Senate Hearing on U.S. Defense Policy in the Asia-Pacific
January 1, 2017
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
The Frame
This hearing informs potential future changes to U.S. military force structure, resource allocation, and strategic posture in the Asia-Pacific region based on an independent assessment of current capability gaps.
Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.
U.S. Department of Defense
The department is responsible for implementing the rebalance strategy and addressing the capability gaps identified in the report.
Asia-Pacific allied nations
These nations are involved in the U.S. rebalance through military access agreements and regional cooperation.
Last recorded activity January 1, 2017.
Next step not available in the current record.
Summary
Key Facts
- The hearing reviewed an independent assessment of the U.S. 'rebalance' to the Asia-Pacific, mandated by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015.
- The CSIS report concluded that the Obama administration lacked a clear, coherent, or consistent rebalance strategy.
- China has reclaimed 3,200 acres of land in the Spratly Islands, an increase from 400 acres reported one year prior.
- The committee discussed China's military reorganization aimed at modernizing joint warfare capabilities.
- The U.S. rebalance strategy includes initiatives like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and increased military access to the Philippines, Australia, Singapore, and Vietnam.
Why It Matters
This hearing informs potential future changes to U.S. military force structure, resource allocation, and strategic posture in the Asia-Pacific region based on an independent assessment of current capability gaps.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why was this hearing held?
What is the 'rebalance' to the Asia-Pacific?
What concerns were raised about China?
News Coverage
Sponsors
Discoveries
Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.
Transparency Gap
The committee noted that public awareness of Chinese land reclamation was driven by an independent think tank (CSIS) rather than official U.S. government intelligence releases.
Connected Entities
Sources
www.govinfo.gov
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance80How much this matters to a regular citizen
- Controversy65Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment20Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz30Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools