Connect with us

America

Pentagon divided over military priorities in Asia and the Middle East

Published

on

Senior Pentagon officials are reportedly divided over the extent of military support for Israel versus engagement in Asia, a split that could influence the direction of foreign policy in a potential second term for Donald Trump.

Ben Smith, founder of the news site Semafor, explored this issue in a recent special report. According to Smith, General Michael “Erik” Kurilla, the commander of US Central Command (CENTCOM), is advocating for more resources to defend Israel as retaliatory actions from Iran increase.

In contrast, Elbridge Colby, the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and a proponent of the US military focusing on China and the Indo-Pacific, opposes the diversion of American military assets from Asia to the Middle East.

An Iran war embodies the primary tension for Colby and his allies: the US has long sought to implement its “pivot to Asia,” a strategy first announced by Barack Obama in 2011. However, practical demands and political pressures consistently redirect American military involvement back to the Middle East.

Shifting priorities within the Pentagon

According to Smith, Colby’s opposition stems from concerns that deployments, such as the transfer of a Patriot missile battery from South Korea to the Middle East in April, could compromise US readiness for future conflicts with China or the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Despite providing military aid to Israel, Trump has occasionally shown frustration with open coordination and allegedly dismissed his National Security Advisor, Mike Waltz, due to his close ties with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Trump’s potential appointment of Colby to a Department of Defense position has raised concerns among pro-Israel hawks, who might interpret it as a sign of diminishing US support.

Although Waltz’s dismissal and Trump’s allowance for an “independent” Israeli strike on Iran suggest a more non-interventionist approach, Colby’s influence appears to be waning.

CENTCOM chief Kurilla gains strength

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth reportedly dismissed several of Colby’s allies in April and has cultivated a closer relationship with Kurilla.

Eli Lake of The Free Press reported that the new Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the Middle East, Michael Dimino, who is from the “restrainer” camp, has set off alarm bells among Trump supporters who believe engagement in the region is vital.

Referring to Dimino’s views, one Trump ally joked, “The guy who is going to be his deputy in charge of Middle East policy thinks the US shouldn’t be in the Middle East. Somebody call Elon at DOGE.”

Earlier this month, Al-Monitor reported that Kurilla had requested the deployment of a second aircraft carrier strike group to the region. While the Pentagon has not confirmed this deployment, the US has begun sending warships and aircraft to the area. The planned visit of the USS Nimitz to Vietnam was abruptly canceled due to “urgent operational requirements.”

The future of American policy

A key force behind the “restrainer” ideology is Defense Priorities, a think tank funded by Charles Koch’s Stand Together philanthropy group.

The organization recently published a carefully worded paper arguing for reducing Israel’s reliance on US military guarantees: “A more secure, diplomatically connected Israel would rely less on American military backing and more on regional partnerships to secure its future.”

Colby and the Pentagon press office did not respond to media inquiries, but internal dynamics suggest that those who favor traditional US intervention in the Middle East are gaining an advantage.

According to Smith, as Trump attempts to balance his “America First” policy with regional alliances, the outcome of this internal debate will determine the trajectory of US-Israel relations during a period of regional instability.

Elbridge Colby’s fixation on China

One claim in the report suggests that Colby is so focused on Asia that he “clashes with anyone doing anything else in foreign policy, including loyal Trump supporters.”

After Smith’s report was published, chief Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell stated in an email that reports of any internal division were inaccurate and that Colby was “fully aligned with the leadership team and moving in lockstep.”

In an interview with POLITICO last July, Colby emphasized his personal view that defending Eastern NATO requires allocating forces in a way that does not diminish the US’s ability to defend Taiwan.

Colby also identified “key capabilities” such as long-range fire, logistics, command and control (known as C4ISR), and air defense as areas where the US should focus on Asia, not Europe.

Having previously argued that US commitments to Ukraine were excessive, Colby has consistently underlined that the most tangible economic and military challenge to his country and its interests comes from China.

The strategist, who noted that he views Ukraine through a “China lens,” clarified that he was not calling for an immediate halt to all aid to Kyiv. He argued that while Russia’s actions are “evil,” the assistance provided by the US does not align with the tangible interests of Americans.

When asked what he would advise the US President to do now, Colby responded: “I would say, ‘I don’t want to talk about Ukraine right now. We are going to talk about Taiwan, China, and Asia first, and after we have addressed that problem satisfactorily, then we will spend time, political capital, and resources on Ukraine.'”

Last month, the Financial Times (FT) reported that Colby had told British officials a Trump administration would expect the British military to increase its focus on the Euro-Atlantic region.

America

US national debt hits record $40 trillion as borrowing accelerates

Published

on

The US national debt has reached a record $40 trillion as borrowing expanded at a historic pace.

The development has heightened investor concern over the state of US public finances, despite Donald Trump’s pledge to bring spending under control.

Gross federal debt crossed the threshold on Tuesday, according to Treasury Department data published on Wednesday.

Calculations by the Financial Times show that debt climbed by $3 trillion over the past year, registering the fastest rate of increase in history outside the pandemic period.

Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget think tank, said:

“This is like a giant, flashing ‘check engine’ light. It doesn’t mean your engine will melt down tomorrow, but it is a clear sign that things have gotten quite out of hand. And it’s not just the size of the number; it’s the speed at which we’ve reached it.”

The US national debt has surged over the past two decades, climbing from below $6 trillion at the start of the century (about $12 trillion in 2026 dollar terms) as massive public spending during the financial crisis and the Covid-19 pandemic compounded enormous budget deficits.

In the past 10 years alone, the total debt load has doubled. Debt held by the public—a key gauge tracked by markets that excludes intra-governmental holdings—now exceeds $32 trillion, roughly equal to the size of the US economy.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office expects debt held by the public to surpass the post-Second World War record of 106% of GDP by the end of the decade and to reach 120% by 2036.

As borrowing increased, investors began demanding a higher premium to hold US bonds.

This has driven interest rates higher, leaving debt servicing costs larger than national defence spending.

The situation has created unease in Washington. On Wednesday, prior to the release of the debt data, the Treasury Department announced it would double its buybacks of long-term government debt in a bid to halt a recent sell-off.

Last week, the US paid its highest borrowing costs since 2001 to sell 30-year bonds.

Wednesday’s 10-year Treasury auction produced the highest yields since 2007 as investors fretted over the scale of the debt.

Ed Yardeni, president of Yardeni Research, said: “That is an awful lot of money being borrowed. It is going to feed on itself with interest expenses. If interest rates rise because of concerns about the high debt load, that will lead to even more interest expense. It’s a vicious cycle.”

Trump returned to office in 2025 promising to rein in “wasteful” government spending.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent pledged to reduce the budget deficit to 3% of GDP by the end of Trump’s term.

However, measures to trim spending in some areas were offset by broad tax cuts in the president’s signature 2025 fiscal legislation, the “One Big Beautiful Bill”, which will add more than $4 trillion to the debt by 2034.

Trump also requested an increase of more than 50% in annual defence spending, seeking $1.5 trillion in the largest budget request in US history.

The deficit fell to 5.9% of GDP in 2025 from 6.3% the previous year. The CBO expects the deficit to decline to 5.8% this year. The US national debt comprises years of accumulated deficits compounded by interest charges.

Analysts noted that both US political parties missed opportunities during periods of economic expansion to take significant steps toward curbing spending.

Calculations by the Congressional Joint Economic Committee indicate that over the past year, total national debt grew by roughly $7.9 billion a day, or approximately $91,000 per second.

Budget specialists said they hoped crossing the $40 trillion threshold would spur politicians from both parties to take meaningful steps to bring borrowing back under control.

Michael Peterson, head of the Peterson Foundation, a think tank dedicated to returning debt to a sustainable trajectory, said:

“My hope is that this serves as a national alarm and wake-up call to address our fiscal future. If we keep borrowing this much, we are going to face a day of reckoning in financial markets… People will wake up one day and decide: ‘You know what? I’m more worried about the United States now. I’m going to demand higher interest rates, or I’m going to put my money somewhere else.'”

Continue Reading

America

Independent US oil firms set to sign output deals in Venezuela

Published

on

Several independent US oil producers are expected to sign production contracts with Venezuela’s state-owned oil company in the coming days.

According to sources who spoke to Politico on condition of anonymity because details of the event have not yet been made public, a signing ceremony involving several small US producers and Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) was scheduled to take place in Houston on Tuesday (18 August) evening.

One source said Venezuela’s oil minister and the head of PDVSA’s exploration division were scheduled to attend the ceremony. Another source added that the event could be postponed until Wednesday morning.

The White House, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, was not expected to be officially involved in Tuesday’s ceremony.

However, the development follows a visit by senior officials to Caracas in late April, where they signed memorandums of understanding that established the framework for formal production agreements in the country, which holds some of the world’s largest oil reserves.

Despite the tailwind provided by high crude prices, negotiations had stalled over key details such as dispute resolution, while officials in Caracas contended with two devastating earthquakes in June that claimed thousands of lives.

Venezuela’s interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, announced new regulations last month that offer more favourable fiscal terms to international oil companies.

According to an industry source close to the negotiations, the signing of the contracts comes after the Trump administration renewed pressure on Rodríguez to ensure PDVSA concludes agreements with American firms.

The source said these efforts included outreach by Secretary of State Marco Rubio to discuss how increased oil revenues could assist the country following the devastating earthquake earlier this summer.

The source added:

“Delcy reached a renewed awareness that increased oil production is the way to rebuild after the earthquakes and to achieve what her government wants to do for the people suffering from the earthquakes.”

David Goldwyn, president of the international energy consultancy Goldwyn Global Strategies, said investments from independent oil producers and boosting output from existing fields would serve as the “primary source of new oil growth for the next few years” for Venezuela.

“While the oil majors are trying to buy time to see how the political situation clarifies and whether they can cherry-pick the best assets, independent companies can de-risk their projects in the short term,” Goldwyn said.

However, Goldwyn noted that these investments would add no more than 300,000 barrels per day to the country’s oil production over the next year, falling far short of the multi-million-barrel increase that officials in Caracas and Washington wish to see.

“Until the framework improves, electricity is restored, and the political picture becomes clear, all we will see is incremental production growth,” the strategist said.

Continue Reading

America

US-Brazil rift widens over proposed sanctions and trade tariffs

Published

on

Diplomatic tensions between the two countries remain at a peak as the US government considers new sanctions targeting a judge on Brazil’s Supreme Court.

According to sources familiar with the matter who spoke to the Financial Times (FT), the Trump administration is evaluating new measures against Justice Alexandre de Moraes, whom it sanctioned last year on human rights grounds before subsequently rescinding that decision.

Washington’s renewed focus on the magistrate threatens to widen the rift between Brazil and the US across trade and political spheres, casting a shadow over upcoming elections in Latin America’s largest nation.

A little over a year ago, De Moraes was subjected to sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent accused him at the time of engaging in a “repressive censorship campaign, arbitrary detentions that violate human rights, and politicized prosecutions,” including measures directed at former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro.

Bolsonaro, an ally of Donald Trump, was sentenced last year to 27 years in prison for plotting a coup.

However, sanctions targeting the judge, his wife, and a company owned by his family were lifted in December following a meeting and phone conversations between Trump and his Brazilian counterpart, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

According to a source familiar with the matter who requested anonymity, US interest in De Moraes was revived partly due to a case that ignited a debate over press freedom in Brazil.

The judge authorized police raids against a journalist and two sources as part of an investigation into media coverage concerning a Supreme Court justice and his family.

De Moraes defended the action, arguing that the information in question had been illegally obtained and disclosed, thereby endangering the safety of the justice’s family.

The judge gained global prominence several years ago following a public conflict with Elon Musk, which briefly led to the billionaire’s X platform being blocked in Brazil.

Supporters say he “helped protect Brazilian democracy against a wave of misinformation.”

However, critics, including the Trump administration, view him as violating free speech rights.

“He went after the president’s supporters. Not just Elon Musk, but MAGA supporters in Brazil as well. Even if we want to build good relations with Brazil, it is clear that this man is an adversary,” said a person familiar with the US government’s thinking.

Another person stated that the reimposition of Magnitsky sanctions is “under evaluation,” noting that such sanctions entail the freezing of US-based assets and a prohibition on American companies and individuals conducting business with targeted parties.

While it remains unclear whether or when a decision will be reached, any such move would intensify an escalating retaliatory spiral between the two most populous countries in the Americas.

Tensions initially erupted more than a year ago when Trump imposed a 50% tariff on Brazil while demanding that prosecution proceedings against Bolsonaro be dropped.

That tariff was subsequently invalidated by the US Supreme Court.

A brief period of de-escalation since then has drawn to a close, with the US applying a 25% import tariff on numerous Brazilian products in July.

Last month, Brazil denied entry to two Trump envoys over concerns regarding potential interference in its upcoming October elections. Washington rejects those allegations.

Lula, who is seeking re-election for a fourth presidential term, suggested that the US might act to support his main opponent, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, the jailed former leader’s son.

The 80-year-old president has also engaged in a sharp public exchange of words with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

On Sunday, thousands of supporters gathered to welcome Lula at a stadium in Sao Bernardo do Campo, an industrial suburb of Sao Paulo, for the official launch of his election campaign.

Lula originally achieved prominence in the area during the late 1970s as a union leader heading metalworkers’ strikes.

Speaking at the venue, Lula said, “I thank the working men and women of this country who believed that someone like themselves could achieve more than someone different from them. As long as I am alive, I will not stop fighting, and I will not allow the right [to prevail].”

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey