No need for an Asian NATO to counter China

This article was originally published by Pacific Forum, a Honolulu-based foreign policy research institute founded in 1975. It is republished with permission.

NATO heads of state gathered in Washington last week for the alliance’s 75th anniversary summit. While summit deliverables were predictable, China had a surprisingly central role in summit deliberations.

The Asian superpower was a top agenda item for NATO, increasingly called out for any number of perceived sins, including the People’s Liberation Army’s bellicose behavior in the East China Sea and South China Sea, its strategic partnership with Russia and attempts to undermine the so-called rules-based international order.

“The People’s Republic of China’s stated ambitions and coercive policies continue to challenge our interests, security and values,” NATO stressed in its joint communique.

NATO’s invitation to the Indo-Pacific Four (IP4) grouping of Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea for a third consecutive year demonstrated the organization’s intent to increase coordination and collaboration with Asian powers on China.

While the United States and NATO leadership did not explicitly frame the meetings as a counter-China effort, the subtext was certainly there.

Europe and East Asia — one domain?

In recent years, experts and officials in growing numbers have argued that Europe can’t be walled off from East Asia — and vice-versa. A security crisis in the South China Sea, the logic goes, could negatively impact Europe’s economic health; a conventional conflict in Europe could allow China to press its advantage while the West finds itself distracted.

As US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on July 1, “there’s strong recognition that the two theaters …