This week’s NATO summit was significant for a whole host of reasons that have already been picked over extensively. From an agreement paving the way toward the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO to President Biden’s decision to base U.S. troops in Poland, there were several notable announcements that resulted from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Another development worth pointing out: The alliance explicitly acknowledged the danger of the “no-limits” partnership between Russia and China.
The strategic-concept document that made reference to that alignment did not specifically use that language, which refers to the outcome of a meeting between Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping on February 4. However, the strategy clearly took aim at the partnership they declared on that occasion.
The NATO strategy, which identified China as a security concern for the first time, ran through the numerous ways in which Beijing’s policies are a growing concern:
The PRC employs a broad range of political, economic and military tools to increase its global footprint and project power, while remaining opaque about its strategy, intentions and military build-up. The PRC’s malicious hybrid and cyber operations and its confrontational rhetoric and disinformation target Allies and harm Alliance security. The PRC seeks to control key technological and industrial sectors, critical infrastructure, and strategic materials and supply chains. It uses its economic leverage to create strategic dependencies and enhance its influence. It strives to subvert the rules-based international order, including in the space, cyber and maritime domains.
The document then proceeds to make a short statement to outline its concern about Sino-Russian alignment: “The deepening strategic partnership between the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federation and their mutually reinforcing attempts to undercut the rules-based international order run counter to our values and interests.”
U.S. officials have said on multiple occasions that there’s currently no reason to believe that China has sent Russia weapons or equipment to aid its invasion of Ukraine. Nevertheless, the stated drive toward cooperation between the two countries, repeated multiple times over the past few months during conversations between their top officials, is rightly raising alarm in Western capitals.
This is a trend that some of the president’s likely conservative challengers have already integrated into their messaging on foreign policy, and it’s a worthwhile topic that he and his top aides also ought to put at the center of their efforts to educate Americans about the threat from these dictatorships.