Pentagon urges UK to refocus military strategy on Europe over Indo-Pacific

Trump administration seeks British military commitment to Europe, reversing Biden-era Indo-Pacific focus amid China tensions.

Crew members walk toward a Royal Navy F-35B Lightning fighter jet to prepare it for takeoff from the deck of the British aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales, at an undisclosed location, on April 24, 2025, during its deployment to the Indo-Pacific region. Photo by Richard Pohle/AFP

By Anna Fadiah and Hayu Andini

The Pentagon has urged Britain to concentrate its military power on Europe rather than the Indo-Pacific, in a marked reversal of the strategy pursued by the Biden administration. This strategic redirection, described by multiple officials familiar with internal discussions, represents a significant shift in US defense policy and reflects the Trump administration’s desire to prioritize European security in the face of Russian aggression.

According to five individuals briefed on recent conversations, Elbridge Colby, the under-secretary of defense for policy and one of the most influential civilian figures at the Department of Defense, directly communicated this position to British officials. Colby emphasized that the United Kingdom should intensify its military efforts within the Euro-Atlantic region, aligning more closely with the emerging defense posture of the United States under President Trump.

Concerns over HMS Prince of Wales deployment to Asia

At the heart of the Pentagon’s concern is the UK’s planned deployment of the aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales to the Indo-Pacific later this year. While the mission is intended to reinforce Britain's global presence and support freedom of navigation operations in regions like the South China Sea, Colby and others in the Trump administration believe such deployments dilute the effectiveness of NATO-aligned forces in Europe.

Colby has long maintained that European nations must shoulder greater responsibility for their own regional security, particularly in light of the ongoing war in Ukraine. The underlying strategic logic is that increased European engagement within their own continent would enable the United States to redirect more of its military resources toward containing China in the Indo-Pacific.

From Indo-Pacific expansion to Euro-Atlantic consolidation

The change in direction stands in sharp contrast to the Biden administration’s strategy, which encouraged European allies—including the UK, France, Germany, and the Netherlands—to project military influence into the Indo-Pacific. This included coordinated naval deployments and freedom of navigation patrols in contested waters such as the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea. In 2021, the Pentagon had lauded the deployment of the Royal Navy’s HMS Queen Elizabeth to the region as “historic.”

Under Biden’s guidance, national security officials like Kurt Campbell, who served as the White House Indo-Pacific coordinator, championed the concept of linking Atlantic and Pacific theaters to form a cohesive global deterrent against Chinese expansionism. The Trump team, however, appears poised to abandon this dual-theater integration in favor of geographic compartmentalization.

Reassessing alliances and strategic commitments

Zack Cooper, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and an expert on Asia-Pacific security, observed that the new Pentagon stance under Trump could have far-reaching implications for allied confidence.

“This decision suggests that the Trump administration will attempt to delink the two [Atlantic and Pacific theaters], which could leave allies in both regions more concerned about the prospects for continued US regional engagement,” Cooper said.

The policy revision comes amid renewed Chinese diplomatic outreach toward Europe, an effort that aims to fracture transatlantic unity cultivated during the Biden era. Beijing has grown increasingly assertive in cultivating ties with European capitals in hopes of discouraging them from participating in Indo-Pacific security initiatives.

Push for increased defense spending

Colby’s approach is also shaped by a broader agenda to elevate defense spending across US allies. In remarks to Congress and internal briefings, he has urged NATO members to increase defense budgets to 5 percent of GDP—far above the current 2 percent NATO guideline. He has similarly encouraged Japan to surpass its 2 percent commitment and recommended that Taiwan allocate up to 10 percent of its GDP toward military preparedness.

These aggressive targets are part of a renewed US focus on burden-sharing, particularly as it faces simultaneous threats from China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. Colby and other Pentagon officials argue that a leaner, regionally concentrated European military footprint would ensure readiness in NATO while allowing Washington to reinforce positions in Asia.

Skepticism and allied pushback

While the Trump administration's defense leadership views these changes as essential to realigning global military priorities, not all allies agree. An official from an Indo-Pacific nation warned that the interconnected nature of today’s security threats necessitates a more unified approach.

“The European, Middle Eastern and Indo-Pacific theaters have always been deeply interconnected,” the official said. “But today security is more indivisible than ever—not least because of the re-emergence of a potent global axis of authoritarian revisionist powers.”

Indeed, growing military coordination among Iran, Russia, North Korea, and China has prompted some experts to call for a more integrated global deterrence strategy rather than a geographically siloed one.

Britain asserts independence in global posture

For its part, the United Kingdom has emphasized its commitment to maintaining a global defense posture while also remaining a reliable transatlantic partner. A person familiar with the matter stated that the UK has “always been active across the globe, including working closely with the US on Euro-Atlantic priorities,” and will continue to balance its national interests across regions, from Europe to the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific.

The UK Ministry of Defence reinforced this sentiment, saying: “We are working closely with our US and Indo-Pacific allies on our carrier strike group deployment with HMS Prince of Wales due to conduct exercises later this year.”

This statement reflects London's intent to maintain its independent decision-making on defense deployments, even as it continues to collaborate with Washington on shared objectives.

Strategic trade-offs and future implications

Eric Sayers, a senior advisor at Beacon Global Strategies and a former Pentagon official, noted the logistical and strategic constraints facing European militaries.

“European military power remains limited if not stretched, so it’s natural the Trump administration would want to see it focused on the European subcontinent and the Russia threat rather than spread thinly in Asia or elsewhere,” he said. “Deploying peacetime naval diplomacy to other regions is a luxury I just don’t believe Europe can afford these days.”

Still, the Trump administration’s recalibration could trigger unease among allies who previously invested in transregional partnerships and interoperability across continents.

A new chapter in transatlantic defense relations

The Pentagon’s message to the UK reflects a broader realignment of American defense priorities under President Trump, with implications not just for Europe and Asia, but for the credibility and cohesion of Western military alliances. Whether the UK heeds the call to recalibrate its strategy or maintains its global defense role remains to be seen, but the debate highlights growing tensions between traditional alliance frameworks and emerging geopolitical realities.

As of now, the Pentagon has declined to comment further on the matter. However, the strategic conversation appears far from over as allies reassess their roles in a changing world order.