval construction,” Mulvenon said, “that again …will have to be explained. And it can’t be explained simply as defense of the motherland if, in fact, you are engaging in wide-ranging global deployments.”

Andrew Erickson, associate professor at the Naval War College, pointed to China’s sustained growth rates, which he claimd reached an annual average of 16.5 percent in the last decade and leveled off at 10.4 percent in 2011.

“Over the past decade, these double digit nominal increases have quadrupled spending, and they have made the PLA budget second in size only to that of the U.S. military budget,” he said, “albeit several hundred billion dollars less.”

“The PLA budget’s growth rate is truly the envy of the U.S. and its allies, whose defense budgets are either stagnating or declining absolutely,” he said, with Japan being the rare exception, having a 0.8 percent growth increase in defense spending.

Although the realities of China’s actual capabilities, which lag far behind the U.S., remain unimpressive to many in Washington, Erickson said Americans are mistaken to compare Chinese military hardware to any “gold standard.”

“How good is good enough?” Erickson said. “Look at the sheer amount of resources and programs that China is throwing out there. It may not all be efficiently spent, but no other major country with the possible exception of the U.S. is able to do this.”

China has seven major military shipbuilding programs, for example, and is sustaining multiple aircraft development programs.

The “sheer dynamism” of that effort, compared to any other country outside of the U.S., Erickson said, was “striking.”

Photo by Feng Li/Getty Images

Posted By Kevin Baron

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will fly to Singapore next month to attend a key conference of Asia-Pacific defense ministers.

Hagel told Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loon, during a working lunch at the Pentagon on Monday, that he will attend the annual Shangri-La Dialogue, which is held May 31 to June 2. The conference is named after the hotel in which it is held and hosted by London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS).

This year, Singapore becomes an even more important strategic hub for U.S. naval interests in the region as the U.S.S. Freedom, the nation’s first littoral combat ship (LCS), arrives later this month for its first-ever forward deployment. Four LCS ships will rotate deployments there, putting the fast-moving, shallow-water vessels into the South China Sea for the first time.

“The meeting was an opportunity for Secretary Hagel to hear the prime minister's views on regional security issues, including how nations can work with one another to peacefully resolve territorial issues in the East and South China Seas,” said Pentagon press secretary George Little, in a statement. The men talked about “Afghanistan, counter-piracy and counter-proliferation efforts.”

The draft agenda for this year’s Shangri-La should come as no surprise to Asian security watchers. Topics include speeches and sessions on: “The U.S. Approach to Regional Security,” “Military Modernization and Strategic Transparency,” “Avoiding Incidents at Sea,” “Defense Diplomacy and Conflict Prevention,” “The Cyber Dimension to Asian Security,” and, of course, China.

U.S. defense secretaries Leon Panetta and Robert Gates attended the important annual gathering in previous years, delivering their own strong pledges to build alliances, remain forward deployed in the region and keep open the waters of the South China Sea. The event is the closest thing the region has to mirror NATO's defense ministerial meetings, bringing together nations to foster a regional collective defense.

DOD photo by Glenn Fawcett

Posted By Kevin Baron

Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will travel to China next month.

Dempsey’s Beijing plans first were reported last week by Chinese media, but Pentagon officials kept quiet about the trip. The chairman confirmed his upcoming travel with a passing mention during his appearance at a luncheon Monday in Washington.

Dempsey’s spokesman, Col. David Lapan, said trip details are still being worked out. The visit by Dempsey, President Obama’s senior military advisor, is scheduled to follow trips by Secretary of State John Kerry and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew.

"General Dempsey looks forward to visiting China next month to enhance cooperation on shared security interests and strengthen our relationship," Lapan said. Dempsey spoke with Gen. Fang Fenghui, chief of the General Staff of the People's Liberation Army, last week.  "They discussed the upcoming visit, strengthening ties, and regional security issues."

It comes on the heels of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s order to boost anti-ballistic missile defenses on the West Coast of the United States in response to North Korea threats. China criticized the move as adding risk to the situation. A spokesman said Hagel’s move “can only deepen antagonism,” according to the New York Times.

Feng Li/Getty Images

Posted By Kevin Baron

One. The number of questions senators on the Armed Services Committee asked Chuck Hagel on Thursday specifically about China totaled one.

To be fair, the list of major national security topics the Senate Armed Services Committee ignored but that Hagel, if confirmed, must command is a long one: Afghanistan, al Qaeda, North Africa and the Mali conflict, even multi-billion dollar weapons procurement and the entire defense budget.

But also on the list is China, the U.S. military’s robust effort under President Obama to open the People’s Liberation Army to warmer and steadier relations, and the administration’s pivot, or rebalancing, to Asia and the Pacific region.

Hagel, in his opening statement, pledged to continue Obama’s pivot and grow U.S. engagement in Asia. He offered nothing more, however, on what he thinks of the U.S.-China relationship or the military capabilities race in which Washington and Beijing are engaged, leaving China experts unsatisfied.

“I just don’t know that he’s thought about it at all,” said Bonnie Glaser, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Glaser was not surprised China wasn’t a larger part of Hagel’s confirmation hearing for two reasons: the Senate has lost some key members who focused on Asia, namely Sen. Dick Lugar (R-IN) and Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA), and Hagel entered the room already under fire over other issues that commanded the clock. The little that was said about China was elementary.

“It’s the usual mainstream, obviously, questions that people say about China. And I think we need to look beyond whether China is being militarily transparent,” she told the E-Ring. “Is that the most important issue today?”

“What’s not being talked about,” she said, “is as China evolves its capabilities, it is seeking to exert greater sea denial and potential sea control over the waters close to China.” At the same time, the U.S. is seeking to maintain its ability to retain control anywhere within those same waters. That will be expensive – more so if the military relationship becomes more competitive than cooperative.

“How do we get to where they don’t insist on being in control of all [of the waters near China], and we don’t insist on access to everywhere [in those seas] right up to their coastline?”

Here is the one exchange on the Pacific Hagel did have, with Hawaii’s Sen. Mazie Hirono, a Democrat:

SENATOR MAZIE HIRONO (D-HI): Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Inhofe. I join my colleagues in welcoming you, Senator Hagel.
 
We live in a complex world, and any secretary of defense should ask tough questions, maybe not particularly politically popular questions. And I see you, Senator Hagel, as that kind of person based on your service to our country, your conduct and responses to the questions asked of you today and the conversation that you and I had.
 
Turning to your statement this morning, you talked about looking at our future threats and challenges and why the Department of Defense is rebalancing its resources toward the Asia-Pacific region. And of course this kind of rebalance is critically important to Hawaii (in ?) our forward position in the Pacific.
 
Would you expand as to why and what particular economic or national security factors come in to play as we rebalance to the Asia- Pacific region.
 
MR. HAGEL: Senator, you know better than most your region and its importance and why it will continue to be important to the world, but certainly to the United States.
 
As I noted in my opening statement, and you know, we have always been a Pacific power. We have been a Pacific power because we have clear economic interests there. We have diplomatic security interests there. We have strong allies there; I mentioned some of them in my opening statement.
 
When we look at the growth of economies, we look at trade growth, we look at population growth, the rise of China, but not just China, but that entire Asia Pacific region, we need to stay relevant to opportunities as well as challenges in all areas, but in particular the areas that we see as emerging as to the largest, most significant economic security issues and challenges and opportunities.
 
It's appropriate that any nation rebalance assets. You have to be relevant to the times, to the shifts, the changes. Our world today is totally different than it was 12 years ago. Our force structure is being refit, and we are looking at a far more agile, flexible force structure as our economies are becoming more agile and flexible.
 
So for all those reasons and more, that's why we are doing what I think is exactly the right thing to do. It doesn't mean, as I said in my opening statement, that we are abandoning anybody or any part of the world. We can't.
 
SEN. HIRONO: Senator, and as we live in times of budget constraints, will you commit to keeping me and this committee informed as you develop the strategies and contemplate force posture adjustments that go along with this kind of re-balancing?
 
MR. HAGEL: Yes, and I look forward to it.


MARK RALSTON/AFP/GettyImages

As you watch tonight’s presidential debate between President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney on foreign policy, remember this: there are few things Americans care less about than foreign policy. And, conveniently, there are fewer things Americans know less about than foreign policy.

But Americans have opinions, nonetheless. Since 2010, there have been more Americans saying they wanted to pull troops out of Afghanistan as soon as possible than those saying the United States should stabilize that country first. By a roughly 60-30 percent gap, Americans are more worried about China’s economic strength than its military power. More than 60 percent have no faith that sanctions will sway Iran to give up its nuclear program. And more than 65 percent of Americans think the administration is treating Israel just fine. As for Russia, only 2 percent of Americans think it’s the greatest threat to the United States.

National security is not run by referendum, however. But keep those statistics and these others released last Friday in mind when Obama and Romney try to strike a balance tonight between looking like a strong commander-in-chief, but not one who is wasteful or itching to get the U.S. too involved around the world. Americans want a tough president, but one who is ready to focus his attention back home, according to the Pew Research Center’s latest findings.

What does that mean for these five issue areas that have been announced for tonight’s debate?

“America’s Role in the World”

This topic goes to the heart of the U.S. military’s footprint around world and how the next president intends to use it -- and never mind the militarization of foreign policy, because that’s a phrase barely mentioned in the Pentagon. Obama has presented Congress a five-year plan that offers a robust global counterterrorism presence with a significant downsizing of the Army and Marine Corps, a plan strongly backed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and a pivot/rebalancing toward Asia. That means a leaner military. Defense spending could get aired out tonight here and it could be interesting. The brass are on record that they want to reset, refit, and retrain the force for the post-Iraq and Afghanistan world. Few are calling for what Romney is advocating: a significant increase in the troop presence in the Middle East and a 4 percent GDP-sized spending account for the Pentagon. More likely, the candidates will present their views in basest of terms: the open hand of Obama versus the “no apology” of Romney and American exceptionalism. But will they challenge each other?

“Our Longest War -- Afghanistan and Pakistan”

There is less daylight between Obama and Romney on any topic than Afghanistan. That’s mostly because Romney has not offered any different course other than promising to be more attentive to commanders on the ground, which allows him to imply Obama has not done so. In his Tampa acceptance speech, Romney didn’t mention Afghanistan. Republicans are divided over what to do there next. And even though Democrats by 98 percent think Obama’s pullout order too slow, the president gives Romney little room here. The U.S. and NATO are committed to the 2014 deadline -- whether you believe the U.S. will keep fighting that long or not. Unless moderator Bob Scheiffer draws something out of the candidates, those watching among the 67,000 troops in Afghanistan can expect little more than a rehashing of the justification for extending the war another two years.

Red Lines -- Israel and Iran”

Romney has tried most to distinguish himself as a better friend to Israel than Obama. But as they speak, the United States and Israel are preparing to begin a massive war game that’s unofficially geared as a united defense against an Iranian missile threat -- the expected response from Tehran should anyone try to knock out their nuclear program.  “Who loves Israel more?” is now staple campaign fare. Look for Obama tonight to defend his love for Israel and press Romney to say what, exactly, he’d do differently than the current administration. Look for Romney to allege that Obama’s sanctions-loving, Israel-ostracizing public posture is only making the region less stable.

“The Changing Middle East and the New Face of Terrorism”

Obama might use some of this time to explain just how extensively the Pentagon is preparing for or engaged in counterterrorism operations country-by-country across the Middle East and North Africa. U.S. officials are working the new post-Arab Awakening governments to secure relationships and military ties they’ll need to track and keep a thumb on al Qaeda and other extremists. Under Obama, security and stability still drives Middle East policy. Romney will likely continue to hit Obama on botching Benghazi, on not helping the Syrian rebels enough, and for allowing extremism to spread throughout the region. It could be the most interesting exchange of the night, especially if the president opts to highlight U.S. military activity in the region under his watch.

“The Rise of China and Tomorrow’s World”

For some national security watchers, this topic should be called “The Rise of China’s Military.” But it’s not, for a reason. Most Americans are far more concerned about China’s economic rise than they are about J-20 stealth fighter test runs. Romney has made trade with China a centerpiece of his campaign. Don’t expect a debate over strategic power here -- it’s probably the segment to step out and grab popcorn as the candidates discuss manufacturing jobs and currency manipulation. Or to flip over to what tens of millions of other Americans tonight will actually be paying close attention to: Monday Night Football.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Posted By Kevin Baron

Sensing a crack in Beijing's shell, Defense Department officials are sounding positive about the chances China will join in the next RIMPAC, the world's largest multinational joint military maritime exercise, led by U.S. forces across the Pacific.
 
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is back in the Pentagon after last week's globe-trotting journey to Japan, China and New Zealand. His mission was to continue the U.S. effort to warm relations with China's People's Liberation Army and keep inching towards better understanding of the PLA's intentions. So, Panetta invited China to send a ship to the RIMPAC in 2014. He doesn't return with a firm yes to the invitation, but with China's military leaders, this is perhaps as good as it gets.
 
"There were good indicators from the conversation with the Chinese," said one defense official, leaving the U.S. defense officials "hopeful they will accept the invitation." The American official was referring to enthusiasm for the RIMPAC 2014 invitation displayed by Chinese officials during Panetta's meetings in China.
 
RIMPAC began in 1971. The last exercise was held this summer, with 22 nations, including South Korea, Singapore, and Thailand -- all three are China's neighbors and all three harbor territorial disputes with Beijing.
 
"I hope that they bring a ship, and I hope that they bring a crew ready to learn and to be interoperable," said Pacific Command's Adm. Sam Locklear, in San Diego.
 
The invitation is one of many efforts to increase senior-level engagement between American and Asian officials as part of the Pentagon's "rebalancing" -- don't call it the "pivot," officials plead -- to the region.
 
This year, Panetta already visited Singapore and Vietnam, in June. In November, Panetta turns his Doomsday plane, the E4-B, around for another marathon run to Australia for annual bilateral meetings. The defense official said Panetta on that trip also will visit other Southeast Asian nations, but would not announce those stops yet.

Canadian Forces photo by MCpl Marc-Andre Gaudreault, Canadian Forces Combat Camera

In an exclusive interview with Foreign Policy on Friday evening, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta cast himself as a mediator in the dispute between China and Japan over the Senkaku Islands, which both see as sovereign territory. "What we've urged both China and Japan to do is to resolve these disputes as peacefully as possible as well, and that will be one of the things I will urge Japan to do," Panetta said.

On Saturday, Panetta travels to Japan, then China and New Zealand. The Asia trip comes at a time when events in the Middle East are another reminder that it is hard to keep focus on the much-hyped "pivot to Asia," designed to assert American military presence as China builds its own military power.

While two carriers and other naval elements are deployed to the Central Command area of responsibility should there be a conflict with Iran, the Pentagon is attempting to beef up its naval presence in Asia. There are more than 25,000 troops in South Korea, more troops in Okinawa, and Defense Department planners are developing plans for deployments to Darwin, Australia, and to the Philippines, he said. "We have a significant naval presence, we have a large number of troops [in Asia]" Panetta said.

In the end, it's important to be able to do two things at once, Panetta said. Indeed, it's the mark of a strong military power. "I think one of the things about the United States military is we have to walk and chew at the same time," he said.

Panetta ticked off the myriad challenges in the region - nuclear proliferation, maritime navigation rights and trade. The countries in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or ASEAN, are attempting to develop a "code of conduct" for territorial disputes. "We are still waiting for an enforcement mechanism, still waiting for them to put teeth in the process, but the fact that they've been able to do that is an indication that they want to be able to resolve these issues peacefully."

The elephant in the room, of course, is the mystery that is China. Developing a trusting, transparent relationship is key to good relations, Panetta said, and on his must-do list while there. "That's one of the things I'm going to urge," he said.

He said he's not afraid to talk cyber security between the two countries, as well as military capabilities.

The former CIA director said he maintained a "very good relationship" with China on intelligence issues and he'd like to do much the same thing on the military-to-military side. "Even though relationships would go up and down, it was a good relationship because we had very good communication and exchanges with regards to intelligence information," Panetta said.

Panetta sounds part diplomat, part mediator, part conciliator when it comes to China: "If we can maintain a steady relationship, a transparent relationship, what are the capabilities, what are the areas we can work on, you know what we can do together, can we do exercises together, can we try to improve that knowledge and communication, that I think would be helpful to both countries, so that's what I'm going to try to work on."

But he has yet another challenge in China, he acknowledged. Xi Jinping, the vice-president and China's heir apparent, hasn't been seen for two weeks. 

"One of my challenges is to find out where he's at," Panetta joked.

MARK RALSTON/AFP/GettyImages

Kevin Baron reports on the people and policies driving the Pentagon and the national security establishment in The E-Ring.

Read More