Why This Article Was Flagged
The article published by The Guardian on June 1, 2025, describes U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s remarks at a Singapore defense forum, which China condemned as provocative. A user asked whether Hegseth made specific, verifiable claims about China’s behavior or whether his comments amounted to political rhetoric. This fact-check explores the accuracy and context of the claims referenced in Hegseth’s speech and China’s response.
Historical Context
Tensions between China, the U.S., and neighboring countries in East and Southeast Asia have escalated over the past decade. These tensions center primarily around China’s assertive territorial claims in the South China Sea, its growing military presence, and the status of Taiwan—a self-governed democracy that China considers a breakaway province. Defense meetings like the Shangri-La Dialogue often serve as platforms for diplomatic signaling, both confrontational and reconciliatory.
Claim #1: “China is credibly preparing to potentially use military force to alter the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.”
This statement from Hegseth, although framed as a warning, includes a clear factual assertion: China is preparing militarily to change the regional balance of power. Multiple credible sources affirm that China has significantly expanded its military budgets, modernized its navy, constructed artificial islands in the South China Sea, and increased military drills around Taiwan. According to the U.S. Department of Defense’s 2024 report on China’s military power, Beijing aims to achieve military parity with or superiority over the U.S. by 2049 and has accelerated joint training operations simulating potential conflict scenarios, particularly around Taiwan. Thus, while Hegseth’s phrasing is charged, the core claim is largely supported by evidence.
Source: U.S. Department of Defense 2024 Report
Claim #2: China is rehearsing for “the real deal” of invading Taiwan.
This assertion refers to China’s military drills mimicking a potential invasion of Taiwan. In 2023 and 2024, China conducted near-weekly airspace incursions and military exercises simulating encirclement of the island. In April 2023, during “Joint Sword” drills, the People’s Liberation Army Navy conducted mock blockade operations against Taiwan. These actions are widely interpreted by defense analysts as practice for real-world scenarios involving Taiwan. While China claims these drills are defensive, their scale and proximity to Taiwan support the inference of preparation for potential forceful unification.
Source: CNN – China’s Taiwan Drills
Claim #3: “China is trying to become a hegemonic power in the Asia-Pacific.”
Hegemony means dominance or leadership, especially by one country over others. Hegseth’s claim references China’s expanding economic and military influence, particularly through its Belt and Road Initiative, military base agreements (e.g., in Djibouti and Cambodia), and assertive policy in the South China Sea, where it rejects international tribunal rulings. In 2016, a Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling dismissed China’s sweeping maritime claims, which Beijing ignored. This aligns with broader efforts to project power regionally. While labeling China “hegemonic” is a characterization, not a pure factual claim, there is credible support for the view that China seeks regional primacy. However, whether it qualifies as hegemonic remains subjective.
Source: Brookings Institution Analysis
Claim #4: “No country in the world deserves to be called a hegemonic power other than the US itself.”
This counter-claim from China’s Foreign Ministry seeks to deflect blame by criticizing U.S. foreign policy. While this is a political argument rather than a verifiable factual statement, it omits China’s own growing military activities and global influence campaigns. For example, China has deepened alliances with countries such as Russia, Venezuela, and Iran, and increased investment through the Belt and Road Initiative across Asia, Africa, and Europe. Thus, the perspective that China is also asserting itself hegemonically is not without basis, and China’s framing here omits relevant context.
Source: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Final Verdict
The article accurately reports on Pete Hegseth’s speech and China’s subsequent condemnation. While the article describes Hegseth’s tone as provocative, analysis of his claims reveals they are supported by extensive evidence and align with public U.S. defense assessments. China’s rebuttals appear politically motivated and omit relevant developments such as military exercises and strategic expansion. The article’s framing is largely neutral, though it could have provided more third-party analysis to contextualize both sides’ rhetoric. Overall, Hegseth’s remarks were not baseless political theater—they reflected real, ongoing geopolitical dynamics.
Help Fight Misinformation with Us
Want fast, verified answers to today’s most confusing headlines? Download the DBUNK app or follow us on our social channels. Every truth you uncover adds strength to our shared pursuit of clarity.
Read the original article here
