In recent years, changes in the global security environment have demonstrated the intensification of competition among major powers in both Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. The United States (US) has sought to enhance its global influence by not only expanding the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Europe and exerting strategic pressure on Russia through Ukraine but also by establishing new security architectures in the Asia-Pacific region against actors such as China, Russia, and North Korea. In this process, defense initiatives involving Japan, one of the US’s closest allies in the region, and the increasing military deployments by Western countries have drawn significant attention. These developments have deeply impacted regional dynamics not only in terms of defense policies but also in terms of geopolitical balances.
Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has embarked on efforts to reshape the region’s security dynamics by calling for the creation of an “Asian NATO” in response to the growing military cooperation between China, Russia, and North Korea. Under the Biden administration’s strategy, referred to as the “Interwoven Security Architecture,” defense cooperation between the US, Japan, and other regional partners has intensified. Regular meetings within the framework of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) involving Japan, India, and Australia, the AUKUS alliance, and increasing cooperation between Washington, Tokyo, and Seoul are key components of this strategy. In an article for the Hudson Institute, Ishiba characterized these developments as a success, arguing that tensions over Taiwan could be mitigated through a NATO-like defense mechanism. However, while these initiatives are viewed as positive steps by the US and Japan, they are perceived by other regional actors as indicative of a broader strategic threat.[1]
These efforts illustrate that the US has extended its global deterrence strategy beyond the Asia-Pacific to also address the threat posed by Russia in Europe. Military aid provided to Ukraine under NATO leadership has heightened Russia’s perception of threat and accelerated Moscow’s efforts to strengthen both conventional and strategic deterrence capabilities. Statements by Russian Defense Minister Andrey Belousov regarding the need to prepare for a potential war with NATO underscore Moscow’s continued view of the West as a strategic threat. Decisions made at NATO’s July summit, support provided to Ukraine, and new doctrines regarding unmanned systems have reinforced this perception in Russia.[2]
The connection between these two regions demonstrates that the United States is attempting to implement similar strategic models in both Europe and the Asia-Pacific. Russia’s perception of threats in the Asia-Pacific region has become more complex, not only due to pressures originating from the West but also due to the formation of regional alliances led by Japan and the United States. Russia’s Chief of the General Staff, Valery Gerasimov, stated that a military alliance similar to NATO is taking shape in the Asia-Pacific under the leadership of the United States, Japan, and South Korea, identifying Russia, China, and North Korea as primary adversaries.[3] Highlighting that the current ASEAN-based security system is being transformed into U.S.-controlled alliances, Gerasimov noted that a force of approximately 400,000 troops has been deployed in the region. The U.S. provision of modern weaponry to Taipei and the continuation of naval activities in the Taiwan Strait, which exacerbate tensions around Taiwan, have been described by Moscow as provocations.[4]
During this process, the deployment of a carrier strike group by France, a member of both NATO and the EU, to the Asia-Pacific region has emerged as a significant element of the West’s strategic direction. With this move, France aims to strengthen the EU’s collective defense identity and its global strategic influence. Joint naval exercises in the Indo-Pacific region with the navies of the U.S., Japan, Australia, and Canada are intended to deepen France’s regional partnerships but are perceived by actors such as China as external interference. Similar deployments by the United Kingdom and Italy have further escalated tensions in the Asia-Pacific and undermined efforts to establish a regional security framework.[5]
These developments are combined with NATO’s efforts to reorganize the global distribution of power by assuming the role of coordinating Western military aid from the U.S. The “NATO Support and Training Mission for Ukraine” (NSATU), decided upon at the NATO Washington Summit in July 2024, has been headquartered in Wiesbaden, Germany, and aims to ensure a support mechanism for Ukraine with a structure involving 700 personnel. This transition has been seen as a precaution against the possibility of newly elected U.S. President Donald Trump reducing military aid to Ukraine. However, the fact that the U.S. remains Ukraine’s largest supplier of weapons and the policies of the Trump administration limit the impact of this transition. As the Biden administration allegedly plans to deliver large quantities of ammunition to Ukraine before leaving office, Trump’s advisors have raised a plan that includes the possibility of halting military aid if Kyiv does not commence negotiations with Moscow. This further complicates the West’s efforts to maintain sustainable support for Ukraine.[6]
In the same period, the concept of an “Asian NATO” has emerged as a significant term in the context of international security and cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. However, the practical feasibility of this idea appears to be limited. Donald Trump’s foreign policy approach, shaped by the slogan “Make America Great Again,” suggests that during a second Trump administration, the United States would prioritize national interests and adopt a strategy based on leadership rather than multilateral alliances. Considering Trump’s criticisms of NATO and his distant stance toward collective defense mechanisms in Europe, the likelihood of the U.S. supporting the establishment of a NATO-like alliance in the Asia-Pacific is considerably low. The security strategy developed by Japan in close cooperation with the U.S. under the Biden administration is expected to shift toward more bilateral and limited collaborations during the Trump era. Japan’s adoption of a more independent and pragmatic regional security approach in the post-Biden era could reshape the regional power dynamics in the Asia-Pacific.
Russia and China’s responses to this process will likely focus on achieving strategic alignment in Eurasia and the Asia-Pacific. In Eurasia, Russia may deepen its economic, diplomatic, and military ties with China to establish a joint defensive front against U.S. power-shifting policies in both Europe and Asia. The active involvement of allies such as North Korea in this bloc could further complicate regional equations. Additionally, China’s economic expansion policies under the Belt and Road Initiative and its infrastructure projects in the Asia-Pacific could increase the economic dependency of regional countries, weakening the influence of U.S.-led alliances. China’s hardening stance on Taiwan and its counter-strategies against U.S.-backed military maneuvers could further intensify regional security dynamics.
In this context, due to the U.S.’s lack of leadership and resource constraints, the formation of an “Asian NATO” as a concrete alliance is considered highly unlikely. Regional allies are expected to develop their security strategies more independently and pragmatically in the absence of direct U.S. leadership. Japan might adopt a more balanced approach to managing Taiwan tensions and countering China’s growing regional influence. Meanwhile, Russia and China could capitalize on this situation, expanding their existing collaborations to tilt the regional balance in their favor. In this sense, the idea of an alliance resembling NATO in the Asia-Pacific is likely to remain a political rhetoric and will not lead to a significant change in the regional security architecture. This scenario could herald a long-term geopolitical transformation that strengthens a multipolar order and weakens U.S. global leadership.
[1] Micah McCartney, “Japan’s New Leader Pushes Nuclear Weapons and Controversial ‘Asian NATO’”, Newsweek, https://www.newsweek.com/japan-prime-minister-ishiba-pushes-nuclear-weapons-asian-nato-1963059, (Access Date: 21.12.2024).
[2] Boldizsar Gyori, “Russia Must be Ready for Potential Conflict with NATO ‘within 10 years,’ Defense Minister Says”, The Kyiv Independent, https://kyivindependent.com/russia-preparing-for-possible-conflict-with-nato, (Access Date: 21.12.2024).
[3] “Gerasimov: Belyy dom Stremitsya Sozdat v ATR ‘Aziatskuyu NATO’”, TASS, https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/22703811, (Access Date: 21.12.2024).
[4] “Russia warns of emerging US-led ‘Asian NATO’”, News.Az, https://news.az/news/russia-warns-of-emerging-us-led-asian-nato, (Access Date: 21.12.2024).
[5] Guo Yuandan, “By Deploying Carrier Strike Group to Indo-Pacific for 1st Time in 40 years, France Aggravates Tensions in Aisa-Pacific: Expert”, Global Times, https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202412/1325358.shtml, (Access Date: 21.12.2024).
[6] “Koordinatsiya Voyennoy Pomoshchi Kiyevu pereshla ot SSHA k NATO”, Central Asia, https://centralasia.media/news:2207402, (Access Date: 21.12.2024).
