Decoding the US-China Military Rivalry: A Post-Victory Day Parade Analysis

The recent military parade in China and a potential US Department of Defense rebranding to the "Department of War" signal significant shifts in global power dynamics and military strategy. This analysis breaks down the key developments and their implications for the Indo-Pacific region and beyond.

Hypersonic Asymmetry: China's Parade Showcase

The recent Chinese military parade was a clear demonstration of rapid technological advancement, particularly in the realm of hypersonic weapons. Analysts noted that China publicly displayed two distinct types of hypersonic missiles:

• Hypersonic Glide Vehicles (HGVs): These are launched and then glide at extreme speeds.
• Hypersonic Cruise Missiles: These are powered by advanced air-breathing engines throughout their flight.

This is significant because, while the US is developing similar technology, it has not yet publicly demonstrated a operational hypersonic cruise missile. The mass display of these systems, particularly those designed for naval deployment, indicates a mature and rapidly scaling capability.

The strategic implication is profound. With the Chinese Navy's (PLAN) number of vessels now surpassing the US Navy, equipping this larger fleet with hypersonic missiles could effectively challenge US naval supremacy in the Indo-Pacific, potentially pushing the US fleet out of the region.

The "Department of War": US Strategic Refocus

The discussion around renaming the US Department of Defense (DoD) back to its old title, the "Department of War," is more than symbolic. It reflects a deeper shift in US strategic thinking under a potential second Trump administration.

The historical context is important. The DoD was established in 1947; before that, it was known as the Department of War. A return to this name signifies a desire to refocus the institution on its core mission: warfighting.

This shift is accompanied by practical changes, such as plans to reduce the number of high-ranking generals and admirals, which had ballooned over decades of global military engagements. The new focus is expected to be on:

• Domestic Security: Increased use of military assets for border control and combating issues like fentanyl trafficking.
• Reduced Global Intervention: A move away from acting as the "world's police," a stance fueled by the perceived failures of lengthy wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
• Traditional Military Culture: A rollback of policies focused on diversity and inclusion within the military, aligning with a more conservative political base.

For allies, this means the US will likely demand they take on more responsibility for their own defense, purchase more American military hardware, and contribute more to shared security costs. The era of unquestioned US security guarantees is evolving into a more transactional relationship.

The New Trio: North Korea, Russia, and China

The presence of North Korean and Russian leaders at the Chinese parade highlighted the strengthening ties between the three nations. However, this relationship is more pragmatic than ideological.

North Korea's attendance was a significant shift from just months prior, when relations with China were notably cool. This rapprochement is driven by mutual need:

• North Korea gains economic lifelines and strategic depth, moving from its old "byungjin" (parallel development) policy to a new "Moscow-Beijing Axis" for security and economic support.
• Russia acquires a source of munitions and a partner to divert Western attention.
• China gains a destabilizing asset in the US-led regional order but remains wary of a overly assertive North Korea and a potentially unpredictable partnership with Russia.

This is not a monolithic bloc. The three nations maintain separate bilateral relationships and historical distrust. The alliance is fluid and will likely change based on the outcome of the war in Ukraine and other geopolitical variables.

South Korea's Dilemma: Navigating a Bifurcated World

For South Korea, these shifts present a formidable challenge. The old strategy of "security from the US, economy from China" is no longer viable.

Chinese markets are becoming increasingly difficult for Korean companies to compete in, with domestic champions like Xiaomi and Huawei dominating sectors once led by Samsung and LG. Technologically, the gap is widening, with China investing massively in R&D for areas like AI (with an estimated 600,000 engineers) and space (230,000 personnel), far surpassing South Korean capabilities.

The US, meanwhile, is pressuring allies to decouple from China and integrate more closely with its own economy and defense industrial base. This leaves South Korea with a shrinking set of options:

• Strengthening its alliance with the US through increased defense spending and weapons purchases.
• Finding niche areas for cooperation while avoiding overt actions that could trigger Chinese retaliation.
• Investing heavily in domestic technological and defense capabilities to ensure greater self-reliance.

The upcoming APEC summit will be a critical test of South Korea's diplomatic skill, needing to manage relations with a transactional US administration while avoiding a complete breakdown in ties with China.

The Future of Conflict: AI and Multi-Domain Warfare

The Chinese parade also highlighted the future of warfare: multi-domain operations and AI integration. Modern conflict spans five domains: land, sea, air, space, and cyberspace/electronic warfare.

China displayed a range of unmanned systems and AI-enabled technologies, including:

• Loyal Wingman-style unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs) designed to operate alongside manned stealth fighters.
• Large-scale drone swarms and high-power microwave (HPM) systems, akin to an electromagnetic pulse (EMP), designed to counter them.

The message was clear: China is not only closing the technological gap with the US in some areas but is already fielding next-generation systems that the US is still developing. This rapid military modernization, fueled by massive investment and a "civil-military fusion" policy, is a core component of its goal to become a "world-class military" by 2049.