The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) seeks to institutionalize cooperation with partners in the Asia-Pacific region. The Asia-Pacific Initiative aims to strengthen cooperation with countries in the region such as Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand. In particular, the support of Japan and South Korea during international events such as the Russia-Ukraine crisis was an indicator of the rapprochement and shared security values between NATO and these countries..
With this background, Ankara Center for Crisis and Political Studies (ANKASAM) presents the views of Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ikboljon Qoraboyev of Maksut Narikbayev University to evaluate the Asia-Pacific Initiative of NATO .
1-Can you explain how the Asia-Pacific Initiative is integrated into the overall strategic approach of NATO?
Over the past seventy years, NATO has defined itself as an alliance that successfully ensures the freedom and security of its allies in the Euro-Atlantic region. This geographic focus was recently reiterated very clearly by French President Emmanuel Macron, who rejected the idea of opening a NATO office in Tokyo during the Vilnius Summit. For him, NATO is a North Atlantic organization and “the Indo-Pacific is not the North Atlantic.” According to NATO ‘s critics, expanding the alliance’s strategic horizon to include Asia would both dilute its geographic focus and unnecessarily provoke China.
The globalization of NATO and the rise of China paradoxically force NATO to expand its strategic horizon toward Asia. Over the past three decades, NATO has engaged in various cooperative and operational activities that go beyond the traditional Euro-Atlantic region and enhance NATO ‘s role as a global actor. NATO’s most recent Strategic Concept, adopted in 2022, describes our time as one of increasing strategic competition, with China becoming the West’s greatest challenger in both political-military and normative terms. While the French president represents those who argue for a cautious and measured approach in a time of strategic uncertainty and increased risk of great power confrontation NATO, global interconnectedness and geopolitical change are undeniable. Threats and challenges transcend regional boundaries. NATO’s turn toward Asia is a consequence of these changes. We can observe a gradual but steady strengthening of Asia in the overall strategic concept of NATO In response to the demands of both member states and the Asia-Pacific region, NATO is called upon to institutionalize its relationships with partners in the Asia-Pacific region.The 2022 Madrid Summit and the adoption of the new Strategic Concept were important milestones for NATO ‘s focus on the Asia-Pacific. With the 2022 Strategic Concept, NATO mentioned China for the first time in its strategic documents as a country whose ambitions and challenging policies challenge the Alliance’s interests, security, and values. The concept also called on NATO to expand its engagement in the Indo-Pacific region. The Madrid summit was the first time that leaders from the so-called “Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea (AP4)” officially participated in NATO ‘s highest-level event. This trend continued in July 2023, also with AP4 countries. During the Vilnius Summit NATO, which was attended by leaders from NATO who mentioned China in the final declaration. Leaders used the Vilnius Summit to announce enhanced cooperation between NATO and its Asia-Pacific partners: All four countries have signed or are about to sign bilateral, individually tailored partnership programs (ITPPs) with NATO. The ITPPs have been described as an “upgrade to a higher form of partnership” that serves as a roadmap for cooperation between NATO and AP4 countries in areas such as cybersecurity, information sharing, or supply chain security. Japan’s ITPP includes 16 areas of cooperation, such as collaboration to improve capability development and interoperability, maritime security, cyber and hybrid threats, and climate change. South Korea’s ITPP addresses 11 areas of cooperation, ranging from counterterrorism and nonproliferation to new technologies, cybersecurity, and public diplomacy.
NATO remains committed to its Euro-Atlantic obligations, but thanks to the Alliance’s bilateral cooperation with AP4 countries, its strategic assessments now include the Asia-Pacific perspective
2- How is the Asia-Pacific Initiative expected to add value to NATO’s security environment in the Asia and Pacific region?
Japan and South Korea’s contributions to NATO’s support for Ukraine facing Russian aggression point to significant added value of cooperation with Asia-Pacific countries for NATO. Both Japan and South Korea are providing humanitarian and financial assistance to Ukraine. They also announced plans to provide non-lethal military equipment to Ukraine. More importantly, they have joined the international sanctions imposed on Russia. Without political and economic sanctions involving all major NATO partners, including the European Union (EU), Japan and South Korea, NATO’s military actions could be significantly weakened. This joint stance emboldens NATO through coordinated and robust response to common challenges
While NATO allies are preparing for a long-term strategic contest with China, it is essential for the Alliance to strengthen and develop co-operation with similarly-minded Asia-Pacific countries. The strategic positions of these countries will strengthen NATO’s capabilities. Common concerns about China, Russia and North Korea, expressed as “two sides”, make co-operation between the two countries mandatory. The recent ITTP agreements with AP4 countries are the most important example of the benefits of joint actions that mutually reinforce each other.
Also, commitment to a rule-based international order is another important factor that brings NATO and its Asia-Pacific partners closer together. Respect for international law, support for a rule-based international order, including human rights, free trade and freedom, is expressed both collectively and individually by major NATO allies such as the United States of America (USA), France or Germany, and Asia-Pacific countries. They are aware that this vision can only be realized and sustained through enhanced cooperation
3- What do you think are NATO’s long-term goals in the Asia-Pacific region? NATO is often described as a regional alliance, it adopts a global approach to securityThis global perspective is clearly reflected in the updated Strategic Concept, which highlights interlinked security issues. “Security is not regional, it is global,” said NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg.In this context, the Indo-Pacific region is seen as key to NATO’s strategic interests. According to Stoltenberg, events in the Indo-Pacific and Europe are intertwined, which makes co-operation extremely necessary.
While the 2022 Strategic Concept identifies Russia as the most significant and direct threat to security, peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic region, the threat is expressed more in military and political terms. When it comes to China, the Strategic Concept underscores its multi-faceted threats to NATO. According to NATO, China is resorting to a wide range of political, economic and military instruments to increase its global footprint and make power projections. Key technological and industrial sectors are trying to control critical infrastructure and strategic material and supply chains. China uses coercive policies and strategic dependencies to challenge NATO and the West globally.
NATO’s Asia-Pacific partners have expressed their intention to develop and institutionalize co-operation with the Alliance. They share shared values and shared strategic interests. Strategic objectives such as technological superiority, freedom of movement, energy security or supply chain security are all issues that require greater engagement between NATO and its Asian partners.
We should note the alignment of US objectives with Alliance policies as an important factor in NATO’s increasing orientation towards Asia. European policymakers and analysts are calling for Europe’s strategic autonomy on key issues of global geopolitics. In this context, voices are rising for a distinction between American and European strategic interests. But the war in Ukraine has shown that it is not an easy shortcut to such autonomy and that the US remains the main provider of security in the Euro-Atlantic region. US strategic goals and policies will continue to shape the common preferences of NATO and the Euro-Atlantic region in the foreseeable future. From this perspective, we can see the efforts of the US to harmonize its approach to security in Europe and Asia.
The US has traditionally preferred to support multilateral mechanisms for collective security (NATO) in Europe, while relying on bilateral instruments to establish security co-operation with its Asia-Pacific countries. Such differentiated preferences by the US have been used to explain the absence of “NATO in Asia”. But China’s rise is pushing the US to rethink its regional policies to better adapt to the changing geopolitical landscape of the world.
The US has recently signed several important mini-lateral agreements to complete its bilateral partnership in Asia. The Quadruple Security Dialogue (QUAD), revived between Australia, India, Japan and the US to coordinate their military and political efforts against China in the Indian-Pacific region; the AUKUS agreement, committed to advanced security cooperation and assistance; and, finally, the Camp David Pact, a tripartite security pact between the US, Japan, and South Korea in August 2023, based on the commitment of the participating countries to promote a Indian–Pacific security framework based on collective security and shared interests and values. These trends also contribute to the increase and development of engagement between NATO and the Asia-Pacific countries. Strengthening the security of NATO allies, safeguarding the interests of NATO and the collective West, and strengthening the position and capabilities of the US in the context of geostrategic competition with China are the builders of stronger ties between NATO and Asia. This has led to NATO’s Indo-Pacific strategy being expressed and China being identified as the main rival in the 2022 NATO Strategic Concept. The integration of China and the Indo-Pacific factors into the NATO Strategic Concept is also interpreted as an attempt by the European wing to maintain US commitment to NATO and European security.
4- When did the NATO attempt to open an office in Japan begin, and what were the underlying reasons for these initiatives? What do you think is the level of relations and co-operation between Japan and NATO?
The proposal to open a NATO office in Japan has been an important and pivotal topic in discussions around NATO throughout 2023. This idea was first expressed in the context of Japan’s decision to establish a separate NATO delegation from the Japanese Embassy in Brussels in January 2023, raising its representation in the Alliance. A month later, Secretary-General Stoltenberg further advanced the idea during his visit to Japan. Those advocating the opening of a NATO office in Tokyo argue that such an office would facilitate coordination, undermine the growing commitment between NATO and its Asia-Pacific partners, and demonstrate the US’ intention to harmonize security arrangements more closely with its Asian partners.
It has been met with suspicion and resistance by some of the major NATO actors, including France. Suspects say opening a NATO office in Asia would mean provoking China unnecessarily. It will also cause NATO to deviate from its Euro-Atlantic focus. The discussions ended with the victory of suspects, such as France, to which Germany joined during NATO’s Vilnius Summit in July 2023, and the idea was drawn from the Vilnius summit outcome statement.
Despite this setback, NATO-Asia co-operation is growing and the partnership between NATO and Japan remains stable. Both sides share a common interest in further institutionalizing this relationship. Japan’s late Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was the first politician to advocate a comprehensive strategic approach where the Indian and Pacific oceans are treated as one and indivisible whole. Abe spoke of the term “Indo-Pacific” as a new strategic region during his visit to India in 2007, and played a major role in the revitalization of QUAD in his own time. Since then, the Indo-Pacific has increasingly served as a mental map to reflect both the transition from economy to security and to recognize India’s growing importance in Asia’s geostrategic and geo-economic dynamics. NATO’s 2022 Strategic Concept effectively established the Indo-Pacific region as a main framework guiding NATO activities in Asia.
Japan also signed the Individual Partnership Programme (ITTP) with NATO in July 2023, followed by the Triple Camp David Agreement between the US, Japan and South Korea in August 2023. Japan is contributing significantly to NATO’s efforts to support Ukraine. These developments signal the strengthening of relations between NATO and Japan and undermine their mutual commitment to global peace and stability.
Ikboljon Qoraboyev
Ikboljon Qoraboyev is a Assoc. Prof. Dr of International Relations at the School of International Economics at Maksut Narikbayev University. He is Associate Research Fellow at the United Nations University Institute for Comparative Regional Integration Studies (UNU-CRIS). His research areas include comparative regionalism, international relations and international law. In addition, his work focuses on Eurasia and Central Asia.
