{"id":137181,"date":"2022-11-02T22:55:18","date_gmt":"2022-11-02T22:55:18","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/militarytimes\/uncategorized\/2022\/11\/02\/congress-must-act-to-boost-combat-credible-airpower-in-indo-pacific\/"},"modified":"2026-08-08T00:43:45","modified_gmt":"2026-08-08T00:43:45","slug":"congress-must-act-to-boost-combat-credible-airpower-in-indo-pacific","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/militarytimes\/commentary\/2022\/11\/02\/congress-must-act-to-boost-combat-credible-airpower-in-indo-pacific\/","title":{"rendered":"Congress must act to boost combat-credible air power in Indo-Pacific"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

It is hardly news that for the last decade the Pentagon has fallen short<\/a> of its strategic ambitions in the Indo-Pacific. Still, it is quite conspicuous when evidence of that \u201csay-do gap\u201d emerges within 24 hours of the publication of the Pentagon\u2019s most important strategic document.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Last week, the Pentagon\u2019s new National Defense Strategy<\/a> declared that China is the \u201cpacing challenge\u201d of this \u201cdecisive decade\u201d while citing posture as a key element of deterring Chinese aggression. Within hours of the strategy\u2019s publication, the Financial Times<\/i> reported<\/a> that the Pentagon is set to withdraw two fighter squadrons stationed at Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan<\/a> over the next two years. The Pentagon later confirmed the withdrawal. And though it plans to begin temporary deployments of more advanced aircraft during the withdrawal, it acknowledged it has made no decision on a long-term solution<\/a> to replace the loss of forward-stationed combat power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The problem with withdrawing permanently stationed fighter aircraft from Japan is not about symbolic presence or the \u201cmessage\u201d the decision sends to Beijing. The central issue is combat-credible posture. Eliminating one-quarter of the permanently stationed fighter squadrons west of the international date line, promising temporary rotations as a substitute, and offering no long term plan for their replacement does not enhance combat-credible posture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Defenders of the decision say the retiring F-15C and D aircraft currently stationed at Kadena are old, fourth-generation aircraft that would not contribute much in a conflict with China. Yes, the Air Force should upgrade fighter aircraft in the Indo-Pacific<\/a>. Indeed, we strongly support<\/a> stationing F-35As at Misawa Air Base in Japan<\/a>. But that is not what the Air Force has announced. It has promised temporary rotations of more advanced aircraft but has not finalized plans beyond an initial six-month rotation for F-22s from Alaska. Moreover, after operating fifth-generation aircraft for nearly two decades, the Air Force has announced no plans to permanently station any fifth-generation aircraft west of the international date line.<\/p>\n\n\n\t