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

After the US Pentagon ordered the USS Abraham Lincoln’s deployment from the Pacific to the Middle East amid growing fears of confrontations erupting following "Israel's" assassination of Resistance leaders in Beirut and Tehran and the attack on Yemeni infrastructure, the US is left with no naval aircraft carrier in the Indo-Pacific.

Currently, the USS Theodore Roosevelt, as well as the USS Abraham Lincoln have been deployed in the Middle East. According to a report by the US Naval Institute (USNI), published on Monday, they are both stationed in the Gulf of Oman at the moment.

Read more: US Air Force plans Pacific drills to test potential war with China

According to The Washington Times, the redeployment has resulted in the US being without a carrier in the Indo-Pacific region for the first time since 2001.

Similarly, the USS Ronald Reagan and the USS Carl Vinson, the two other carriers based in the Pacific, remain docked on the West Coast.

The no-carrier in the Indo-Pacific situation is set to last at least until next month as Navy officials noted that the USS George Washington, based in San Diego, is en route to Japan but will not arrive in the region until then.

Yemeni threat ties down third of US carrier force: National Interest

Earlier, last Saturday, the National Interest published an opinion piece discussing the US strategy in the Red Sea, particularly in response to Yemeni operations and their impact on American naval resources.

According to writer Samuel Byers, the US has been engaged in the challenging task of launching what he described as a proportionate response to the Yemeni-led naval blockade on "Israel", which has lasted for nine months.

In response, the US Navy has deployed four consecutive aircraft carrier strike groups in an attempt to force the re-opening of the route for ships bound to "Israel."

Over this period, the US has prioritized defending a so-called "freedom of the seas" and "safeguarding global trade routes."

Initially, carrier groups led by the USS Gerald R. Ford and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower were present in the area when the Yemenis declared their intent to attack shipping in order to pressure the Israeli regime to cease its genocidal campaign on Gaza.

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

This deployment has effectively elevated the Bab el-Mandeb Strait to the same strategic importance as other critical regions like the Euro-Atlantic, Middle East, and Indo-Pacific.

The US has committed significant resources, including $1 billion in munitions, to intercept Yemeni missiles and drones, focusing on immediate defense rather than tackling the underlying causes of the conflict.

The opinion piece questions whether this heavy commitment is justified, given the perceived small threat posed by the Yemeni Resistance.

It argues that while the principle of freedom of navigation is crucial, the allocation of such a substantial portion of the US naval force, which is also needed to deter major powers like China, may not align with broader strategic interests.

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

Read more: Failed, extended aggression on Yemen costs US Billions: Politico