WASHINGTON -- US military leaders are increasingly concerned that the United States faces the prospect of global flashpoints turning into prolonged, multi-front confrontations stoked by the United States' main adversaries -- Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea.
Amid tightening ties between the four countries, this likely means that short, geographically contained wars -- the kind of confrontations that the US military has largely anticipated -- are things of the past, US military officials said on May 13 in Washington at a conference hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
“I think you have to immediately believe that if there is a fight in one geographic area, because of these relationships, they will immediately metastasize or have a geographic, a geopolitical protraction. It can’t be avoided,” said General Christopher Mahoney, assistant commandant of the US Marine Corps.
Mahoney’s warning echoes growing concern within the Pentagon that America’s traditional assumptions about conflict escalation no longer hold.
“The idea of a short, sharp conflict, I think, is a fantasy,” Mahoney said. “It just will not happen.”
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine -- which the Kremlin reportedly expected would last at most a few weeks -- is approaching its 40th month with fierce fighting still taking place along the 1,000 kilometer front line. The help Moscow has received from China, Iran, and North Korea arguably has prolonged the conflict.
General James Mingus, Army vice chief of staff, noted that while ties among these countries are not new -- Russia has maintained friendly relations with Iran and North Korea for decades -- the depth of current collaboration, particularly in technology and arms transfers, marks a dangerous new phase.
“This level of sharing -- we have to be very concerned about that,” Mingus said.
Admiral James Kilby, Navy vice chief of operations, added that the Navy’s Large Scale Exercise -- an integrated global training event involving U.S. fleets -- would return for a third iteration in August. The exercise is designed to prepare for precisely the kind of transregional conflicts U.S. officials now expect.
“It’s an acknowledgement that this is the place we are in,” Kilby told the conference.
A De Facto Axis
China, Iran, and North Korea have all supported Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, with each supplying critical technology, drones, missiles, and artillery to Moscow. North Korea has sent thousands of troops to support Russian operations.
The nature of this cooperation, Mahoney said, “sounds a lot like an alliance.”
“So while it may not be a formalized agreement, it is happening, and I believe it will continue to happen,” he said.
The alignment extends beyond Ukraine. Iran’s proxy Hamas launched its October 7 attack on Israel while Iran was simultaneously helping Russia sidestep Western sanctions and sustain its war machine. At the same time, China continues aggressive maneuvers in the South China Sea and around Taiwan, even as it expands economic and military ties with both Iran and Russia.
Can the US Industrial Base Keep Up?
Analysts and defense officials are increasingly skeptical that the US defense industrial base is prepared for an extended, high-intensity conflict, let alone multiple ones.
After two decades of counterterrorism operations focused on small, specialized forces and limited procurement of high-end platforms like F-35s, the US now faces a steep ramp-up challenge.
Artillery production, particularly the 155-millimeter shells critical to Ukraine’s defense, had dwindled. Shipbuilding has also slowed dramatically. China, which now possesses the world’s largest navy by number of hulls, is launching new ships at up to 200 times the rate of the United States, according to Kilby.
President Donald Trump, who swept to office on a promise to strengthen the US armed forces, has made rebuilding the Navy a key pillar of his defense agenda. In April, he issued an executive order aimed at reviving the shipbuilding industry and reestablishing American maritime dominance.
But industry executives and military leaders warn that the problem goes beyond any one administration. Chronic delays in passing budgets, short-term continuing resolutions, and partisan brinkmanship -- including three government shutdowns over the past 12 years -- have made it difficult for defense companies to commit to long-term investments.
The Pentagon’s acquisition process itself has also come under fire. Experts say the system is too slow and conservative, bogged down by bureaucracy that hampers innovation and deters new entrants.
Mahoney said all legs of the acquisition process have to be reformed “or you won’t get much advantage out of that” effort.
The Money Question
Despite growing threats, US defense spending has remained relatively flat in inflation-adjusted terms for much of the past two decades. As a share of GDP, it now stands at about 3 percent -- less than half the Cold War average -- Senator Mitch McConnell (Republican-Kentucky) noted at the conference.
Compounding the issue, the share of the defense budget spent on weapons procurement has declined, McConnell said.
The Trump administration’s proposed 2026 defense budget includes $893 billion in direct spending, similar to the previous year, with an additional $119 billion over a decade through a reconciliation process. But critics say that’s not enough.
“The chasm between the threats we face and what we’re doing to meet them is wide. And it ought to terrify us,” McConnell said.
He pointed to Ukraine’s defense as a model not just of resilience but of rapid innovation.
“Our friends have developed what is arguably the world’s foremost drone innovation sector,” he said. “But even more remarkable is the sustained speed with which Ukrainian producers are honing and refining unmanned systems in real time.”
McConnell agreed with the military leaders that any future conflict is unlikely to be small or isolated.
“One of the greatest strategic challenges we’re facing today is the prospect of high-end conflict or simultaneous conflicts in different theaters that would strain the depth of our arsenal and the resilience of our supply lines,” he said. “Victory would depend on delivering at scale and in time.”
That would be an immense challenge in a conflict over Taiwan as the island lies more than 6,000 miles from the US mainland.
Fortress America?
As the Trump administration admonishes European governments over joint defense spending, raising questions about US commitment to NATO allies, McConnell also said the United States cannot fight its adversaries alone.
He said the administration’s trade war with European and Asian allies comes at a time when adversaries like Russia and China are coming together to challenge the US-led international order.
“There’s little question that our adversaries are working hard to split America and its European allies. If we’re making their job easier, we’re doing something wrong,” said McConnell, who stepped down from Senate leadership in February.
He said the United States will need to rely on allies and partners to help it deter and contain aggression in the coming years from the Indo-Pacific to Eastern Europe.
“Going it alone will only increase costs for taxpayers and risks to our warfighters,” he said.