NATO leaders in a communique on Monday described China as a threat to the “rules-based international order and to areas relevant to alliance security,” marking a major change of focus for the organization.
They said that China “is rapidly expanding its nuclear arsenal,” is “opaque” about its military modernization and is “cooperating militarily with Russia.”
Following the NATO meeting in Brussels, US President Joe Biden assured the alliance that the US would honor its NATO commitments, and said that China and Russia were attempting to drive a wedge between the Washington and European allies.
“I want all Europe to know that the United States is there. NATO is critically important to us,” Biden said.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel also described Beijing as a threat, citing its cooperation with Russia and “cyberthreats” traced to China.
The comments from NATO leaders come only a day after the meeting of G7 leaders in the UK, where G7 members lambasted China for human rights violations in Hong Kong and Xinjiang.
Taiwan’s input must be added to this increasingly united voice of resistance against Chinese expansionism and China’s human rights violations.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said the alliance did not want a cold war with China, but Beijing’s response to legitimate concerns of world leaders makes it appear that a cold war is inevitable.
Rather than seeking to communicate productively with world leaders about their concerns, the Chinese Mission to the EU responded aggressively, saying it would “not sit by and do nothing if ‘systemic challenges’ come closer to us.”
Stoltenberg said NATO members “need to address together, as the alliance, the challenges that the rise of China poses to our security.”
Since NATO has described China’s establishment of bases in Africa and its military cooperation with Russia as examples of such challenges, it only seems fitting that its members should seek military cooperation with China’s neighbors, including Taiwan, Japan and South Korea.
Establishing formal relations with Taipei and refusing to acknowledge Beijing’s “one China” policy would send a clear message — that democratic nations do not allow authoritarian states to threaten them or dictate their foreign policies.
A Reuters report on Tuesday suggested that despite their expressed concerns over Chinese activities, NATO leaders remain aware of their countries’ investments in China.
Last year, German trade with China totaled more than US$257 billion, while US trade with China was US$559 billion, the report said. These staggering figures should be a reminder of the need for democracies to reduce economic reliance on China. Trade with China also comes with significant risks, since Beijing often imposes unilateral trade restrictions on a whim, usually for political reasons.
It is clear that Beijing is delusional, calling its growth “peaceful” and dismissing any comments to the contrary as “slanderous.” China sees nothing wrong with forcing millions of its minority citizens into internment camps, arresting people for publicly expressing their views, engaging in cyberattacks against numerous countries, militarizing islands in disputed waters and ceaselessly coercing and threatening Taiwan and its allies.
Greater US participation in NATO, and a shift in NATO’s focus toward China, are encouraging signs. Taiwan should remain vocal about its importance in helping NATO achieve its goals, and should call for inclusion in the organization’s discussions.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS