Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

Former SECAF Frank Kendall warns that conflicts against less advanced adversaries like Iran reinforce outdated tactics and supply chains. This diverts focus and resources from developing the adaptive capabilities needed to counter a peer competitor like China, which presents a fundamentally different challenge.

Related Insights

The strategic competition with China is often viewed through a high-tech military lens, but its true power lies in dominating the low-tech supply chain. China can cripple other economies by simply withholding basic components like nuts, bolts, and screws, proving that industrial basics are a key geopolitical weapon.

The U.S. faces adversaries who are actively collaborating, rendering a siloed response insufficient. Victory requires an integrated effort combining the government, the traditional defense industrial base, and agile innovators, creating unique partnerships to move faster than the competition.

The US cannot win a manufacturing-based war of attrition against China. Instead of stockpiling existing weapons, the focus must shift to creating a defense industrial base that can rapidly adapt and circumvent new threats. This requires smart, targeted investments in flexible capabilities rather than sheer volume.

The US is moving from a global deterrence posture to concentrating massive force for specific operations, as seen with Iran. This strategy denudes other theaters of critical assets, creating windows of opportunity for adversaries like China while allies are left exposed.

While the U.S. talks about pushing back against China, its military position in East Asia has declined relative to China's rapid buildup. Unlike during the Cold War, U.S. leaders haven't committed the necessary resources or explained the stakes to the American public.

By forcing the U.S. to operate its air defense systems at scale, the conflict in Iran is inadvertently providing China with a treasure trove of intelligence. The Chinese can observe how these systems perform, identify weaknesses, and refine their own tactics for a potential future conflict.

China plays the long game. Instead of direct confrontation, its strategy is to wait for the U.S. to weaken itself through expensive military interventions and political division. This allows China to gain relative power without firing a shot, similar to its rise during the War on Terror.

Despite China's rapid military buildup, the US maintains a critical advantage: decades of real-world combat experience. Under Secretary of War Emil Michael notes that US generals have learned hard lessons from the Global War on Terror, while their Chinese counterparts lack recent conflict experience.

The Iran conflict serves the strategic interests of China and Russia by distracting US attention and draining its military resources. It consumes critical assets (like Patriot missiles needed for Ukraine) and diverts political focus from containing America's primary geopolitical rivals in Europe and Asia.

China's ascent to a peer competitor wasn't through tanks and missiles. It used factories, ports, and loans to build global influence and absorb technology, capital, and leverage, particularly while the US was distracted by wars in the Middle East.