College Public Policy

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation has traditionally been a forum for military and political cooperation between North America and Europe. However, in a globalized 21^st century where actions in one part of the world affect others millions of miles away, it is clear that NATO needs to work with other countries to accomplish its goals. Therefore, it was encouraging to hear NATO Secretary General Anders Rasmussen advocate for the alliance to develop more global partnerships on July 4, 2012 at Chatham House.

The majority of Rasmussen’s talk focused on the need for NATO to deliver security through partnerships with other countries. He argued that NATO cannot deal with security challenges solely from a European perspective, but rather should develop a global viewpoint. To showcase the previous success of NATO partnerships, he highlighted the military assistance and political legitimacy NATO’s partners have provided to NATO missions, including in Afghanistan and Libya.

One of the key partners Rasmussen highlighted was Russia because of NATO’s historically tense relationship with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Given that neither side need to be wary of the other’s ambitions in contemporary times, he advocated for both sides to break out of the Cold War mentality and seek avenues of mutual cooperation. The Secretary General was hopeful that younger generations without Cold War biases would be able to improve relations between Russia and the West.

The most interesting aspect of Rasmussen’s talk was his recommendation for NATO to develop partnerships with rising powers, particularly China and India. Given China’s permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council and global role, he advocated for NATO to develop a more active and cooperative dialogue with this powerful Asian country.

I found this recommendation to be particularly insightful as a means for improving the Chinese-West relationship. China’s rise and the West’s relative decline has created tension between the two sides, with some analysts even predicting
conflict during this power transition. However, such conflict is not evitable if misperceptions on both sides are corrected and effective collaboration is established. Launching a strategic China-NATO dialogue would reduce uncertainty about both sides’ military ambitions and serve as a forum for enhancing cooperation and resolving disputes.

However, it remains unclear whether Rasmussen’s ideas about global partnerships will come to fruition. While the Secretary General might have a vision for the organisation, it is ultimately up to NATO member states to make key decisions in this intergovernmental institution. Due to the underlying scepticism between the United States and China about each other’s ambitions in the Asia-Pacific region, the NATO secretariat will need to work tirelessly to persuade both
sides to sign up for such an agreement. The transatlantic partners, whose NATO alliance serves as a pillar of the international community, should seek to develop better partnerships with other counties for the sake of international
peace and security.