I just don't see a crossroads for NATO that should have any route to Asia.
How should the military alliance NATO handle China?
NATO has been a major part of the United Kingdom’s defence strategy for over 70 years, but the Alliance is facing a major crossroads in the coming years regarding how it should address the challenge of China. Some members prefer a cordial relationship based on trade, while others chastise the resurgent power through trade wars and vicious rhetoric. The political divide is exacerbated by a gap emerging between the US and the rest of NATO in terms of military doctrine and procurement, which in turn generates further pressure on the pillars the Alliance is built upon.
Shortly after the end of the Second World War, the existential Soviet threat was met with a united response from NATO in the shape of the Brussels Treaty. 70 years later, Europe is a different place and the world has changed. NATO’s most powerful member sees China as the pacing threat. It is only proper to question the future of NATO and how this may shape our security strategy, and potentially the shape and form of our own military.
This is a UK-centered article. But it is really a general question for the entire NATO alliance. Yes, Britain is a power that can project power globally. But in comparison to what China fields in the Asia-Pacific region, Britain's power is virtually indistinguishable from a country like Belgium which can project nothing that far. If America and regional allies can't handle China, no shape of Britain's military and strategy will be decisive in that contest.
Basically, I don't think NATO should change its military and military strategy to cope with China. NATO has enough on its hands handling Russian aggression and safeguarding the southern border from uncontrolled migration that destabilizes the continent.
Add in the proximity to the
crisis-generating Middle East and an internal threat from Erdogan's
empire-building Turkey, and that is more than enough to challenge European NATO's threadbare defense efforts.
How would European NATO contribute to INDOPACOM when it has enough problems contributing to the eastern frontier in NATO?
My only hopes for NATO in regard to China is doing no harm--write a memo to Germany, please. If NATO would adopt provisions that preclude actions and deals that would help China fight America and our allies in the Asia-Pacific region, that would be more than enough contribution.
And being capable of reducing the amount of American help required to contain and defeat China's junior partner Russia from committing more aggression in Europe would be great.
I just don't see how the current vital NATO missions can be seen as so insignificant that NATO has to seek distant enemies it can never actually confront in battle. There is no crossroads in sight.
