For the first time in decades, the U.S. military has no aircraft carrier battle groups stationed in the Indo-Pacific region, despite rising tensions with China over disputed islands in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait.

After the US Pentagon ordered the deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln from the Pacific to the Middle East amid growing fears of confrontation following the assassination of resistance leaders in Beirut and Tehran by “Israel” and the attack on Yemeni infrastructure, the US now has no aircraft carrier in the Indo-Pacific.

Both the USS Theodore Roosevelt and the USS Abraham Lincoln are currently deployed in the Middle East. According to a report released by the US Naval Institute (USNI) on Monday, both ships are currently stationed in the Gulf of Oman.

Read more: US Air Force plans Pacific exercises to test possible war with China

Accordingly The Washington TimesThe redeployment left the United States without a carrier in the Indo-Pacific region for the first time since 2001.

Likewise, the other two aircraft carriers stationed in the Pacific, USS Ronald Reagan and USS Carl Vinson, remain anchored on the west coast.

The carrier-less situation in the Indo-Pacific is expected to last until at least next month, as Navy officials indicated that the San Diego-based USS George Washington is en route to Japan but will not arrive in the region until then.

National Interest: Threat from Yemen ties up a third of the US aircraft carrier fleet

Previously, last Saturday, National interest has published an opinion piece on US strategy in the Red Sea, particularly in response to operations in Yemen and their impact on American naval assets.

According to author Samuel Byers, the United States faces the difficult task of launching what he called an appropriate response to the nine-month-long Yemen-led naval blockade against “Israel.”

In response, the US Navy deployed four consecutive aircraft carrier battle groups to force the reopening of the route for ships bound for Israel.

During this period, the United States has given top priority to defending so-called “freedom of the seas” and “securing global trade routes.”

When the Yemenis announced their intention to attack ships to pressure the Israeli regime to stop its genocidal campaign in the Gaza Strip, carrier groups led by the USS Gerald R. Ford and the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower were initially in the area.

Later, the USS Theodore Roosevelt and USS Abraham Lincoln strike groups were diverted from the Pacific to conduct ongoing operations.

This deployment gave the Strait of Bab el-Mandab virtually the same strategic importance as other major regions, such as the Euro-Atlantic region, the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific.

The United States has committed significant resources, including $1 billion worth of munitions, to intercept Yemeni missiles and drones, focusing on immediate defense rather than addressing the root causes of the conflict.

The commentary asks whether this large-scale deployment is justified given the perceived low threat posed by the Yemeni resistance.

It argues that while the principle of freedom of navigation is crucial, deploying such a large portion of U.S. naval forces, which is also necessary to deter major powers such as China, may be inconsistent with broader strategic interests.

The article concludes that the current US strategy in the Red Sea may not be proportionate to the actual value of the results achieved, given the ongoing risks and significant opportunity costs.

Read more: Failed, ongoing aggression against Yemen costs the US billions: Politico