Before reading the article, please click "Follow" to facilitate discussion and sharing. The author will live up to expectations and create better content on time and in quantity.
Wen I Han Cuo
Edit I Han Cuo
Preliminary
The U.S. military is performing a rare scene since the Cold War, with the Pentagon emergency mobilization demanding that senior officers and sheriffs from all command positions around the world return to the United States for a deadline.
This gathering, which covered more than a hundred generals and affected the situation in NATO and South America, has become the focus of most attention in the current international security field.
1
In recent days, tensions in the Pentagon have been spreading outward. NATO allies have frequently communicated with the United States to try to find out what is going on. Countries in South America are paying close attention to the developments of the U.S. military due to the recent direct threats.
The outcome of all this was a mobilization order issued by the 25th U.S. Secretary of Defense at the Pentagon that all senior U.S. military commanders and their sheriffs deployed around the world should return to Minneapolis Naval Base in Virginia next week to attend a meeting.
According to the U.S. media analysis, such mobilizations were extremely rare after the Cold War, and the scope of the rally was accurate and extensive.
All officers in command, commander-in-chief of the Army and above, and senior generals of the Navy's equivalent rank, together with their senior officers, shall be recalled.
Preliminary estimates suggest that as many as 800 scattered generals from around the world will attend the meeting, and even commanders in conflict areas must attend the meeting in person.
What is even more abnormal is that the trips of senior US military generals usually need to be planned several weeks in advance. Such a large-scale and short-term emergency recall, without making the reasons publicly clear, naturally triggered intensive speculation from the outside world.
Surprisingly, however, Trump, who has always been good at attracting attention through hype, abnormally downplayed the content of the meeting this time, not only claiming to be the "President of Peace" again, but also claiming that the meeting was only related to the review of military equipment.
This “low-tone response” is strongly opposed to the “high-tone mobilization” of the U.S. military, but instead makes the outside world more curious about the real purpose of the conference.
2
At present, international public opinion's speculation about this meeting mainly focuses on three directions, each of which is related to the direction of the global strategic pattern.
The first speculation points to the integration of power within the United States. Trump may use this meeting to further gather military power and eliminate dissidents. This speculation is not groundless. After the new Defense Secretary Haxes took office, he has repeatedly promoted "cleaning" in the Pentagon.
He has previously dismissed more than a dozen senior officers in the rank of generals, including President Brown of the U.S. Army Coalition, who took office during Biden's reign, and five other naval generals.
If the General is recalled in order to insert confidence in key command positions, it will directly affect the stability of the U.S. military's internal command system, and even change the U.S. military's traditional rules of personnel operation.
The second is likely to focus on the Sino-US strategic game, as the Sino-US military balance of power is broken, the U.S. control in the Asia-Pacific region gradually loosens, Hooksis or take the opportunity to promote the U.S. military strategic shift, will shift the focus from "global deployment" to "territorial defense".
Judging from the existing signals, this direction is not without foundation. Fox News, which is quite recognized by Trump, launched a column program some time ago, mentioning that Pentagon officials are brewing a new strategy and plan to withdraw the strategic focus of the US military from the Indo-Pacific region to local defense.
If this strategy is implemented, the US military may initiate a series of supporting adjustments, such as merging European and African commands to streamline command levels and establishing a cross-service coordination mechanism to improve local defense efficiency. This will completely change the US military's "Indo-Pacific First" deployment logic in recent years.
The third speculation is related to multi-regional conflict response. The United States is facing the dilemma of "reverse bundling" of the principal. This meeting may be to coordinate global conflict response plans.
In the Middle East, Israel’s recent actions have become increasingly radical, not only exacerbating regional tensions, but also pushing many countries in the Middle East to accelerate the process of “de-Americanization.”
From Saudi Arabia to Iran, to reducing the dependence of Middle East countries on U.S. military bases, the U.S. influence in the Middle East continues to decline, with the recall of U.S. military senior commanders in the Middle East not excluding to develop concrete strategies to intervene in the conflict.
And in the Asia-Pacific direction, the topics that the U.S. military needs to discuss are more specific, how to adjust the troops stationed in order to take into account the "response to the situation in the Taiwan Sea and the South China Sea" and "supporting the domestic defense"?
The results of these closed-door issues will directly affect the future security balance of the Asia-Pacific region. On a deeper level, if the US military wants to shift its strategic focus to Western Hemisphere and local defense, it must reallocate global resources.
Reducing the size of troops in non-core areas such as Europe and concentrating troops and equipment in key directions, how to avoid the loss of trust among allies and how to deal with potential conflicts on multiple lines in this process are all difficult problems that need to be solved at this meeting.
From the current information, this rally is by no means Trump's emergence of the "Fireflies", but more likely a key step in the US military's adjustment of global strategy.
Whether it is the reshuffle of internal power, the shift of strategic focus, or the response to multi-regional conflicts, the final decisions formed at the meeting will have a profound impact on the NATO cooperation model, the Sino-US game situation, and the security landscape of the Middle East and Asia-Pacific.
conclusion
Every move of the US military, every decision, is reshaping the global security order, followed by the need to continue paying attention to official information such as the conference communiqué, the U.S. military deployment adjustments.
These details will help us to make a clearer judgment of the future international situation, which is also key to understanding the changing pattern of global security.