The ‘Asianification’ of NATO Runs Counter to Regional Peace

The NATO summit was held in Washington from July 9-11. On the eve of the summit, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg publicly announced that NATO security “is global, not regional” and that NATO “will continue to deepen [its] cooperation in addressing shared challenges” with its Asia-Pacific partners. The Washington Summit Declaration released during the summit tried to exaggerate further the tensions in the Asia-Pacific region, brimming with Cold War ideology and warmonger rhetoric, and its content pertaining to China was filled with prejudice, slander and provocation. NATO will stretch its arm toward the Asia-Pacific by strengthening military and security ties with China’s neighbors and United States allies, thereby ensuring its cooperation with the U.S. in implementing its “Asia-Pacific strategy.” In effect, saying that NATO is a regional, defensive organization for maintaining peace no longer holds weight and reeks of hypocrisy. America has used NATO as a strategic tool for its own selfish interests to avoid collective resistance and protect its hegemony, thus aggravating regional tensions.

Ceaselessly Seeking Expansion, NATO Is a Repeat Offender in Sowing Division and Chaos

European Parliament member Kostas Papadakis points out that NATO has always been an offensive alliance and never a defense mechanism. Under the direction of the United States, NATO was a product of the Cold War that was established in 1949 to defend against “Soviet invasion.” Over the course of 75 years, NATO’s member nations have since expanded from 16 post-Cold War to 32, becoming the world’s largest military organization. NATO has worked tirelessly to operate its so-called partnership network, devising clever names for its methods of breaking apart North Atlantic borders such as the Partnership for Peace, Mediterranean Dialogue, Istanbul Cooperation Initiative and “global partner countries,” and then proceeding to cast its net out to other regions.

While constantly interfering in extraterritorial affairs, NATO has also engaged in securing marine, internet, space, terrorism, climate, investment, infrastructure and other sectors under the banners of common and collective defense. Under the guise of “humanitarian intervention,” “responsibility to protect” and “nation-building,” NATO justifies the conflicts it incites and the legitimate interests of other nations it infringes upon. Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and many other countries are victims of NATO’s expansionist ambitions and foreign interference. According to incomplete statistics, since 2001 the wars that NATO countries have instigated and participated in have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands and the displacement of millions more.

As NATO’s Sinister Hands Stretch toward the Asia-Pacific, America Is the Driving Force behind NATO’s Eastward Advances

Driven by the United States, NATO has attempted to expand its power into the Asia-Pacific for nearly 20 years. In 2006, then-U.S. Ambassador to NATO Victoria Nuland tried to expand NATO’s global influence by concocting the concept of “global partnership” and establishing an association mechanism with four Asia-Pacific countries: Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. From 2012 to 2014, NATO signed Individual Partnership Cooperation Programs with each of these four nations. In 2014, NATO brought forward the Partnership Interoperability Initiative, which not only allowed for nonmember nations to participate in NATO military activities, but also included Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand within its interoperability framework.

Additionally, NATO countries have increased their military activity in the Asia-Pacific. In 2021, England dispatched the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier strike group, including American and Dutch ships, to the Asia-Pacific and announced permanent deployment of two warships in the Asia-Pacific region. In the same year, Germany sent its Bavaria frigate to the Asian-Pacific. Canadian warships have also conducted activities several times within Asia-Pacific waters in recent years. NATO countries have not stopped strengthening military cooperation with Asia-Pacific countries. France conducted its first joint military exercises with America and Japan within Japanese borders in 2021; England signed a Reciprocal Access Agreement with Japan in 2023; Germany participated in the Talismanic Sabre joint exercise led by the U.S. and Australia in 2023, then signed an Agreement on Mutual Provision of Materials and Labor Services with Japan in 2024.

Peddling Security Anxiety, NATO Schemes To Tie Regional Countries to Anti-China Chariots

Setting up imaginary enemies is NATO’s well-versed means to maintain its existence and expand its power across borders. Moon Chung-in, former Special Advisor on Foreign and National Security Affairs to the South Korean president, said that the reason for NATO’s inviting the four Asia-Pacific nations is very simple, and that is primarily to surround and contain China. NATO’s accelerated eastward push into the Asia-Pacific is highly consistent with America’s foreign policy adjustments. In recent years, in order to maintain global hegemony, the United States has become increasingly unable to hide its intentions to contain China. NATO intends to scale up the intensity and breadth of its strategic competition with China, integrate resources in the Asia-Pacific region, form a policy coordination network with the U.S. as its central fulcrum, and leverage the Cold War mentality of collective resistance to create an international environment for competing against and containing China.

Controlled by the United States, NATO provokes a conflict of values by selling the China threat theory and causing Asia-Pacific countries to develop a deeper security dependency on NATO, thereby creating opportunities for it to accelerate eastward expansion. On the eve of this year’s summit, America and NATO cited the argument of China’s assisting Russia on several occasions as a cause of great concern for NATO and its Asia-Pacific allies, stating that the region’s countries should carry out cooperative dialogue as much as possible to share their views on the threat. In the summit declaration, NATO frames China as a “decisive supporter” of the Russo-Ukrainian war and advocates that transatlantic security is closely related to the Asia-Pacific.

Although the U.S. and NATO continue to agitate the Asia-Pacific region with their rhetoric, reality has proven time and time again that the security guarantee they tout does not actually provide safety to its allies and partners, but only raises the intensity of strategic competition between major countries and increases the risk of geopolitical conflict. Individual Asia-Pacific countries doing as the U.S. and NATO say and aiding NATO’s “Asianification” will do nothing but harm the regional situation and would merely be raising a stone to break their own feet.

By Promoting a Countercurrent of Confrontation, NATO Faces Widespread Condemnation

Under the modern backdrop of countries worldwide that generally advocate for peace and win-wins while abandoning confrontation and war, NATO is swimming against the current, accelerating Asia-Pacific expansion, worsening geopolitical tensions, and has exposed the true nature of being controlled by the United States, clinging to Cold War ideology and advocating for group confrontation. University of London Professor Gilbert Acca pointed out that after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, NATO no longer had a reason for existing, but driven by the United States, NATO has continuously expanded and undergone qualitative change. An article on the American website International Policy Digest said that NATO has [become] 'Washington’s axe, spear, and spade.”

NATO Asianification has aroused several objections across the international community. Former Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen warned that NATO Asianification is a worrying trend that threatens the safety and stability of Asia. Former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating wrote an article stating that if NATO expands to Asia, it will affect Asia’s developmental prospects. Veronika S. Saraswati, a researcher at the Indonesian Center for International Strategic Studies, remarked that if America and the West are allowed to turn the Asia-Pacific into their own home field, it will severely threaten the interests of regional countries. Russian political analyst Anatolii Fomenko opined that America increasingly views China as its greatest opponent and therefore is pushing NATO to extend its power into Asia. Jan Oberg, founder of the Swedish Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research, stated that China’s diplomatic policies have not threatened America, nor has China sent warships near the United States; rather, the West has used its warships to surround China.

NATO ignores the calls of the international community for peace, development, cooperation and win-win solutions to move against the current, which is doomed to be unpopular and unsuccessful. China has been a peaceful institution, contributor to global development and defender of international order from beginning to end. China has continuously injected greater stability and positive energy into the world through its own development and foreign partnerships. NATO should correct its own perceptions of China, let go of its obsession with military force, stop the erroneous practice of seeking so-called absolute security, give up its dangerous schemes to destabilize the Asia-Pacific and instead play a constructive role in world peace and stability. All nations of the Asia-Pacific must remain vigilant and doubly cherish their current, hard-won peace. To stand on the right side of history, they must refrain from inviting wolves into their dens and becoming accomplices to endangering regional peace and stability.