Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told Asian allies and partners at the Shangri-La Dialogue that U.S. security support will become more conditional, pressing countries in the Asia-Pacific to commit to spending 3.5% of GDP on security or risk being treated less fa
For years, American military might has sat at the center of security in Asia—an underpinning that helped allies hedge against rising pressure from China. On Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth tried to change that bargain.
Speaking during a speech at the Shangri-La Dialogue, a defense summit hosted annually in Singapore by the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Hegseth demanded that U.S. allies and partners in the Asia-Pacific commit to spending 3.5% of GDP on security.
He warned that countries showing a commitment to a U.S.-led regional defense effort would be moved “to the front of the line.” Hegseth said that would mean “expedited arms sales, deep industrial-base collaboration, expanded intelligence sharing—the list goes on.” He said “the benefits are many.”
But those that do not “carry their own weight for our collective defense” would be treated less favorably, he said.
The comments landed at a moment when tensions across the Indo-Pacific are intensifying. China has rapidly increased its military spending and intensified pressure in territorial disputes with Japan and the Philippines, while also expanding its military footprint across the region.
The White House did not respond in time for immediate comment. Newsweek reached out to the White House by email outside of office hours for comment.
Hegseth’s remarks also echo President Donald Trump’s longstanding complaints that the United States bears a disproportionate share of the burden for collective defense. Under Trump, NATO members endorsed a new goal of spending 5% of GDP on defense by 2027.
The threshold Hegseth set—3.5% of GDP—would mark a significant jump for most U.S. partners in Asia. None of Washington’s major partners in Asia currently meet the 3.5% benchmark.
Singapore and South Korea come closest, spending roughly 2.8% to 3% and 2.8% of GDP respectively. Japan is approaching 2% under its ongoing defense push, while Australia spends about 2%.
Hegseth pointed to the Philippines as an example of burden sharing. citing Manila’s deepening defense ties with Washington and its hosting this year of the largest-ever Balikatan joint military exercises. Yet even with a roughly 12% increase in defense spending last year, the Philippines’ military budget remains well under the 3.5% target.
On the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue, Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro said, “It is especially difficult for agricultural economies to reach compared to more industrial nations with an established military-industrial structure.”
He added that hitting the number is harder because “for an archipelago of 7,600 islands where you still have to invest in your basic infrastructure for connectivity, education, health care, it is very difficult to hit.”
Malaysia raised another kind of obstacle—economic constraints tied to its relationship with China—while still acknowledging the strategic value of the United States. During a roundtable discussion at the Shangri-La Dialogue on Sunday. Malaysian Defense Minister Mohamed Khaled Nordin said. “We recognize that the United States is a very important partner and plays a very strategic role in creating a balance in the Indo-Pacific region.”.
He said, “But they must also understand that every country faces different circumstances, priorities, as well as constraints.” Nordin warned that sharply increasing defense spending could come “at the expense of development in other sectors,” with potential knock-on effects for stability.
Taken together, the message from Singapore is clear: access to the most immediate forms of U.S. support—faster arms sales. deeper industrial collaboration. and expanded intelligence sharing—is being linked to whether allies can meet a spending benchmark. For countries weighing growing security risks against budget pressures at home. the question now is how far they can move. and how quickly. before the line shifts.
Pete Hegseth Shangri-La Dialogue Asia-Pacific security defense spending 3.5% GDP Indo-Pacific Philippines Gilberto Teodoro Malaysia Mohamed Khaled Nordin China Japan South Korea Singapore Balikatan
So basically we’re charging them to be friends now?
3.5%?? That sounds like one of those numbers politicians throw out and nobody actually checks. If China is the problem, why are we negotiating percentages with Japan/Philippines instead of just increasing our own stuff.
Replying to whoever said this is all about China lol. But I saw somewhere that 3.5% is like the same as 5% or whatever, so are they just moving the goalposts? Also “front of the line” sounds like they’re trying to buy loyalty with arms sales.
Is this why prices go up? Like if Asia allies have to spend more, doesn’t that mean US defense contracts get more filled and then we all pay for it indirectly? I can’t tell if he’s threatening China or threatening the allies. Either way the whole 3.5% thing seems kinda arbitrary.