One of the United States Marine Corps’ top generals thinks that China is not a near-peer rival of the United States — it is already a peer rival, and one that he considers the pacing challenge of facing America today.
“There is no threat that looms larger than the People’s Republic of China,” Lieutenant General Stephen Sklenka, the Deputy Commandant for Installations and Logistics, said as part of comments given during a panel discussion during this year’s iteration of the Modern Day Marine Expo. “Don’t listen to this garbage about them being a near peer. They’re a peer because they rival us in nearly every single measure of national influence.”
Formerly the Deputy Commander of U.S. INDOPACOM, General Sklenka had a court-side seat to the developments in that area of the world.
In particular, the general noted, was China’s belligerence toward its neighbors in the region, as well as Beijing’s concerted military buildup within the waters shared with its neighbors.
What, exactly, a war in the Indo-Pacific with China would look like is not known for certain.
But, the general emphasized, one only needs to look to the current conflict between the United States and Iran to get a sense of how destructive a war with China could be — and what that could mean for American forces.
The Iran Connection
Although the casualties suffered by the United States in the course of Operation Epic Fury against Iran, prosecuted with the aid of Israel, are relatively modest for an operation of this scale, the war is not an accurate preview of what a war against China could look like.
That kind of conflict, according to General Sklenka, would be significantly more costly. Still, the casualties accrued in the course of this fight underscore the gravity of war fighting — and how much more costly a future fight is likely to be.
Operation Epic Fury is indicative of “how a mid-tier power can hold a significantly superior force at risk,” General Sklenka said. “As a learning organization, we ask ourselves, ‘how do we carry every lesson from this fight forward, and how do we ensure that we’re equally prepared to dominate the conflict with China?’”
Furthermore, the United States must evaluate “the complexities and complications… with Iran, and then ask… ‘how are we going to respond and act when we’re going up against a nation that’s number two in national GDP?’” the general added. “The fact is that Iran doesn’t have anywhere near China’s economic might.
They don’t have their industrial base. They certainly don’t have their military modernization trajectory.”
Changing Environments
Long gone are the days of the Global War on Terror, when the United States could assume air superiority and overfly battlefields with near-impunity.
The kind of drone warfare seen today in Ukraine is a threat the United States has not yet been forced to contend with — and is an area of potential vulnerability.
And while the United States certainly has orders of magnitude more real-world combat experience than China, General Sklenka said, not all of that experience is necessarily applicable to the kind of combat that could be expected in the future.
“None of us in uniform today have ever had to operate in a world where a legitimate peer simultaneously contests us in every single domain,” General Sklenka emphasized.
He added that the next war will be all-consuming and fought not just on physical fronts, but also in the digital realm. “We are talking terrestrially and non-terrestrially, kinetically and non-kinetically. We’re going to have to fight to get to that fight, and we’re going to have to embrace these challenges and not operate under the auspices of how we did in the 80s and 90s,” he explained.
An Adversary of Immense Proportions
China’s shipbuilding capacity is the largest in the world, and the People’s Liberation Army Navy, or PLAN, is the world’s largest in terms of vessel numbers.
China’s growing prowess in the developing field of artificial intelligence also gives General Sklenka pause — as does China’s nuclear arsenal, currently the world’s fastest-growing.
“History is proven, and our current operations confirm that the society that can project and sustain power and sustain their forces most effectively ultimately they prevail.”
Defending Bases
Perhaps one of the most immediate areas ripe for reinforcement today, the general opined, are American installations in the Indo-Pacific.
Though the United States has air strips, ports, depots, and other infrastructure spread across the Indo-Pacific — some of which date back to the Second World War — those locations will almost certainly be contested.
Some need refurbishment and modernization. “We need integrated base defense, and we need industry’s help to do all this,” he emphasized. “We’re not going to be just fighting from our bases. In many cases, we’re going to be fighting for those bases. That’s a new concept to us. We’ve got to start embracing that.”
About the Author: Caleb Larson
Caleb Larson is an American multiformat journalist based in Berlin, Germany. His work covers the intersection of conflict and society, focusing on American foreign policy and European security. He has reported from Germany, Russia, and the United States. Most recently, he covered the war in Ukraine, reporting extensively on the shifting battle lines in Donbas and writing about the war’s civilian and humanitarian toll. Previously, he worked as a Defense Reporter for POLITICO Europe. You can follow his latest work on X.
