From May 29-31, defense chiefs from across the Indo-Pacific region – home to most of the world’s ten largest militaries – gathered in Singapore for the annual Shangri-La Dialogue. When U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth joined them for the second time since taking office, his speech made more headlines for what he did not mention: Taiwan.

His address came at a high-stakes moment for U.S. aims in the world’s most geopolitically consequential region. On the heels of U.S. President Donald Trump’s May summit in Beijing with President Xi Jinping, Hegseth had a unique opportunity to set the record straight on the administration’s support for Taiwan.

Instead, Hegseth’s remarks characterized the U.S. government’s approach to the Indo-Pacific as “confident enough to speak and walk softly while carrying a big stick,” but did not directly address one of the most important regional security issues for everyone in the room.

Much has changed since Hegseth spoke at last year’s gathering, and not just the fact that his speech in 2025 mentioned Taiwan five times and warned that conflict initiated by Beijing could be “imminent.” Back then, Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro was still walking free, and Iran’s Ali Khamenei was still alive. 

But at least one important trendline still has not changed: Beijing’s intensifying pressure campaign against Taiwan.

Last December, the Pentagon warned that “China expects to be able to fight and win a war on Taiwan by the end of 2027.” Days later, the Chinese military conducted drills all around the main island to simulate an invasion, and a government spokesperson described the exercises as “severe punishment” for Taiwan.

Faced with Beijing’s growing military strength, Taipei’s ability to defend itself against a potential invasion is one of the most decisive factors in deterring an invasion from happening at all. By investing in many of the modern asymmetric military tools that Ukraine has used effectively, such as cheap drones, Taiwan can make Beijing fear that China’s invading forces would experience devastating losses akin to Russia’s.

The good news is that Taiwan is stepping up. In the past decade, Taipei has doubled its defense spending, reformed its military, and invested in its overall resilience. Last month, the legislature advanced $25 billion in additional military spending. The compromise measure fell short of President Lai Ching-te’s initial $40 billion proposal, but it marked an important step nonetheless.

Taiwan has taken major strides in recent years, and Lai aims to increase the island’s defense spending to 5 percent of its GDP by 2030. However, even if Taipei quadrupled the scale of its current ambitions, the sheer size of China’s military requires continued cooperation between Taiwan and the United States in order to prevent cross-strait conflict. For this reason, the decades-long U.S. policy of supporting Taipei’s self-defense capabilities, codified in the Taiwan Relations Act, still enjoys strong bipartisan support on Capitol Hill and throughout past Republican and Democratic administrations.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has sent an array of mixed signals regarding the depth of its support for Taiwan.

On the positive side of the ledger, the Executive Branch announced an $11 billion arms sale to Taiwan last December. Then in April, the White House’s budget for the upcoming fiscal year requested billions of dollars from Congress for tools created during the previous administration to help equip Taiwan’s military and civilian agencies.

But before Trump’s trip to China, the Executive Branch also reportedly stalled a separate $14 billion arms sale to Taipei that would have angered Beijing. Last year, media reports also claimed the administration outright canceled a separate arms transfer using Presidential Drawdown Authority.

Then after Trump met with Xi, he described the weapons package as a “very good bargaining chip” in future discussions with the Chinese leader, a remark that was bewildering at best for observers in Taipei.

And last month, the U.S. Navy’s top official claimed the sale was on “pause” so the U.S. military could ensure it had enough materiel for its operations in Iran, fueling concerns that the war has complicated Washington’s ability to advance its most important interests in Asia. While Hegseth tried to downplay those concerns after delivering his remarks in Singapore, he stopped short of committing Washington to ultimately advancing the package at any point.

His Shangri-La speech gave Hegseth a rare chance to send an unequivocal message of U.S. support for Taiwan in a room full of regional leaders who need to hear it. Every Indo-Pacific military chief who came to Singapore knows that a war across the Taiwan Strait would be catastrophic for the entire region.

Last weekend, the Pentagon chief could have said the loud parts out loud when it comes to Taiwan, but without resorting to the “rhetorical theatrics” that he criticized elsewhere in his speech.

Taking advantage of the fact that Chinese military officials also usually attend the gathering, Hegseth could have called out Beijing’s coercion against Taipei and across the region. After rightly praising decisions by Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia, and other regional players to increase their defense spending, he should have also mentioned Taiwan’s recent moves to do the same. Crucially, he could have reiterated that peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait remain central for U.S. interests in Asia, and that support for Taiwan is still a bipartisan priority in Washington.

Finally, Hegseth could have committed the U.S. government to using every tool it has for strengthening Taiwan’s ability to defend itself. That includes advancing the long-awaited U.S. arms sale to Taipei – even if doing or saying so would mean jeopardizing his or other Pentagon officials’ potential trips to Beijing later this year. Some principles are worth missing flights for.

Strong oratory in Singapore would have sent an important message, but Washington’s actions matter even more. That is why the Executive Branch should release the arms package – the sooner, the better. Then in the coming months, it should fully utilize the other security assistance tools that Congress has not only created and funded, but also wants the Administration to actually use.

Hegseth’s speech could not have come at a more important time for a strong statement about the U.S. commitment to cross-strait peace and stability. When he took the stage, the secretary should have talked tough. But looking forward, the Trump administration can still follow through. Indeed, it must.