America’s War Economy is Preparing for Conflict with China
Here’s Why We Should Be Concerned
By: Megan Russell and Melissa Garriga
In a recent congressional testimony, Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell pressed for a dramatic increase in U.S. Navy funding, calling it “the most important thing to do in the next ten years.” More ships, more bombs, more bases — it’s all part of a strategy to expand America’s military presence, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region. And while Campbell presents this as necessary for national security, it’s clear that his real objective is to maintain the profitability of the U.S. war economy, with a looming confrontation with China in sight.
Our leadership no longer treats war with China as a hypothetical; it’s now a stated goal, with policymakers seemingly resigned to a “Great Power War” scenario. The U.S. military is carrying out large-scale drills in the Pacific, drawing up elaborate battle plans for land, sea, and air. Officials speak of a potential U.S.-China war as if it’s inevitable, likely preparing the American public for when this Cold War rhetoric turns hot. But what they’re not saying is that this war can be avoided, and the first step is questioning the motives and methods of figures like Campbell.
Kurt Campbell is a longtime architect of the U.S. military machine. As a co-founder of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) in 2007, he helped establish one of the most influential think tanks shaping U.S. defense policy. With funding from major defense contractors like Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, CNAS has consistently pushed for expanded military budgets and interventions — and stands to gain financially from any escalation in conflict.
One of the principal proponents of Obama’s “Pivot to Asia,” Campbell has advocated for a buildup in the Asia-Pacific region for years, recommending deployments of long-range missiles, submarines, and AI-driven weaponry. He has repeatedly called for a militarized stance toward Beijing, a country that has consistently stated its interest in regional peace and stability. Campbell’s goals align more closely with the defense industry’s bottom line than with any legitimate national security need.
Meanwhile, this buildup in the Asia-Pacific is harming communities in the region that are already feeling the effects of militarization. From environmental destruction to local displacement, U.S. military installations and exercises impose actual costs on people and the planet. Yet Campbell’s vision doesn’t stop at defense; it’s an unabashedly aggressive posture that prioritizes military force over diplomacy and cooperation.
The solution lies not in ramping up tensions but rebuilding diplomatic channels and exploring constructive relations with China. World leaders should build a future based on cooperation and dialogue, not destruction and fear-mongering. The U.S. can gain far more from a peaceful, mutually beneficial relationship with China than from an arms race that could devastate both countries and the broader Asia-Pacific region.
However, Campbell’s approach suggests he has other priorities. The U.S. spent roughly $2 trillion on military expenditures in 2024, a staggering amount at a time when millions of Americans struggle to afford basic necessities. This astronomical spending comes at a cost: every dollar spent on missiles and military bases is a dollar not spent on healthcare, education, and economic support for working families. While Campbell’s agenda fills the coffers of weapons manufacturers, it leaves our citizens vulnerable to crises of food and housing insecurity.
Campbell is stoking the flames of a conflict that could still be prevented. In his testimony, he claimed increased spending on the U.S. Navy is essential for confronting China, but by escalating our military presence, he’s only making that war more likely. War with China is not only far from inevitable but also entirely avoidable through diplomacy and dialogue. Instead of sinking more money into a potential disaster, the U.S. should focus on peaceful, cooperative foreign policy.
If the U.S. truly wants peace, it’s time to stop listening to figures like Kurt Campbell, who have built their careers on expanding military budgets and promoting aggressive postures abroad. We must reject the outdated Cold War mindset and focus on fostering positive international relationships that prioritize citizens' well-being over defense contractors' profits. The war between the U.S. and China serves no one but those who profit from the military-industrial complex. Let’s choose peace over profit and prioritize the future we all deserve.
Tell Kurt Campbell: Stop Funding War In The Pacific!
Megan Russell is CODEPINK's China is Not Our Enemy Campaign Coordinator. She graduated from the London School of Economics with a Master’s Degree in Conflict Studies. Prior to that, she attended NYU where she studied Conflict, Culture, and International Law. Megan spent one year studying in Shanghai, and over eight years studying Chinese Mandarin. Her research focuses on the intersection between US-China affairs, peace-building, and international development.
Melissa Garriga is the communications and media relations manager for CODEPINK. She writes about the intersection of militarism and the human cost of war.