NATO’s role in Indo-Pacific security

The fragile balance between deterrence and instability

  Articoli (Articles)
  Francesco Oppia
  23 January 2025
  4 minutes, 52 seconds

In recent years, China, North Korea, and Russia have grown closer, reinforcing the perception among NATO members of an interconnection between European and Asian security. This link became even more evident following the support China and North Korea provided to Russia during its military actions in Ukraine. In return, Russia could assist North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs, strengthening Beijing and Pyongyang in Asia and, if necessary, intervening in favor of its partners.

Given these developments, NATO may have an interest in extending its presence in the Indo-Pacific to discourage military assistance to Russia. However, NATO’s role in the region is inevitably limited due to the geographic restrictions imposed by its founding treaty. As a result, its initiatives would primarily focus on areas such as defense industry and countering hybrid threats, including cyber threats.

Despite NATO’s increasing involvement in the region, there is no unanimity among its members regarding the extent to which NATO should engage in Indo-Pacific affairs or the severity of the threats China poses to European security. NATO members fear that if the U.S. were to militarily intervene to defend Taiwan from a Chinese attack, Washington might be forced to leave the task of managing deterrence against Russia entirely to its European allies. Moreover, a potential failure of such an operation in the Taiwan Strait would have devastating economic consequences. Estimates suggests that a conflict could reduce global GPD by up to $10 trillion. A similar scenario could unfold in the event of war on the Korean Peninsula.

In 2019, for the first time, NATO officially mentioned China in the London Declaration, stating that “the rising influence of China and its international policies presents both opportunities and challenges” for the Alliance. This marks a significant shift from the 2010 Strategic Concept, in which China was not even mentioned. This change in approach was reaffirmed at the 2022 Madrid Summit, where a new Strategic Concept was adopted, declaring that “China’s ambitions and coercive policies challenge our interests, security, and values.” It also highlighted the joint efforts of China and Russia to “undermine the international order.” Moreover, for the first time, NATO invited the leaders of Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea (known as the AP4) to the summit together, emphasizing the importance the Alliance places on transregional cooperation.

The communiqué from the 2023 Vilnius Summit, where the AP4 participated again, further underscored NATO’s concerns regarding China. NATO expressed its intention to conduct joint drills and strengthen relationships with Asian countries through a series of partnership agreements. Japan stands out as NATO’s longest-standing non-European partner, despite practical cooperation only beginning after the 9/11 attacks.

Even though the convergence between NATO and its Asiatic partners seems destined to strengthen, it should not be interpreted as a complete alignment of interests. NATO views China primarily through the lens of its relationship with Russia, paying a particular attention to their ”strategic partnership.” The sealing of this agreement in 2022 raised several concerns, especially because it included an explicit call for NATO to stop admitting new members—a demand perceived as an intrusion into European security. Despite this, NATO members do not seek a complete rupture with China, recognizing its crucial role as a trade partner.

The Atlantic Organization should be aware that strengthening its ties with the Indo-Pacific could provide China with the perfect excuse to claim that NATO is escalating tensions in the region. According to Chinese experts, greater NATO involvement in the Indo-Pacific would increase the risks of division and confrontation, intensifying competition for regional hegemony. In particular, Japan has been accused to exaggerating the “Chinese threat” narrative and using values such as “democracy, freedom and openness” to reshape the regional order in its favor.

The establishment of NATO liaison office in Japan is perceived by Beijing as an escalation of the Alliance’s involvement in the region. According to Chinese academics, this move would enable NATO to interfere in regional affairs, increasing the risk of conflict. Additionally, the participation of European nations in military drills in the western Pacific is seen as an attempt to provoke a new Cold War and maintain American hegemony.

Regarding Taiwan, the current government, led by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) may view NATO’s growing presence in the region as a reinforcement of its security. However, this could also encourage Taipei to adopt a more provocative stance toward Beijing, heightening tensions in the Taiwan Strait and further destabilizing the region.

In conclusion, greater NATO involvement in the region could have two opposite effects. On one hand, increased cooperation with the Asiatic democracies could contribute to regional stability. On the other hand, if Beijing perceives that its goal of reunification with Taiwan has become unattainable or views Taiwan’s independence as imminent, China may feel compelled to use force to take control of the island.

To prevent uncontrolled escalation, NATO could adopt a policy of strategic ambiguity regarding Taiwan, similar to that of the United States. This approach would help avoid sending signals that might provoke China into military action while simultaneously maintaining a deterrent stance toward Beijing and Pyongyang. At the same time, such a strategy could discourage Taiwan from adopting provocative policies toward China, preventing Taipei’s government from feeling overly secure in taking concrete steps toward formal independence. In this way, NATO could help maintain a balance in the region, reducing the risk of direct conflicts without compromising regional stability.


Mondo Internazionale APS - Riproduzione Riservata ® 2025

Share the post

L'Autore

Francesco Oppia

Autore di Mondo Internazionale Post

Categories

Eastern Asia

Tag

NATO China Taiwan ambiguitàstrategica espansione Giappone