stated in no uncertain terms that China is a potential threat that needs to be taken seriously.
NATO, it seems, is making a concerted decision to add Asia to its docket at a time when the alliance has its hands full managing Europe’s largest war since 1945. If this is the plan, NATO policymakers should step on the breaks before it goes too far. NATO’s new Asia-Pacific mission is remarkable for several reasons. When the alliance was formed in 1949 amid the looming post-war threat posed by the Soviet Union, it had a clear-cut purpose: protect Western Europe from the threat of Soviet expansionism. Once the Soviet Union collapsed, NATO lost its raison d’être. Expanding to Central and Eastern Europe was no longer an obstacle, and the alliance has nearly doubled in size from its Cold War peak.
But that could be undermined if NATO distracts itself in Asia. NATO’s newfound sense of purpose would be diluted, as would attempts to revitalize defense investments in Europe. NATO unity will be harder to maintain the further it gets bogged down in Asian security issues; there are already substantial differences among members about the nature and extent of the China threat and how best to respond to it.
The disagreements surrounding NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg’s initiative to open a small NATO office in Tokyo is instructive. While Stoltenberg sees the office as a way to make NATO’s relationship with Japan more durable, French President Emmanuel Macron sees the projectNATO’s European members insist that security on the continent requires a constant American military presence.