VLADIVOSTOK: NATO is militarizing the Indo-Pacific region and is rocking the conflict potential there, although the alliance was not invited to the region, said Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova.
According to her, countries "that worked hard daily to escape poverty and dependence during the colonial era, unfortunately are now subject to unresolved conflicts left over by their colonizers."
"They created time bombs, and now these bombs are ready to go off," Zakharova said. The diplomat stressed that major efforts must now be undertaken "to prevent this."
The North Atlantic Alliance is militarizing the Indo-Pacific region, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova stressed during the Eastern Economic Forum
She also added that NATO is rocking the conflict potential in the region, although no one invited him there. According to her, the alliance does not hide its interest in the Indo-Pacific region.
"NATO is now militarizing the region and is taking steps to boost conflict potential," she stressed.
The Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) is an international event held annually in Vladivostok with the aim of stimulating foreign investment in the Russian Far East and developing economic cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. This year, the WEF takes place from 3 to 6 September.
Russian Foreign Ministry
======================================================
NATO IS BECOMING A PLATFORM FOR COORDINATING SECURITY POLICY IN THE INDO-PACIFIC REGION
Philip Shetler-Jones
David Capi
Over the past few years, NATO has begun to move beyond its traditional Euro-Atlantic framework as member States and partners seek to coordinate their actions in response to security challenges in the Indo-Pacific region.
The extent to which the transatlantic community can coordinate policy and relations in the Indo-Pacific region, including China, will be an important determining factor in the future of international security. Currently, coordination is carried out within the framework of the G7 and bilateral relations between the EU and the United States. However, recent research shows that NATO is underestimated as a unifying and coordinating forum. The events that took place at the 75th anniversary NATO summit in Washington in July indicate that the Alliance now has every reason to claim the role of a leading institutional platform for coordinating Euro-Atlantic/Indo-Pacific policy.
The main factor that contributed to NATO's promotion to this role is Beijing's position on Russia's war in Ukraine. China first appeared on the NATO agenda at the London 2019 summit, when the Alliance's leaders stated that "Beijing's growing influence and international policy open up both opportunities and challenges that we must address together."
The communique of the 2021 summit included two paragraphs on China, which stated that "China's stated ambitions and assertive behavior pose systemic challenges to the rules-based international order and areas relevant to the security of the North Atlantic Alliance." The 2022 Strategic Concept, adopted after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, warns that "China's stated ambitions and coercive policies challenge our interests, security and values," and also talks about "deepening the strategic partnership between the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation and their mutually reinforcing attempts to undermine the international order, based on rules, which is contrary to our values and interests."
At the recent Washington summit, the North Atlantic Alliance declared China a "decisive factor" in Russia's war against Ukraine, adding that it "continues to create systemic challenges to Euro-Atlantic security" in the form of malicious cyber and hybrid activities, including disinformation. Simply put, China's foreign policy actions are shaping the security landscape in Europe.
If the war in Ukraine has become a catalyst, then the breadth of NATO membership is the second factor that gives it advantages over other multilateral platforms. The alliance, consisting of 32 countries, not only unites Europeans with Canada and the United States, but also unites even more European countries than the 27 EU countries. Institutions of transatlantic coordination, such as the US–EU Trade and Technology Council, exclude important members of the transatlantic community such as Canada, the United Kingdom, Turkey and Norway. NATO may not be able to coordinate policy towards China in areas such as trade, regulation or sanctions, but the partnership format may include countries with relevant competence in these areas. For example, at the Washington summit, the EU joined the meeting with NATO as a partner along with four states of the Indo-Pacific region.
The third advantage of NATO is its partnership in the Indo-Pacific region. In Washington, NATO held the third consecutive summit of the so-called IP4 (Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea). All countries, with the exception of Australia, participated at the Prime ministerial level. The IP4 meeting, chaired by New Zealand, discussed North Korea, tensions in the South China Sea and China's support for Russia. Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky joined the discussion on Ukraine, and the leaders issued a joint statement condemning "illegal military cooperation between Russia and North Korea, which undermines peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region and Europe."
None of the other institutions playing a role in transatlantic coordination has anything to do with IP4 as the foundation of a partnership connecting the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific regions. Each IP4 partner has its own bilateral agreements with NATO, providing for a number of cooperation activities tailored to their priorities (such as strategic communication, space, interoperability and non-proliferation). In addition, in Washington, IP4 agreed on four new "flagship projects" in support of Ukraine in the field of military healthcare, as well as strengthening cooperation in the field of cyber defense, countering disinformation and technologies such as artificial intelligence.
Of course, the nascent coordination function of NATO is not without criticism. France has consistently opposed such a role for the Alliance. Before the 2023 summit, President Emmanuel Macron returned from Beijing, warning Europeans against emulating the United States in response to the potential Taiwan crisis and reaffirming the idea of European "strategic autonomy" in relation to Chinese policy. Shortly afterwards, France reportedly vetoed the proposed opening of a NATO liaison office in Tokyo, insisting on the "geographical" limitation of NATO's activities to the Euro-Atlantic region. Chinese state media, which often criticizes NATO as a manifestation of the "cold War mentality," unsurprisingly welcomed Macron's veto. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs also condemned references to Beijing in the declaration of the 2024 summit, calling them "a pile of prejudice, slander and provocations."
An event that is largely overlooked in this debate is that IP4 is beginning to function not just as a continuation of NATO's agenda towards China, but also more broadly, having a stabilizing effect on the region. IP4 partners attach great importance to NATO summits as an opportunity to meet and highlight the interconnectedness of what may seem to be distant security threats, as is evident from their high-level participation. There are several other mechanisms that bring Japan and South Korea together for security cooperation. The statements made at the IP4 summits on the Korean Peninsula in 2023 and 2024 indicate important common concerns. In Washington, the four leaders expressed their commitment to promoting the group as a forum for regional cooperation. U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said he plans to meet with foreign ministers of IP4 member countries outside NATO later this year, which means that IP4 could become another part of the "grid" of overlapping security mechanisms in the Indo-Pacific region.
Raising awareness of security issues in the Indo-Pacific region is neither a hierarchy headed by the United States nor a one-way street - partners shape the agenda and influence allies according to their own interests and priorities. And if forecasts of a more significant "turn" of US resources from Europe to the Indo-Pacific region turn out to be correct, this will only increase the need for a platform that can help both coordinate views on the interconnectedness of each theater of operations and the overall balance of threats, and ensure practical cooperation.
A source
Add comment
Comments