Pentagon Strategy Reveals High Casualties in Hypothetical China Conflict

The Pentagon seeks to avoid endless conflicts, preferring to maintain “peace through strength”—a phrase that, in practice, lacks the force to back it.

Photo: commons.wikimedia.org by 张展通, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

053K (531) frigate in Qingdao Chinese Navy Museum 2011

U.S. Marine Corps Strategy

China is identified as the main military adversary. War Secretary Pete Hegseth, speaking at the annual defense forum of the Ronald Reagan National Library, outlined four priorities for the Pentagon to ensure “peace through strength”:

• Defense of U.S. territory and the Western Hemisphere (Monroe Doctrine);
• “Deterrence of China by strength, not violence”;
• Fair distribution of war costs between the U.S. and its allies;
• Strengthening the defense-industrial base.

Hegseth added that the Pentagon intends to “expand military communications” with the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to resolve conflicts and de-escalate tensions.

“This approach is based on flexible realism, focused not on domination but on a balance of power that allows all nations to enjoy a dignified peace in the Indo-Pacific region, with open and fair trade, shared prosperity, and respect for all interests,” said Hegseth.

The Origins of Pentagon Caution

Earlier, Hegseth revealed that all AI-simulated war scenarios with China ended in U.S. defeat.

“Our bureaucratic system and weapons procurement speed are ten years behind, preparing us for a past-generation war,” he said. The U.S. now confronts a clear lag in the arms race, marking a turning point in strategy.

This reality has forced a rejection of conflicts that could lead to defeat. Even a “small victorious war” against China is unachievable. The “U.S. Marine Corps Pacific Strategy to 2025,” published six months ago, confirms this assessment.

Marines Cannot Win a Guerrilla War Against the PLA

The Marine leadership was tasked with planning operations for a hypothetical war against China. The plan, described as “expeditionary base operations,” amounts to guerrilla warfare across multiple small islands near the coast.

The strategy predicts heavy losses. Initial strikes after Marines deploy to the “first island chain” would result in 30–50% casualties. If they hold beyond three days to enable naval breakthroughs, losses could rise to 70%. Small craft and UAV losses are estimated at 60–80%, while ground-based UAV control stations survive only 2–5 hours. Short-term operations could cost 30–50 thousand U.S. personnel, and prolonged campaigns could see 80–120 thousand casualties.

“We must accept disproportionately high losses to give the fleet a chance to operate,” states the report. Such losses are unacceptable for American society. The U.S. cannot sustain conventional warfare against China, let alone simple amphibious operations.

Peace Through Weakness

As soon as Taiwan’s semiconductors and chips are produced in the U.S., the Pentagon will withdraw from the region entirely. Acceptance of “peace through weakness” signals the emerging multipolar era. Consequently, Russia and China are now treated as equal strategic competitors in U.S. doctrine.

This view is unlikely to change, as the U.S. shows no breakthroughs in hypersonic weapons, air defense, or drones. The focus remains on updating nuclear capabilities, while Russia has already modernized its arsenal with Burevestnik, Poseidon, and other systems, and China rapidly closes the gap in warheads and delivery platforms.