US strategic battle guidelines under attack New US battle guidelines partly designed to counter the military challenge from China are attracting strong criticism at home and abroad as unnecessarily provocative of one of America's strongest economic partners. The AirSea Battle fighting "concept" intends to maintain military dominance in strategically important areas as the US reconfigures its global outlook more towards Asia. It is being gradually disclosed by the Pentagon, which has viewed China's military build-up in the past couple of decades with concern. Yet as Washington struggles to strike the right balance between competition and co-operation in its relationship with Beijing, there are warnings - even from within the military - that the new doctrine will aggravate relations with China unnecessarily. "AirSea Battle is demonising China," retired Gen James Cartwright, former vice-chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said last week. That's not in anybody's interest. The doctrine has powerful cold war echoes. Alarmed by the threat of Soviet troops over-running western Europe, American military planners developed a battle-fighting doctrine in the 1970s called AirLand Battle which became the basis for much of military policy in the later stages of the cold war, from new weapons to relationships with US allies. AirSea Battle could have an equally important role to shape policy and strategy during the next two decades. Officials say it is meant to cement US alliances in Asia and to counter "anti-access, area-denial" weapons and capabilities that other countries have developed. "This is probably the defining challenge today and, as we view it, in the near future," Adm Jonathan Greenert, the navy chief, said last week, in some of the first public comments on the subject by a senior Pentagon official. Leon Panetta, defence secretary, will travel to Asia during the next week where he will be explaining the implications of the doctrine for US allies. The battle guidelines attempt to address the big strategic themes now facing a military winding down from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars: the rise of Asia; the shift in focus to sea and air power that the vast Asia-Pacific region demands; and the potential importance of cyberwarfare. Yet AirSea Battle is being developed in a very different context from its cold war cousin. While the Soviet Union was a clear adversary with whom economic links were almost non-existent, the US and China have deep economic ties, from trade to Treasury bonds. Amid such delicate politics, US officials insist publicly that AirSea Battle is not focused on one country or even one region, but is about technologies that are being developed by a host of countries and potentially non-state actors. "This notion should not be hijacked by any particular scenario," Gen Norton Schwartz, Air Force chief of staff, said last week when asked if China was the main target. Yet privately officials acknowledge the Pentagon has been alarmed by China's investments in precisely the "access-denial" weapons that AirSea Battle is designed to tackle, from ballistic missiles that can sink warships to submarines and Beijing's emerging cyberwar capabilities. The guidelines are also being introduced in an era of budget cuts. The Pentagon has already reduced its budget by $485bn over the next decade and could be forced to cut by a similar amount if Congress were not to reach a broader budget deal this year. But in order to be effective, AirSea Battle will require huge investments in a long-distance bombers, warships and submarines and in cyber capabilities. "For about the last 12 years, if you wanted something, we basically could afford it," said Lt Gen George Flynn, one of the Pentagon's senior planning officials. The new fiscal reality is going to require us to make choices. However, the Pentagon has made no secret of its view that Asia is now a central priority of its long-term strategy. "One of the key projects that your generation will have to face is sustaining and enhancing American strength across the great maritime region of the Pacific," Mr Panetta told graduates of US Naval Academy at Annapolis this week. For some observers, AirSea Battle will push the US into dangerously provocative war planning against China. One of the documents the Pentagon has published, called the Joint Operational Access Concept, recommends that in the event of any conflict, the US "attack enemy anti-access/area-denial defences in depth." In the case of China's anti-ship missiles, that would mean preparing for a large pre-emptive strike on military bases in mainland China. "The big risk is that such an attack would lead to a very dramatic escalation and China might even think it was an attempt to take out its nuclear capability," says Raoul Heinrichs at Australian National University.