Pawn or partner?: South Korea was one of the four Indo-Pacific countries invited to participate in the recent Nato summit in Washington. — AP
FOUR Indo-Pacific countries participated in the recent Nato summit in Washington, suggesting that the transatlantic military pact is looking to expand, if not in membership then certainly in power and influence, to other waters around the world.
Security concern about China is the one thing that Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea share with Nato members for these four countries to accept the invitation to attend as observers.
And as in previous summits, the gathering addressed concerns regarding the escalating tension in the Indo-Pacific and how best to deal with it. But while every country has a right to choose its allies to protect itself, the expansion of the United States-led Nato, given its recent record in Eastern Europe, will most likely contribute to rather than help de-escalate the tension in the Indo-Pacific.
Nato’s expansion is inviting trouble; the last thing the region needs today. Indonesia, either on its own or through Asean, should come out with a strong statement to reject Nato’s plan to project its power and influence in any form in this part of the world. As a middle power that has stayed true to its non-alignment principle amid the growing tension between the US and China, Indonesia should exert all its diplomatic resources to prevent the Indo-Pacific from turning into a theatre of war.
Interestingly, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese decided at the last minute to skip the summit, effectively demoting its significance to Canberra. In a press interview, Albanese saw Australia’s participation as irrelevant, saying, “as an observer country, we’re not there. We’re not in the room with the Nato members when that takes place”.
Leaders from Japan, New Zealand and South Korea attended the summit while the Australian defence minister is attending in Albanese’s stead. While the four Indo-Pacific countries may not be members, they have an identity as “IP-4” in Nato documents. With Albanese’s absence, make that “IP-3.5”.
As it stands, there are already too many military alliances and pacts muddying Indo-Pacific waters. Almost all of them have an aim to stop China’s growing power and influence in the region and beyond, with many countries inside and outside the region seeing Beijing as the biggest threat to their security and interests. These include the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) involving Australia, India, Japan and the US, the Aukus security partnership involving Australia, the United Kingdom and US, the recent Japan-Philippines-US trilateral summit as well as a plethora of old and new bilateral pacts, the latest one signed last week between Japan and the Philippines.
Many countries have come up with their own Indo-Pacific strategy, including those like the 27 members of the European Union that do not border the two oceans spanning the region, which includes the South China Sea, the most hotly contested part of the world.
The addition of Nato isn’t going to make this region any safer. The prolonged war in Ukraine should make obvious to all that its expansion will have the opposite effect. Russia’s 2022 invasion of its large southwesterly neighbour was triggered by Nato’s rapid expansion into Eastern Europe. Invading a sovereign nation is wrong, but who can stop a big power like Russia from taking an action it deems necessary when it feels threatened?
More than two years later, the war is still raging with devastating consequences not only for Ukraine, but also for many other countries around the world in terms of economic disruption, influx of refugees and for Nato members, budget spending. Likewise, who can stop China, an even bigger power than Russia, from taking action in the name of defending its security interests against any real or perceived threats?
The Indo-Pacific has so many potential flash points already, any of which could turn the ongoing cold war between China and the US into a hot war, including the tension in the Taiwan Strait and the heated situation in the South China Sea, where Beijing is flexing its muscle to enforce its claims over territories disputed by certain Southeast Asian countries. Bringing Nato into the region will not help. Aside from complicating the situation, its expansion only ensures that any war with China will remain conveniently far from its members on both sides of the Atlantic; members that will happily help any Indo-Pacific country in distress to fight a war with China, just as they are happy to help Ukraine fight its war with Russia.
In the latest twist to the tension in the South China Sea, China conducted this week a joint naval patrol with Russia in the Philippine Sea, an area that has been seeing increasing skirmishes of late between Beijing and Manila over their territorial dispute. If the name of the game is the containment or deterrence of China, there are still many avenues to pursue besides the military option.
The diplomatic course to help reduce the tension is far from exhausted. This is where Indonesia should come in. Unfortunately, we cannot hope too much from Asean in coming up with a united front, since some members are aligning with the US and others with China in the great power rivalry.
Non-aligned Indonesia still has leverage that comes from being a middle power, including its control of vital sea-lanes of communication in the South China Sea. Acting on its own rather than through Asean, Indonesia stands a better chance at making a difference in defusing the tension, which must include rejecting Nato’s expansion into this part of the world. — The Jakarta Post/ANN
Endy Bayuni is a senior editor at The Jakarta Post.
