Credit: ASEAN
By Palitha Kohona
COLOMBO, Sri Lanka, Jul 18 2025 – Who in Asia would ask for an Asian NATO? Past attempts to develop Asian security compacts under US leadership have not been glittering successes. The two treaty organisations that the US set up in the 50s to counter the Communist tide, the CENTO and the SEATO, have long dissipated.
Indo-China was taken over by the Communists, despite American and allied military interventions, the large-scale bombing, the devastation of countries and the loss of millions of lives.
Now the countries targeted, having survived the US led interventions, and having adopted liberal economic approaches, are thriving. Today the Indo-Chinese countries have mutually beneficial economic and political relations with China.
China has invested billions to develop infrastructure in the Indo-China region under its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the economic benefits are palpable.
Over one billion USD has been invested in the region and beyond under the BRI with the goal of realising a common prosperous future. The strengthening economic ties would seem to outweigh any need for new military alliances.
After the ouster of the Shah in Iran, Central Asia has become a quagmire for US and Western interests. Despite the expenditure of billions, repeated military interventions and millions of deaths, mainly of non-combatants, no one would suggest that peace has dawned on the Central Asian region covered by CENTO.
The ten ASEAN countries have developed an intertwined economic relationship with China and have benefitted hugely from the bilateral free trade agreement. Today China has replaced the US as the main trading partner of ASEAN, with bilateral trade reaching almost a billion US Dollars.
Goods produced in ASEAN, including fruits and vegetables, have ready access to the lucrative Chinese market and millions of Chinese tourists are pouring into ASEAN countries. The bilateral student exchange is thriving with Chinese students accessing educational opportunities, particularly in Singapore and Malaysia.
Admittedly, there could be flash points in the South China Sea, highlighted, and at times exaggerate in particular, by the Western media. But given the nature of the strengthening bilateral economic and people to people relationship between ASEAN and China and the historical depth of their ties, left to themselves, it is likely that the countries of the region will resolve their differences on their own. No one from the region has, so far, proposed a military alliance to resolve their differences.
It is instructive that within days of the US announcing punitive tariffs on Australian copper and pharmaceutical exports, Prime Minister Albanese of Australia was in China with a high powered trade delegation promoting trade and tourism. China is Australia’s largest trading partner and is unlikely to be eager to upset the apple cart (beef market?) by promoting a defence arrangement targeting China.
Australian exports to China amounted to AUD 196 billion in 2024 and are growing. Australia’s exports to China have a significant positive impact on the living standards of average Australians.
The QUAD involving the US, Japan, Australia and India, although promoted with much hype when it was first created, has in recent times become less prominent.
China is nuclear armed but has a no-first-use policy. Nuclear armed North Korea has a policy centred on deterring attacks. In the circumstances to promote a NATO type arrangement in East and South East Asia as a deterrent would seem excessive and provocative. China has only one base outside mainland China (In Djibouti) to counter piracy in the region.
North Korea has none. China nor North Korea have any defence oriented military personnel outside their own territories. The US has thousands of military personnel in bases surrounding China. The US pivot to Asia had China in its cross hairs. It is the US that has identified China as a strategic threat not the other way around.
The best way to reduce real and imaginary tensions (some stoked intentionally), would be to encourage parties to engage in dialogue with each other. A fractured world needs peace, not more conflict, for human progress.
What we require are alliances that promote infrastructure development for developing countries, that address the threat of climate change and sea level rise, which strive to eliminate extreme poverty, and which will make the world a better place for the living and for future generations.
In the past, US military incursions in the region did not produce peace. On the contrary, the progress of countries was dramatically curtailed, thousands of combatants and civilians died and millions were maimed. We must learn from the past painful experiences.
Dr Palitha Kohona is former chief of the UN Treaty section, a former Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations, and until recently, Ambassador to China.
IPS UN Bureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);
