Indications from the Pentagon that military spending will be significantly curtailed should be treated as a heads-up to Hawaii’s congressional delegation but need not set off a panicked response, given the current national defense posture toward Asia and the Pacific.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has announced plans to draw down the U.S. Army to its smallest force level since the World War II buildup, to cut out a class of Air Force attack jets and make other cuts to spending that have been long anticipated under the Obama administration.

The budget initiatives are already drawing fire from many quarters, including defense-industry executives concerned about the cancellation of manufacturing contracts, and states’ officials wanting to block the phase-out of military units posted in their jurisdictions.

But if the previous statements of President Barack Obama mean anything, surely they mean Hawaii has less cause to worry than other states. Obama has said repeatedly that the transition away from a war footing pairs with a "pivot" to Asia as the next, most critical focus of military planning.

By any reasoned analysis, Hawaii is at the pivot point.

And based on the most recent intelligence on regional security threats, the Asia sphere is heating up.

Speaking at a maritime conference earlier this month, Capt. James Fanell said China is training for a "short, sharp war" with Japan and is expanding its military capacity at precisely the time when the U.S. is contemplating cuts in its defense budget.

Fanell, the director of intelligence for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, said that China’s naval training now concentrates on realistic simulations of combat operations against Japanese forces in the East China Sea. That’s where disputes over the control of the Senkaku Islands have flared.

His assessment, of course, is open to debate, and the Pentagon does, in fact, debate it. Hagel believes "that the peaceful, prosperous rise of China is a good thing for the region, for the world," according to the Pentagon’s press secretary, Rear Adm. John Kirby, in response to Fanell’s recent remarks.

So far, however, the "pivot" discussion has occurred more in Washington think tanks than among budget officials sitting around conference tables, crunching real numbers.

That’s been the observation of Gen. Herbert "Hawk" Carlisle, commander of Pacific Air Forces at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, according to a recent interview in Defense News.

"I would say that the resources have not followed the comment of re-balance into the Pacific," he was quoted as saying, adding that "sequestration and the cuts in defense make it actually incredibly hard to find places to pivot money to the Pacific."

Certainly this is all the more reason why the Pentagon should shield the Pacific region from further cuts, even as it proceeds with its rebalancing work.

Hawaii’s businesses are understandably watching these developments with some alarm, positioning themselves to defend this state’s cut of the Department of Defense spending. The stationing of large units, in all the armed forces, represents a critical element of the islands’ economy. Our congressional delegation should keep advocating for a robust military presence here.

However, the bottom line is that Hagel and the rest of the administration are right to look for ways to begin right-sizing the nation’s military investments around the world. There are hot spots that will need to be watched carefully, but there are also bases in post-Cold War Europe and elsewhere that have to be recognized as marginal, and aircraft and weaponry production lines that aren’t fulfilling any primary mission needs.

There must be a realignment of military resources to better reflect today’s needs a shift away from overseas boots on the ground, for example, to cyberwarfare.

In the interest of redeploying limited federal dollars to uses that are more central to improving American living conditions, the defense draw-down is a transition that is long overdue.