The NATO Summit in Brussels wrapped up on Monday, with leaders taking important decisions to chart the Alliance’s course over the next decade and beyond.
NATO leaders reaffirmed the Alliance’s dual-track approach of defence and dialogue towards Russia. They also pledged to continue to support NATO partners Ukraine and Georgia, bringing them closer to the Alliance.
Leaders called on China to uphold its international commitments and to act responsibly in the international system. They agreed on the need to address the challenges posed by China’s growing influence and international policies, and to engage with China to defend NATO’s security interests.
Allied leaders agreed an ambitious NATO 2030 agenda to ensure the Alliance can face the challenges of today and tomorrow. They took decisions to strengthen political consultations, reinforce collective defence, enhance resilience, sharpen NATO’s technological edge, uphold the rules-based international order, step up training and capacity building for partners, and address the security impact of climate change.
They further agreed to develop NATO’s next Strategic Concept for the summit in 2022.
Sounds encouraging yet with many member’s budgets ravaged by COVID-19, the objectives need to be realistic. Britain is currently very focused on defence, however, the mood may not be shared by all countries regardless of what they pledge?
The UK’s COVID spending may yet undo at least some of the recent improvements in defence spending. Even if the don’t they only represent a repair to ‘some’ of the damage done over the last 30 to 40 years.
Hopefully, the bounce back will be strong enough to see the economiy recover to at least pre-COVID levels by the end of this year. May be the bounce back will have enough momentum to see the economy end up expanding past pre-COVID levels – we can but hope.
Interesting that NATO is talking about China to ‘defend NATO’s security interests’. Given that the only NATO time has invocated Article 5 was post 9/11 and led to the NATO operation in Afghanistan.
I wonder if that means that the precedent has been set for a NATO response to an attack on either the US or Canadians in the Pacific?
If it has then I suggest that NATO partners will have to do something about their defence spending sooner rather than later?
Cheers CR
The drums of war are far greater in the Far East than I was actually aware of. Heightened rhetoric between Australia and China is hotting up as are other nations in the area. The UK has already stated its aim to be a global force and its current carrier group operations are made up of several vessels from other navies, which will add additional budgetary pressures for them. The likelihood of conflict in this zone appears to be greater than say, in Eastern Europe, and North Koren ambitions only exacerbate the mix? The burning question must be the level of… Read more »
European nations, a majority, would not commit to any conflict in the far east. Notice the only “powers” involved in the current Rule Britannia scenario are old colonial powers. Holland, France. And the new colonial power the US. Australia is bullish under the present government, New Zealand? Well Jacinda is a weak link. We have seen the western reaction to the bloodshed in Burma, the weak condemnation of Chinese genocide on minorities and the Hong Kong farce. How long will Modi hold on in India? Taiwan will be the trigger, if the Chinese dare. And a manufactured crisis is not… Read more »
RUSSIA not a threat? Well firstly China has not dumped a chemical weapon on uk public park, and if putin is that desperate in his declining mess of country and even more so desperate to hold on to power then they are just as much of a threat to Nato as is China even more so.
Licence has always lead to conflict it’s just a matter of how dangerous such an outcome would be for World peace? As you say, there appears to be a growing number of circumstances where China is ignoring the international disquiet from its recent actions. Germany did just that in the 1930s as its forces grew exponentially and its leaders blanked international concerns. Equating which is more dangerous, Russia or China, both demonstrate a similar disregard for protocols, so are a risk to World peace. However, I do believe China poses a greater threat to stability. One thing is clear, the… Read more »
The fact is China can do whatever it wants now in the SCS. Its will illegally fish in other countries eez because the smaller countries have no ability to stand up to them. Sending a carrier group through it every couple of months isn’t going to intervene.
I’m not even sure the US would step in to defend Taiwan if China did invade. They would just take the sanctions route and hope that’s enough to put them off doing it.
Agree completely with what your saying… As for the US militarily defending Taiwan, I just don’t see it happening…. Same with Australia or any other Western Power…. The most I can see happening is them sending arms to the Taiwanese to defend themselves… most people don’t realise, No Western country recognises Taiwan as a country…. There are no Embassies, diplomatic recognition of the Taiwanese Government…. There are no formal defence treaties…. The only thing that all the Western Powers signed up for was recognising the Communist Mainland Chinese as the true Chinese government of all China, and giving the communist… Read more »
There has to be a line in the sand somewhere and if the powers dont intervene at any possible trouble in Taiwan that would seem to me to be a huge error, though I’m not knowledgeable enough of the logistics such a defence might be.
What do you mean by a line in the sand? The United Nations doesn’t recognise Taiwan as a country, just a province of China…. Even Taiwan doesn’t see itself as a seperate country,they have never declared independence…. Indeed until relatively recently they believed that they should rule over all China. All the western Powers basically don’t recognise Taiwan, so what government is going to send its soldiers, sailors and airmen to die in a conflict for something they don’t believe in themselves? As for drawing a line in the sand, I think it’s now at Scarborough Shoal, off the Phillipines….… Read more »
Equally it doesn’t matter how big a navy / armed force NATO has, it is not realistically going to go to war with China, as the western economy relies too heavily on China, and so the only solution is a political one, of offering china something it wants.
That’s been the biggest failure of Western Democracy over the last 20 years. We become completely reliant on cheap Chinese labour for manufacturing most of which is garage and built it into an economic power house while we stagnated. Germany in particular will never speak out against China for fear of hurting their exports as it is one of the few countries with a surplus with China.
At the end of the day they do no threaten Europe directly but I’m not comfortable with a dictatorship becoming the most powerful economy on the planet.
This is the foundation of NATO, if anyone attacks the US, any where on earth it will trigger Article 5.
China isn’t going to attack the US militarily, but it will retaliate to any US attack.
Andy,
I thought Article 5 and 6 only provided for attacks on members in Europe/North America or in general any ships/troops in the Med or North Atlantic, not anywhere in the world?
There’s full on arms race in East Asia but the US, S Koreans, Japanese & Aussies combined are a powerful counter to Communist Chinese ambitions. Past time we moved manufacturing we lemming-like gave away to China back nearer home where the profits don’t fund the military build up of a hostile power.
I think Jens Stoltenberg has done a good job. Whoever suceeds him will have a tough act to follow.
I’d prefer NATO to work with China to help provide universal security.
Great objectives, realisable only if funded. 2% GDP minimum must be acheived, more like 3% for us after we started fiddling our figures under Osborne.
Yet NATO does nothing about China who continues to hack into all of NATO’s partner nations networks and steal all our defense secrets not to mention being responsible for Covid spreading and producing more carbon than all other Western nations combine. The Chicoms must be laughing….
Bear in mind the US has done a fairly successful sweep of intelligence networks itself, brought to light by Edward Snowden! I just think the difference is that the Chinese are a bit more blunt about it, the western powers are a bit more discrete…
Enjoyed reading your posts Guys ,I would think we all know Russia or China don’t Respect the weak all need to put more in the Defence pot 🤑.NATO been asleep far to long .
Russia is undoubtedly the biggest threat to European security, with its malign military actions, cyber attacks, political agitprop interference in Western elections, assassinations etc. It really acts as a rogue state. But the far bigger long-term threat is the economic and military dominance of an unreformed China under its autocratic dictatorship, and how that will alter the global balance. History shows that the dominant economic/military power of the day attracts like-minded allies and supplicants into what become large economic and military blocs. The key, and unfortunately most likely, scenario is a Chinese-led autocratic bloc with Russia as a key component,… Read more »