Critics say Trump’s ‘flexible realism’ may undermine U.S. ties in the Indo-Pacific

Elbridge Colby concluded a diplomatic circuit of Southeast Asia by presenting the Trump administration’s “flexible realism” framework, which calls for greater partner contributions and a deterrence-by-denial posture toward China. He stressed that the United States now seeks “partners, not protectorates,” moving away from the Biden era’s values-focused Indo-Pacific plan. Observers note that the doctrine’s reliance on situational discretion could be read as strategic volatility, unsettling regional allies that desire predictable U.S. engagement.

The push for higher defense budgets from countries like the Philippines and Japan may be unrealistic, and Colby’s silence on China during a Manila speech raises questions about the policy’s focus. Additionally, the lack of firm guarantees—exemplified by uncertainty over Australia’s submarine delivery—highlights an asymmetry where the U.S. demands more from partners while retaining the right to scale back its own commitments. Critics fear this could weaken the broader alliance network and give Beijing new strategic leeway.