Pentagon's top policy official outlines new 'realism' approach to China

The Pentagon’s top policy official, Elbridge Colby, outlined a new “realism” strategy for dealing with China in a major speech Monday, emphasizing a shift away from moralistic rhetoric and direct confrontation. The speech, delivered in the Philippines, marked a departure from previous U.S. approaches to regional security, focusing instead on a quiet yet firm posture aimed at reinforcing American military strength without overtly challenging China’s growing influence. Colby, undersecretary of defense for policy, described the new policy as one that prioritizes practicality and self-interest over ideological posturing, reflecting what he called “republican realism.” Colby’s 4,000-word address to a think tank in Manila avoided explicit mentions of China, though the context of the speech and prior remarks clearly pointed to Beijing as the subject. He argued that the U.S. should avoid what he termed “peacocking”, symbolic displays of military might that lack strategic substance, and instead focus on subtle, consistent actions that signal strength. This includes enhancing military readiness and fortifying deterrence through industrial capacity and logistical preparedness. The new policy, he said, is rooted in the idea of being “strong and clear but quiet,” echoing President Theodore Roosevelt’s adage of “speaking softly and carrying a big stick.” The proposed strategy seeks to eliminate what Colby called “hegemony” in the region, though he did not specify which nation or actor he believed was exerting undue dominance. His remarks left unaddressed China’s increasing assertiveness, including its militarization of the South China Sea, large-scale naval drills near Taiwan, and provocative statements toward Japan. Additionally, China has been accused of conducting cyberattacks that compromise U.S. infrastructure, stealing advanced technologies, and engaging in extensive espionage campaigns. These actions, while not directly mentioned in Colby’s speech, form the backdrop against which the new policy is being framed. Colby defended the new approach as a continuation of long-standing U.S. foreign policy traditions, citing figures such as Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Henry Kissinger, and Ronald Reagan. He suggested that these leaders all pursued a balance between military strength and diplomatic engagement, even as they confronted adversaries. Notably, he referenced Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s concept of a “denial defense” in the Western Pacific, a strategy designed to make war less likely by making aggression costly and impractical. This would involve prepositioning military assets and leveraging shared infrastructure with allies to create a resilient, decentralized network capable of deterring potential aggressors. Critics, including some within Washington’s policy circles, have questioned whether the new approach adequately addresses the challenges posed by China’s rising power. Some argue that the emphasis on quiet diplomacy could undermine U.S. credibility in the region, particularly given China’s recent assertive behavior. Others suggest that the absence of direct condemnation of Chinese actions risks emboldening Beijing’s expansionist ambitions. Despite this, Colby maintained that the new policy is not isolationist but rather a pragmatic recalibration focused on protecting American interests while maintaining cooperation with key partners. Looking ahead, the success of this new strategy will depend on how effectively the U.S. can translate its commitments into tangible military and diplomatic outcomes. With tensions continuing to rise in the Indo-Pacific, the challenge will be to maintain a presence that deters aggression without provoking further conflict. As Colby emphasized, the goal is not to provoke but to ensure that the U.S. remains a reliable and formidable force in the region.