Asia pivot advantage.docx - Contention 1 is the Asia pivot...

Contention 1 is the Asia pivot
Right now, NATO is pivoting to Asia.
Morcos 21 of CSIS writes that
As NATO leaders gathered
in London in December 2019, Secretary
General
Jens
Stoltenberg made repeated calls on the
need for the alliance to adapt to
a new challenge for NATO:
China.
In particular,
Stavirdis 21 writes that
This is largely at the behest of the U.S., which is looking for a strong transatlantic partnership to balance Beijing. Europe is waking up to
the dangers of China’s sweeping claims of territory in the vast South China Sea; of efforts to dominate neighbors, including Taiwan;
aggressive behavior toward India (a potentially vital Western partner in the Indo-Pacific); unfair trade and tariff practices; intellectual
property theft; support of North Korea; and offensive cyber-operations. The growing diplomatic condominium between China and
Russia — coordinating their militaries and international policies from the North Pacific to Middle East to the eastern Mediterranean —
is also a concern
.
Over the coming months,
the U.S. will press on NATO allies to “put their ships where their mouth
is,”[and
] i.e.,
deploy maritime forces to the Pacific for operations alongside
U.S. carrier strike groups in
the South China
Sea . The British are already sending a formidable force centered on their brand-new 65,000-ton
carrier, the Queen Elizabeth. The French and Germans have also shown commitment, and there
is serious discussion of a NATO standing maritime task force in the Pacific
This causes a tradeoff.
Erlanger of the new york times writes that
Some NATO members, especially those nearest to Russia in Central and Eastern Europe and
the Baltic nations, are anxious that the
shift in focus to China does not divert resources and attention from the Russian threat.
Moreover, Sensharma 20 elaborates that
Amid the escalating tensions between Beijing and New Delhi, the United States of America (USA)
on Thursday said that the White House is reviewing the global deployment of its forces to
counter the threat posed by China to India, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. US Secretary
of State Mike Pompeo said on Thursday the review is being done at the direction from President
Donald Trump. Pompeo further said that US is reducing the number of its troops in Germany
from about 52,000 to 25,000, adding that the force posture would be dictated by the ground
realities.
Unfortunately, Clegg writes that
The disputes in the East and South China Seas have a real potential to blow up into a direct
military confrontation between the contending states. If Japan, free of the constraints of Article
9, were to engage in war with China, or if the Sino-Philippines dispute were similarly to escalate,
possibly drawing in Japan’s support, the US would be obliged to go to their defence. These
disputes then set the stage for a dangerous rivalry between the two nuclear-armed superpowers
of US and China. Especially given the complications of the Sino-Japanese relationship and the US-
Japanese treaty obligations, the scope for misunderstanding and miscalculation between China
and the US is huge, their relations potentially more volatile than those between the US and USSR