news

한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

editor's note:recently, when the situation in the south china sea has not completely eased, many european armies have organized a group to go to japan. what does the great power competition advocated by the united states have to do with the "asia-pacific version of nato"? what role does japan play in the united states' overall asia-pacific deployment? will the united states completely "untie" japan? this issue of "phoenix military aircraft division" invites military experts dong manyuan and zhang xuefeng to take you to explore the real source of tensions in the asia-pacific.

dialogue丨dong manyuan and zhang xuefeng

editor丨chen jiazhong

"phoenix military aircraft service": judging from the current chaotic situation in europe, nato's contribution to maintaining european security is quite limited. what role do nato-related countries and other european countries play in nato now?

dong manyuan:from the day nato was born as a tool of the cold war, it has actually been a strategic tool serving the united states' global hegemony. in the eyes of the united states, the status of these countries is unequal. for example, after turkey planned to purchase the s-400 air defense system from russia, it was pressured by the united states to exclude the country from the f-35 fighter jet project, and the originally promised 100 f-35 project also fell through.

turkish president erdogan has said that the purchase of the s-400 surface-to-air missile system does not require anyone's permission. (the picture shows the russian s-400 anti-aircraft missile)

but türkiye still insists on cooperating with russia in the military field. erdogan also threatened that if the united states does not provide f-35, it may turn to purchase russian-made su-57. moreover, russia and turkey also cooperate in the nuclear field. the first unit of turkey's first nuclear power plant has been completed. just imagine which other nato country would dare to buy russian weapons without being punished? in addition, whether it is the russia-ukraine conflict or the asian version of nato, there are many internal conflicts within nato and the internal strife is so severe that the french president even said that nato is brain dead.

zhang xuefeng:european countries do have different attitudes towards nato. the first is france. this country wants to integrate european defense. he believes that europe belongs to the europeans, and europe’s defense depends on europe. it cannot follow the lead of the united states, so it does not listen to the command of the united states. as one of the five permanent members of the united nations and one of the founding members of the european union, france's goal is to become the leader in europe.

it is difficult to rationally allocate interests, it is difficult for all countries to unify their views, and it is difficult to continue the path of european defense integration.

second is the united kingdom. after brexit, the country no longer wants to engage in defense integration with europe, including economically being tied up by some small european countries. therefore, it advocates relying on nato to protect europe. after all, for britain, it is better to follow the united states than to follow france.

"phoenix military aircraft service": what are the new trends in some regional military groups established by the united states in asia? what is the difference between these military blocs and the so-called "asian version of nato"?

dong manyuan:the "asian version of nato" was first proposed by japan. from koizumi to abe, they began to advocate this concept, and japan prefers to call it an "asian version of nato." because japan wants to mobilize all available forces to deal with china, in the past year or two, japan, south korea, australia and new zealand have been able to directly participate in nato summits. the topic is also how to cooperate with the so-called great power competition advocated by the united states.

the so-called "asian version of nato" has attracted close attention from a number of asian countries. in particular, it triggered a relatively obvious backlash from countries such as russia and north korea.

"phoenix military aircraft division": in recent years, military cooperation between japan and the united states has continued to deepen, and japan's military power has also expanded significantly. so if the so-called asian version of nato really emerges, japan seems to think that it will play a decisive role. what stage will the cooperation between the united states and japan enter in terms of long-range strike means, including other more intense offensive means?

zhang xuefeng:the united states may deploy intermediate-range missiles, also known as the "typhon" system, in japan. in fact, the united states adopted a "salami-slicing" strategy when deploying its intermediate-range missile system on an island chain. it first deployed it briefly in the philippines, where it was easy to deploy, and then took advantage of exercises to deploy it, and then switched to long-term deployment. because if this shore-based intermediate-range missile system is not deployed for a long time, it will be difficult to take advantage of its ability to launch at any time. after establishing a foothold in the philippines, the next step is to deploy to japan.

the picture shows the u.s. "typhon" intermediate-range missile system

in the future, the united states may deploy hypersonic missiles in japan with stronger penetration capabilities, wider coverage, and greater threats. it cannot even be ruled out that the intermediate-range missile systems deployed in the future may be equipped with nuclear warheads.

"phoenix military aircraft service": after visiting japan and south korea on september 12, the canadian defense minister clearly questioned the concept of an "asian version of nato". he believed that the factors of strategic competition in asia are very complex and are obviously different from europe, and that different measures should be adopted from nato. form. why did the canadian defense minister make a different sound than the united states and japan at this juncture?

dong manyuan:canada is backed by the united states and is a bi-oceanic country. there are no concerns about security issues. canada's biggest concern is the country's development. therefore, i think canada is more throwing cold water on the issue of "asian version of nato". the main goal is to seize more bargaining chips around canada's own economic interests. after all, the united states is piecing together an "asian version of nato" to support and the more countries that respond, the better. but the more different opinions there are, the more difficulties and concerns the united states will have, which will create opportunities and space for countries like canada to seize their own interests.

zhang xuefeng:every country in the asia-pacific region has different interests and conflicts, and it is difficult to bring them together. if canada wants to consider its own interests, it must understand its own position. canada recently updated its indo-pacific strategy, positioning itself as belonging to pacific countries rather than to the indo-pacific. however, the relationship between canada and indo-pacific countries is very close. for example, 6 of the 13 economies with which it has economic and trade relations are in the indo-pacific region, including many of its routes passing through the pacific.

if we build a so-called "asian version of nato" in the indo-pacific region, it will inevitably create more confrontations and conflicts, and may even break out into conflicts. as a result, canada's economic interests will inevitably be affected. so i think canada is thinking about it from the perspective of its economic interests and maintaining cooperation with the indo-pacific region. after all, canada also wants to make the transition of the indo-pacific region as smooth as possible to prevent its interests from being damaged.