What's new

NATO not likely to intervene in an Indo-Pacific conflict, says MSC chief

beijingwalker

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Messages
65,195
Reaction score
-55
Country
China
Location
China

NATO not likely to intervene in an Indo-Pacific conflict, says MSC chief​

Munich Security Conference Chairman Christoph Heusgen takes part in panel discussion about national security strategy at the Foreign Ministry in Berlin in March 2022. | POOL / VIA REUTERSMunich Security Conference Chairman Christoph Heusgen takes part in panel discussion about national security strategy at the Foreign Ministry in Berlin in March 2022. | POOL / VIA REUTERS

BY GABRIEL DOMINGUEZ
May 14, 2023

Despite NATO’s deepening relations with Indo-Pacific countries, including plans to open an office in Japan, the military alliance is unlikely to get involved in any potential conflict in Asia, said the chairman of the Munich Security Conference, Christoph Heusgen, on Sunday.

The plan to open a liaison office in Tokyo demonstrates the interest of NATO countries in regional stability and underlines the close partnership between NATO and Japan, Heusgen said ahead of the MSC’s first-ever Munich Leaders Meeting (MLM) in Tokyo, which starts Monday.

“However, when it comes to active involvement of NATO in possible conflict situations (in the Indo-Pacific), this is by definition excluded in the treaty,” he said, pointing out that such a scenario would rather be dealt with on an individual country basis.

Nevertheless, NATO is increasingly paying attention to events in the region, which is why the alliance is deepening partnerships with like-minded countries such as Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, added Heusgen, who served as Germany’s Ambassador to the United Nations from 2017 to 2021.

“As a global community, we are confronted with global challenges, and you can no longer somehow distance yourself or separate yourself from challenges worldwide,” the MSC chief said.

“Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, which plays out in Europe has repercussions worldwide, on energy prices, on inflation and also … on global trade,” he said, emphasizing that the same would apply to any major crisis in Asia.

“In particular, when it comes to the interruption of the free movement of ships in the South China Sea or in the Taiwan Strait, if something were to happen, this would have global consequences for supply chains,” he warned.

“We are all literally in the same boat.”

Heusgen’s remarks come after Japan and NATO agreed to deepen their partnership in January, during a visit by NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, with both sides arguing that the international community is “facing changes defining an era,” as the military alliance seeks more support for Ukraine and Tokyo looks for like-minded partners to tackle the growing military challenges posed by China and North Korea.

During a speech in Tokyo in early February, Stoltenberg stressed that working with partners around the world — especially in the Indo-Pacific — was part of the alliance’s answer to a “more dangerous and unpredictable world.”

The NATO chief also noted that among NATO’s partners, “none is closer or more capable than Japan,” adding bilateral ties would extend to new areas and domains such as cyberspace, outer space and critical and emerging technologies.

NATO’s planned Tokyo office — its first such station in Asia — is expected to allow the alliance to conduct periodic consultations with Japan and other key partners in the region, particularly on the challenges posed by China’s growing regional assertiveness and its nuclear buildup.

Indeed, these and other pressing security issues, including the war in Ukraine, cybersecurity and North Korea’s ongoing weapon tests, will be high on the agenda when participants from Europe, the United States and across the Indo-Pacific, including Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi, meet for the first MLM in Tokyo.

Representatives from Taiwan, South Korea, Australia and several Southeast Asian countries will take part in the event, which ends on May 16, only three days ahead of the Group of Seven summit in Hiroshima. A representative from China was invited to the meeting but will not be attending.

Traditionally the MSC has been a very European- and trans-Atlantic-centered conference, Heusgen said. “We have opened up the conference over time, but with the geopolitical changes we are witnessing, we find it extremely important to go beyond this classic framework,” he said.

Heusgen added that he wants the Munich Leaders Meeting to serve as a platform to discuss solutions to problems and challenges in all continents as global approaches are needed to deal with today’s international issues.

NATO has been rapidly strengthening relations with its partners in the Indo-Pacific region under its 2030 agenda, as the alliance seeks global support in countering Russia, China and North Korea. In fact, the leaders of Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand participated in their first-ever NATO summit last June in Madrid.

That said, NATO’s growing alignment of global defense and security interests with these four countries have also fueled speculation that the alliance might seek to extend its reach into the Indo-Pacific region.

In particular, Pyongyang and Beijing have warned about what they see as NATO’s attempt to extend its geographical scope and assert military supremacy in Asia.

That said, the White House and the Pentagon have repeatedly rejected claims that the U.S. is trying to create an Asian version of NATO. This is primarily because these countries already have alliances with the U.S., the country that underpins NATO, making formal accession to the trans-Atlantic alliance somewhat redundant.

 
.
Why would NATO intervene in indo-pacific conflict?

People need to know what NATO stand for NORTH ATLANTIC Treaty organisation...neither Indian Ocean or Pacific Ocean is in North Atlantic....

However, it would have been another issue if NATO territories in Indo-Pacific (ie Guam, Diego Garcia, CNMI, Hawaii and all other US territories in North Pacific) is being attacked.
 
.
Why would NATO intervene in indo-pacific conflict?

People need to know what NATO stand for NORTH ATLANTIC Treaty organisation...neither Indian Ocean or Pacific Ocean is in North Atlantic....

However, it would have been another issue if NATO territories in Indo-Pacific (ie Guam, Diego Garcia, CNMI, Hawaii and all other US territories in North Pacific) is being attacked.

So NATO wouldn't intervene if China invades Taiwan? Or any western aligned countries like Japan, South Korea?
 
.
So NATO wouldn't intervene if China invades Taiwan?
Depends on what do you mean by "Intervene"

Send troop to Taiwan? No

Send Weapon to Taiwan like they did with Ukraine? Maybe. but that would be individual country effort, bear in mind even in Ukraine, not all NATO countries send aids to Ukraine and not all countries send weapon to Ukraine were in NATO.

NATO does not have a standing policy to support Ukraine, and it will most likely be the same for Taiwan.
 
.
Depends on what do you mean by "Intervene"

Send troop to Taiwan? No

Send Weapon to Taiwan like they did with Ukraine? Maybe. but that would be individual country effort, bear in mind even in Ukraine, not all NATO countries send aids to Ukraine and not all countries send weapon to Ukraine were in NATO.

NATO does not have a standing policy to support Ukraine, and it will most likely be the same for Taiwan.

My Bad, I just saw this interview again to confirm and then realized Biden is talking only about US troops intervening not NATO as a whole

 
.
Only a fool would trust what NATO is saying right now.
 
.

NATO not likely to intervene in an Indo-Pacific conflict, says MSC chief​

Munich Security Conference Chairman Christoph Heusgen takes part in panel discussion about national security strategy at the Foreign Ministry in Berlin in March 2022. | POOL / VIA REUTERSMunich Security Conference Chairman Christoph Heusgen takes part in panel discussion about national security strategy at the Foreign Ministry in Berlin in March 2022. | POOL / VIA REUTERS

BY GABRIEL DOMINGUEZ
May 14, 2023

Despite NATO’s deepening relations with Indo-Pacific countries, including plans to open an office in Japan, the military alliance is unlikely to get involved in any potential conflict in Asia, said the chairman of the Munich Security Conference, Christoph Heusgen, on Sunday.

The plan to open a liaison office in Tokyo demonstrates the interest of NATO countries in regional stability and underlines the close partnership between NATO and Japan, Heusgen said ahead of the MSC’s first-ever Munich Leaders Meeting (MLM) in Tokyo, which starts Monday.

“However, when it comes to active involvement of NATO in possible conflict situations (in the Indo-Pacific), this is by definition excluded in the treaty,” he said, pointing out that such a scenario would rather be dealt with on an individual country basis.

Nevertheless, NATO is increasingly paying attention to events in the region, which is why the alliance is deepening partnerships with like-minded countries such as Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, added Heusgen, who served as Germany’s Ambassador to the United Nations from 2017 to 2021.

“As a global community, we are confronted with global challenges, and you can no longer somehow distance yourself or separate yourself from challenges worldwide,” the MSC chief said.

“Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, which plays out in Europe has repercussions worldwide, on energy prices, on inflation and also … on global trade,” he said, emphasizing that the same would apply to any major crisis in Asia.

“In particular, when it comes to the interruption of the free movement of ships in the South China Sea or in the Taiwan Strait, if something were to happen, this would have global consequences for supply chains,” he warned.

“We are all literally in the same boat.”

Heusgen’s remarks come after Japan and NATO agreed to deepen their partnership in January, during a visit by NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, with both sides arguing that the international community is “facing changes defining an era,” as the military alliance seeks more support for Ukraine and Tokyo looks for like-minded partners to tackle the growing military challenges posed by China and North Korea.

During a speech in Tokyo in early February, Stoltenberg stressed that working with partners around the world — especially in the Indo-Pacific — was part of the alliance’s answer to a “more dangerous and unpredictable world.”

The NATO chief also noted that among NATO’s partners, “none is closer or more capable than Japan,” adding bilateral ties would extend to new areas and domains such as cyberspace, outer space and critical and emerging technologies.

NATO’s planned Tokyo office — its first such station in Asia — is expected to allow the alliance to conduct periodic consultations with Japan and other key partners in the region, particularly on the challenges posed by China’s growing regional assertiveness and its nuclear buildup.

Indeed, these and other pressing security issues, including the war in Ukraine, cybersecurity and North Korea’s ongoing weapon tests, will be high on the agenda when participants from Europe, the United States and across the Indo-Pacific, including Foreign Minister Yoshimasa Hayashi, meet for the first MLM in Tokyo.

Representatives from Taiwan, South Korea, Australia and several Southeast Asian countries will take part in the event, which ends on May 16, only three days ahead of the Group of Seven summit in Hiroshima. A representative from China was invited to the meeting but will not be attending.

Traditionally the MSC has been a very European- and trans-Atlantic-centered conference, Heusgen said. “We have opened up the conference over time, but with the geopolitical changes we are witnessing, we find it extremely important to go beyond this classic framework,” he said.

Heusgen added that he wants the Munich Leaders Meeting to serve as a platform to discuss solutions to problems and challenges in all continents as global approaches are needed to deal with today’s international issues.

NATO has been rapidly strengthening relations with its partners in the Indo-Pacific region under its 2030 agenda, as the alliance seeks global support in countering Russia, China and North Korea. In fact, the leaders of Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand participated in their first-ever NATO summit last June in Madrid.

That said, NATO’s growing alignment of global defense and security interests with these four countries have also fueled speculation that the alliance might seek to extend its reach into the Indo-Pacific region.

In particular, Pyongyang and Beijing have warned about what they see as NATO’s attempt to extend its geographical scope and assert military supremacy in Asia.

That said, the White House and the Pentagon have repeatedly rejected claims that the U.S. is trying to create an Asian version of NATO. This is primarily because these countries already have alliances with the U.S., the country that underpins NATO, making formal accession to the trans-Atlantic alliance somewhat redundant.


We don't anticipate them interfering in the Indo-Pacific War, and we don't want them to.

The worst-case scenario is that all of China and India's major cities will be destroyed by nuclear weapons, killing millions of people in both countries.

Other countries must stay away if war breaks out.
 
. . .
My Bad, I just saw this interview again to confirm and then realized Biden is talking only about US troops intervening not NATO as a whole

US have a strategic ambiguity policy, while US defense initiative to Taiwan is currently tied to Taiwan Relationship Act 1979, under this act, there are no guarantee that US would come into direct help of Taiwan if there is a war, the wording is to maintain the current relationship to Taiwan and the President have the ability to for direct intervention if congress agreed to such move. So any decision to defend Taiwan must be made with the approval of Congress.

However, there is a loophole, because Supreme Court of the United States have dismissed the case of which Carter, act as POTUS, unilaterally nullified the previous act (The Sino-American Mutual Defence Treaty or SAMDT), and send it back to the lower court, which by dismissing, and not denying to offer a judgement outright, it basically leaves door for the congress to repeal Carter executive order of nullifying SAMDT, which would require the US to directly intervene in case of an invasion to ROC.

So, TL;DR there are basically 2 ways US can be directly involved if China attack Taiwan

1.) POTUS ask for intervention and the Congress approve such intervention.
2.) Congress repeal Carter's executive order with absolute majority and US revert back to SAMDT, thus requiring a direct intervention in case of China invade ROC
 
.
Why would NATO intervene in indo-pacific conflict?

People need to know what NATO stand for NORTH ATLANTIC Treaty organisation...neither Indian Ocean or Pacific Ocean is in North Atlantic....

However, it would have been another issue if NATO territories in Indo-Pacific (ie Guam, Diego Garcia, CNMI, Hawaii and all other US territories in North Pacific) is being attacked.
So what was NATO doing in Afghanistan?
 
.
So what was NATO doing in Afghanistan?
Umm.......Just because you don't think Afghanistan attacked United States in 911 does not mean article 5 does not triggered because of it..


Article 5 has only been invoked once: After the September 11, 2001, terror attacks on the US.
 
.
.
So you stand corrected, Atlantic ocean is not the bound of NATO.

Only if you can't read.

Why would NATO intervene in indo-pacific conflict?

People need to know what NATO stand for NORTH ATLANTIC Treaty organisation...neither Indian Ocean or Pacific Ocean is in North Atlantic....

However, it would have been another issue if NATO territories in Indo-Pacific (ie Guam, Diego Garcia, CNMI, Hawaii and all other US territories in North Pacific) is being attacked.

Again, whether you accept the concept of NATO being a defensive union or not, that is their primary objective. Which mean they do not act offensively, but they acted defensively.

The question I raise is why would NATO be involved in an INDO-PACIFIC conflict when both Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean being not in Atlantic, let alone North Atlantic.

HOWEVER, the ONLY EXCEPTION is when any attacked NATO member territories in the region. I.E. Territories of Hawaii, Guam, Deigo Garcia, CNMI, Wake Island et el was attacked, because that would be the same as attacking US and UK mainland.
 
.
Why would NATO intervene in indo-pacific conflict?

People need to know what NATO stand for NORTH ATLANTIC Treaty organisation...neither Indian Ocean or Pacific Ocean is in North Atlantic....

However, it would have been another issue if NATO territories in Indo-Pacific (ie Guam, Diego Garcia, CNMI, Hawaii and all other US territories in North Pacific) is being attacked.

Because people put 2 and 2 together.

There are growing signs of US wanting to see NATO play a role outside the European theater. I mean, it already has: Afghanistan and Libya forexample. Why would an engagement in Western Pacific be viewed any different?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom