The Iran war puts US military strategy in Asia in trouble

US Undersecretary of Defense for Political Affairs Elbridge Colby was blunt last week: "America is not disengaging from Asia. We are not leaving; in fact, we are entrenching ourselves."

But the words of this senior Pentagon official, spoken during a visit to the Philippines, contrast with reality: today the American presence in Asia is in question. And much of the blame lies with the war in Iran.

The Middle East conflict is monopolizing Washington's attention and military resources, which is leaving other theoretically priority scenarios, such as the Pacific, unattended.

The most symbolic proof of this is the withdrawal of the last American aircraft carrier in Asian waters, the USS George Washington. This warship with the capacity to transport 6,000 people and 90 fighters left its base in Japan days ago to head towards the Arabian Sea. There it will replace the USS Abraham Lincoln, which is in a critical situation after more than 260 days deployed: its crew complains about the lack of food and undignified living conditions.

The absence of US aircraft carriers in the Pacific will likely be temporary, and the Pentagon still maintains substantial forces in the region – including submarines, destroyers and amphibious ships – but the episode has raised concerns among Washington's Asian allies, who fear that China will try to take advantage of the situation.

Not in vain, this summer Beijing has experienced several moments of tension with its neighbors. Last week, it conducted naval exercises with Indonesia east of Taiwan. At the beginning of the month, it carried out military maneuvers near Scarborough Reef, whose sovereignty is disputed with the Philippines. At the end of July, during joint exercises with Russia, a Chinese destroyer fired live fire off the Japanese island of Okinotori. And a few weeks earlier, a submarine launched a long-range ballistic missile in the South Pacific.

This continued display of military muscle is alarming in itself, but it is even more worrying considering that the US today does not appear to be in the best position to provide sufficient aid to its allies in the event of an escalation.

The main problem is that the war in Iran has wreaked havoc on the Pentagon's stockpile of anti-aircraft munitions. According to military sources consulted by CNN and the Reuters agency, the US has already consumed 80% of its THAAD missiles and 65% of its Patriot missiles. Likewise, the US military has used practically all of its long-range, high-precision projectiles.

Faced with this bleeding, the Department of Defense is putting pressure on the arms industry to advance its deliveries and accelerate the pace of production. However, analysts believe that this shortage will be very difficult to resolve in the short term: fully replenishing stocks of the most sophisticated munitions, such as the Patriot, could take years.

All of this threatens to destroy one of the main premises of US military doctrine: that of being able to fight two large-scale wars simultaneously.

If, for example, China now decided to invade Taiwan, Washington would have serious difficulties providing an effective military response. First, it would have to ignore the Middle East to redirect its resources to the Pacific, and perhaps not even for that reason: if it has not been able to subdue a medium power like Iran, how is it going to face a superpower like China, which has the most advanced weapons?

In fact, no one doubts that Beijing has taken good note of the weaknesses that the US has shown in its campaign against Tehran, such as its lack of restraint in the face of drone attacks, weapons that, precisely, China produces en masse.