I’m sorry to say that I found the Atlantic Council’s Ian Brzezinski’s thoughts on the role of NATO in China strategy mostly pabulum. I had hoped for more. In summary his main bullet points are:
- The Alliance should offer to establish a NATO-China Council.
- Second, NATO should deepen its engagement with its Pacific partners, Australia, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Mongolia.
- Third, the Alliance should establish in the Indo-Pacific, perhaps in one of the region’s partner countries, a Center of Excellence (COE) and integrate officers and NCOs from selected partners into the Alliance’s Command Structure.
- The Alliance should also establish a small military headquarters element in the Indo-Pacific region
Do you see what I mean? Conspicuous by their absence are any recognition that the Chinese embassy in Belgrade was bombed by NATO or that the establishing of the “no-fly zone” in Libya that led to Moammar Qaddafi’s ouster, resulting in a decade of chaos in that country, was a NATO operation. Under the circumstances wouldn’t China inevitably see Mr. Brzezinski’s proposals as nakedly hostile?
My own prescription would simultaneously be more and less. I don’t think that NATO as such should have any posture with respect to China. That’s beyond its scope unless China has established a military presence on the Atlantic while I wasn’t looking.
I wish the members of the European Union that, at least as long as the country is ruled by the Chinese Communist Party, China’s goals will be hostile to theirs. They should heed the advice that who sups with the devil should use a long spoon, keeping a discreet distance from China in all things and most especially trade.
What I think they will do is that while European leaders recognize the threat that China presents to them and their interests, they will be glad to cozy up to China, hoping that when push comes to shove the U. S. will protect them, even while condemning the U. S. for its truculent attitude.
That assumes NATO survives the current turmoil.
The leader of the SPD wants US nuclear arms to leave Germany
https://m.dw.com/en/germany-spd-call-to-withdraw-us-nuclear-arms-stokes-debate/a-53314883
The future may have a NATO; but an arrangement where one member shoulders all the risk; including the ultimate risk is not an alliance.
As for the Germans; their current priority with respect to China is an investment treaty; never mind the Chinese have gotten into big tiffs with Czechia and Sweden.
As for the Chinese; they are not concerned at all. How much of a threat can an alliance be that burns its own cities and defaces the statue of one of one of its haloed architects (Churchill?)
I didn’t understand the comment 2 weeks ago that the coronavirus laid bare all the US’s weaknesses but I do now.
No, it’s a con game. I speculate that our diplomats want to hang out with the cool kids.
NATO is a military alliance. I would leave it that way. China is not really a military threat to the EU. I would start winding down our place in NATO for that matter.
If we want to partner against China with the EU I think we can consider that, now might be a good time while everyone is passed at them. I suspect the lure of that big Chinese market will be hard for the EU to resist so any alliance on this issue will be short lived. If the EU can do business more cheaply, or more profitably, with China they will, and it may put our businesses at risk. I think the big question is will we be willing to forego trade and tolerate shorter supply lines if it costs us money?
Steve
I agree. That highlights my problem. I don’t like Trump and I won’t vote for him. Who do you think is more likely to “wind down our place in NATO”? Biden or Trump? If it’s inevitable, Biden well may. But that’s what I thought about Afghanistan in 2008. Then I voted for Obama because I thought he would certainly realize in short order that an “Afghan surge” was a waste of lives and money. Here it is 12 years later.
Look at their advisers. Neither one is going to pull out of NATO. We are going to have to wait for someone younger who doesnt surround themselves with former Cold Warriors and can live without the prestige of dominating NATO.
Steve
By the way, this article by John Mearsheimer on the state of international affairs is well worth a read.
https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/full/10.1162/isec_a_00342#.Xt2mKjLdbEM.twitter
I agree with one of his main conclusions, that existing world order based on US dominance and the spread of liberal democracy is rapidly decaying.
I disagree with his other conclusion, that the liberal democracies should/will form a great alliance like the cold war. This time, the US is in a different place; it does not have 40% of world GDP or a largely united society. There is a much greater desire/need to withdraw, rely on the oceans for safety, and fix things at home.
What should worry voters is neither Biden nor his advisors grasp that reality, and misinterpret the domestic appetite for global leadership.
Not to mention overestimate the appetite for followership.