The guardian of fragile democracies or a catalyst of wars wherever it approaches. The debates on the NATO They have reached Asia with the incipient landing of the military organization. Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan have repeated as guests this week at the Vilnius summit after having made their debut in Madrid last year. This presence and the possible opening of the first office on the Asian continent solidify a trend that worries China.
The Asian country enjoyed generous attention in the communiqué of a meeting that had the war in Ukraine as the main issue. Regarding China, he mentioned the “coercive policies & rdquor;, the “deepening of the strategic alliance & rdquor; with Russia or the use of its economy “to create dependencies and increase its influence & rdquor ;. China is challenging the rules-based international order, rejecting Russia’s condemnation, threatening taiwan and carrying out a substantial military increase & rdquor ;, said Jens StoltenbergSecretary General of an organization that represents 10% of the global population and accounts for 56% of world defense spending.
China responded the next day with the predictable arguments: it accused NATO of slandering it and of persevering in the mentality of cold War. His press went further: NATO takes conflicts to all corners of the world, it is the “ax and spear & rdquor; of USA, is seen as “a terrible monster & rdquor; by all Asian countries…
Division in Asia
The most populous continent in the world allows for varied sensibilities. The Chinese recourse to the fait accompli route in disputed waters of the South China Sea and a certain bullying has generated friction and resentment towards beijing but in the area the certainty persists that it is preferable to fix the conflicts without external influences. And, in any case, they fear both China and the risk that the warmongering impulse of Washington bring disaster to the region.
To the “Asia-Pacific Four & rdquor; o AP4, on the other hand, look happy as guests at the NATO table. So far they have arrived by different paths. Japan it is Washington’s stubborn pawn in the area and accumulates historical lawsuits with Beijing, the conservatives in the South Korean government have settled the equidistance between the two powers, the deterioration of Sino-Australian relations has not yet been fixed by the new left-wing Executive and New Zealand follows the momentum.
“Although the four countries fear an increasingly aggressive and assertive China to some extent, I am afraid that what they mainly want is to get along with China. USA& rdquor ;, judges Peter Kuznick, historian of the American University and analyst of Asia. “NATO’s presence increases the possibility of war. While much of the Global South maintains a healthy skepticism and distances itself from the militarism American, as we see in his refusal to join the sanctions against Russia, some countries blindly or opportunistically follow him down the path of war& rdquor ;, he adds.
“NATO increases the possibility of a war in Asia”
American University historian
The AP4 have every reason not to snub Washington. South Korea The US and Japan have for decades relied on their military umbrella against North Korean outrages. Australia The US and New Zealand make up the Five Eyes along with the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. It is an organization to exchange sensitive information that, according to the former analyst Edward Snowden“does not respond to the known laws of their own countries & rdquor ;.
Chinese complaints
China was already heaping regrets for the harassing US presence: tens of thousands of troops in South Korea and Japan for decades, more than 300 military bases in their vicinity, new supranational defense alliances such as AUKUS or QUAD in the Pacific with the objective to stop its rise… And then it transpired that NATO intended to open its first Asian office in Tokyo. The idea arose during a visit by Stoltenberg to Japan months ago: an office to “facilitate dialogue”, occupied by a civilian without military powers. That low profile did not avoid the spirited response of China either, which sees in NATO Washington’s expansionist weapon and the cause of the mess in Ukraine. France also opposed it, arguing that it would violate the geographical scope of the statutes. The White House He had predictable Japanese support. “The security of Europe and the Indo-Pacific are inseparable,” said Prime Minister Fumio Kishida.
The Vilnius summit was to serve to approve it but there were no mentions in the final communiqué. The Japanese media Nikkei Asia has revealed that the phrase that alluded to the negotiations for its opening was deleted at the last minute, probably due to the French veto. Stoltenberg later denied the death of the proposal and announced “future considerations & rdquor ;.
Related news
“Fortunately, France, Germany and others disagree with US hostility toward China and its provocative policies, whether in Taiwan or in the South China Sea. They have blocked a stronger anti-China statement. They want to increase the economic relations with China, and not undermine them, as the US has tried. The lack of mention of the NATO office in Tokyo is notable. At least to some extent, it seems that cool heads have temporarily prevailed & rdquor ;, says Kuznick.
The expert doubts a defense architecture that has not avoided conflicts in the West. Former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating put it clairvoyantly: “Europeans have been fighting each other for the last 300 years and have given the rest of us two world wars in the last century. Exporting that malicious poison to Asia would be tantamount to welcoming the plague.”