The presence of the Prime Ministers of Japan, Republic of Korea, New Zealand and Deputy Prime Minster of Australia at the NATO Summit early this month is a clear indication that NATO has expanded the geographic mandate of the Alliance beyond Euro-Atlantic into the Indo-Pacific. The new Alliance partners are labelled “Indo Pacific 4” or IP4, and their respective leaders’ statements at the Summit clearly spell out the threat posed by China, Russia, and North Korea. NATO believes that the IP4 can add value to NATO’s policy discussions on “common global security challenges, such as cyber defence, resilience, technology, and the security implications of climate change, maritime security and arms control”.

In fact the new members have been waiting to formally join the Alliance since their first participation in 2022 NATO summit at Madrid Summit. They attended the 2023 Summit at Vilnius and the 75th anniversary of the NATO in 2024 was perhaps the most opportune moment, both symbolically as well as substantively, to join the Alliance.

There are at least two triggers which have prompted IP4 countries to join the NATO. First, the Chinese aggressive posturing flavoured with rapid advancements in military hardware as well as infrastructure enhancement in the South China has jolted the IP4 countries. Second, the 2024 Russia-North Korea Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership has not only changed the regional security environment but added a new dynamics in the region prompting these countries to focus on building deterrent capabilities through capacity building and security agreements-partnerships. In essence, IP4 countries joining an Alliance was a necessary option.

On their part, the IP4 countries offer NATO several military strategic assets to respond to crisis-conflict emanating from China, Russia and North Korea against them. A large number of operational military bases belonging to Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand are primed for the deployment of ships, aircraft and troops of NATO member states. The US already has significant military presence in the region and numerous bases and facilities at Guam, Hawaii, Wake Island and Tinian and Pagan are being augmented. For instance, a “defensive ring” is planned for Guam for a “360-degree persistent and integrated air defense capability” and for Hawaii, plans envisage “additional funding for missile defense priorities, including the Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor, components for an eight Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) battery, Homeland Defense Radar-Hawaii, and additional SM-3IIA interceptors” The US continues to maintain a credible operational posturing involving naval and air exercises whose frequency, intensity and quality has improved significantly in recent times.

However an interesting limitation about NATO’s obligation and commitment in the Indo Pacific is that it is not mandated to cover the US territories of Hawaii archipelago and Guam which are important US military base. This exclusion is due to the fact that NATO came into being a decade before Hawaii became a state of the US. Furthermore, Article 6 clarifies that under NATO Treaty Article 5 “protections only apply to land, forces, vessels or aircraft north of the Tropic of Cancer”. Under the circumstances, Hawaii and Guam which are south of that line cannot be covered by NATO.

Be that as it may, China reacted to IP4 joining the NATO and the Chinese foreign ministry accused the Alliance of “breaching its boundary, expanding its mandate, reaching beyond its defense zone and stoking confrontation.” A scholar at the School of International Studies at Nanjing University in eastern China notes with concern that NATO’s engagements in the Asia Pacific through the alliance members tantamount to interference in the regional security and labelling China as an adversary. “NATO should consider China as a positive force for the regional peace and stability and for global security…We also hope the Ukraine war can end as soon as possible ... and we have rejected a return to the triangular relation with Russia and North Korea.”

Among the other Indo Pacific countries, the Philippines can be expected to join the NATO in the future given that it has been under near continuous coercion and intimidation by China whose Navy, Coast Guard and the maritime militia have ben clashing with the Philippines military over disputed/claimed features in South China Sea.

India’s foreign policy choices of ‘strategic autonomy’ and ‘multi-alignment’ preclude New Delhi to join the NATO. In fact India has avoided joining any military alliances since independence and has chosen ‘partnerships’ as a tool to conduct international relations. It has professed non-alignment and spearheaded it to spread it across regions even during the Cold War. Apparently, in 2023, the US had promoted the idea of “NATO Plus,” a coalition comprising of Australia, Japan, Israel, New Zealand, and South Korea, “aimed at enhancing global defence cooperation” particularly to “streamline and expedite the process for India to acquire the latest military technology”.  However, the offer was declined and Foreign Minister stated that “NATO template does not apply to India”.

Dr. Vijay Sakhuja is Professor and Head, Center of Excellence for Geopolitics and International Studies (CEGIS), REVA University, Bengaluru and is associated with Kalinga International Foundation, New Delhi.