Analysts skeptical about potential of ‘Asian NATO’

 

Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba delivers his policy speech at the extraordinary session of parliament's lower house Nov. 29, 2024, in Tokyo.

Taipei, Taiwan —

Japanese Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru has been actively advocating for the establishment of a collective security alliance in Asia similar to that of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Europe and North America.

Japan’s ruling Liberal Democratic Party set up a new committee in November specifically to discuss this “Asian NATO” concept. However, such an ambitious plan is unlikely to take place under the second term of U.S.-elect President Donald Trump, according to experts.

Ishiba has reportedly advocated for bolstering regional deterrence by integrating existing security frameworks such as the ANZUS Security Treaty between the United States, Australia and New Zealand; the U.S.-Japan Alliance; and the U.S.-South Korea Alliance.

He outlined his vision in a paper to the Washington-based Hudson Institute in September, arguing that such an alliance would deter China from using military force in Asia.

"The absence of a collective self-defense system like NATO in Asia means that wars are likely to break out because there is no obligation for mutual defense," he wrote.

However, the proposal has encountered significant resistance, including opposition from China, concerns from ASEAN nations and even U.S. skepticism.

Feasibility doubtful

Koichi Nakano, a visiting scholar on U.S.-Japan relations at Harvard University’s Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, was skeptical that the U.S. would support an “Asian NATO” proposal.

“Ishiba’s personal advocacy is based on his view that [a] U.S.-Japan alliance should be placed on a more equal footing. And it is also connected to his parallel argument that there should be nuclear sharing with Japan. In other words, it is with an aim at constraining U.S. unilateralism,” Nakano said.

“All of this is exactly what President-elect [Donald] Trump does not want. He doesn\’t even like NATO in the first place, and there is zero reason to think that he would want to have an Asian version of it,” he said.

Trump has pledged that “NATO’s purpose and NATO’s mission” will be fundamentally changed in his new administration. During his first term as president, he reduced defense spending to the alliance, saying America spent more than other countries in the organization.

Officials in the Biden administration have also been skeptical of the Asian NATO proposal.

Stephen Nagy, a professor of politics and international studies at Tokyo’s International Christian University, also said a “Asian NATO” is neither realistic nor achievable.

“An Asian NATO may not necessarily be a negative initiative,” Nagy said. “On the contrary, it may help stakeholders align their strategic thinking on security concerns on the region and find ways to cooperate with each other to deal with traditional and non-traditional security challenges.”

However, Nagy said that minilateral cooperation, which involves a small group of countries working together on specific issues, is more feasible than the “Asian NATO” concept.

“Establishing and maintaining various forms of minilateral cooperation such as the Quad [Australia, India, Japan and the United States]; the Squad [United States, Japan, Australia and the Philippines]; the Manila-Tokyo-Washington minilateral; the Camp David-based cooperation between Seoul, Tokyo and Washington, will be more realistic and accrue security and diplomatic results compared to an Asian NATO multilateral project,” he said.

John Chuan Tiong Lim, a research fellow on East Asian and international relations at the University of Tokyo, said that the idea of an “Asian NATO” faces significant obstacles, including Japan\’s constitutional restrictions under Article 9, which prohibits the country from engaging in collective warfare. This would make it impossible for Japan to replicate NATO\’s European model directly, he said.

Voter support?

In addition to major powers in the Indo-Pacific, Ishiba needs public support.

“There is little interest in foreign and security policy among the Japanese voters, and if anything, the increasing cost attached to the recent drive for remilitarization is likely to lead to a loss of votes for the ruling party,” Harvard’s Nakano said.

Lim also noted that Ishiba did not bring up such a concept during his meeting in Peru with U.S. President Joe Biden in November. Still, Lim emphasized that the proposal remains alive within the LDP. The fact that it continues to be discussed within the party indicates that Ishiba has not abandoned his push for the idea.

Nagy observed that Japan\’s growing security concerns, particularly following Russia\’s invasion of Ukraine and China\’s actions in Hong Kong, have intensified the public’s focus on national security.

“If Ishiba survives in office after the Upper House election in the summer of 2025, I don\’t see the LDP or the public fundamentally shifting their position on an Asian NATO,” Nagy said.

Future security cooperation

In addition to the U.S., Ishiba is trying to establish closer cooperation with other regional powers in the Indo-Pacific such as South Korea. He once served as Japan\’s defense minister and is very familiar with defense affairs. He also met with South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol in October and plans to visit South Korea in January, which will be his first visit since he became prime minister.

“South Korea’s Yoon Suk Yeol might share Ishiba’s interest in trying to anchor the U.S. under Trump to a trilateral framework, but he is also deeply unpopular among the voters,” Nakano said.

“They share the common fear that Trump would bypass them and directly get into a negotiation and even a ‘deal’ of some sort with China or North Korea,” he added.

Nakano believes the best option for Japan now is to seek closer relations with Beijing.

“If Japan wants to secure and defend its national interest, the only logical thing to do now is to increase dialogue and cooperation with China and hedge against the risks that the U.S. has now turned into,” he said.

Lim said that all parties are currently waiting to see the U.S. foreign policy direction after Trump\’s inauguration. In the meantime, existing mechanisms are being institutionalized.

"What can be done now is being done first, with the hope of aligning with the new era under Trump’s leadership," he said.

Some information for this report came from Reuters.

 

By：VOA