NATO-People’s Republic of China Competition

Abstract

The rise of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in economic, technologocial, and political areas is the most serious systemic challenge to the Atlantic bloc after the end of the Cold War. During the era of the U.S. President Donald Trump, the measures against PRC’s rising remained one-sided due to Trump’s suspicions againts NATO alliance. With the election of Joe Biden to the U.S. presidency, his policy of strengthening transatlantic alliance enabled NATO to adopt a common approach concerning the PRC. The PRC’s support to Russia in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, its measures against Uyghur population in Xinjiang, and its strong language in Taiwan issue are factors that led to change in Europe’s threat perception. Thus, European countries started to side with the USA concerning the PRC. NATO identified the PRC as a systemic challenger in 2021 and announced that it will act cooperatively against the security threats that PRC caused. NATO identified political, economic, and digital spheres competition areas with the PRC. It should be expected that NATO will strengthen its partnerships in the Asia-Pacific region; solidify cooperation between the USA and European countries to provide common approach concerning the PRC; and adopt an active position in cybersecurity to counter the activities of the PRC in the cyber area.

Keywords

• NATO
• the People’s Republic of China
• the USA
• the EU
• Competition

NATO-Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti Rekabeti

Abstract

Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti’nin (ÇHC) ekonomik, teknolojik ve siyasi alanlarında yükselişi, Soğuk Savaş’ın sona ermesinden sonra, Atlantik bloğuna yönelen en ciddi sistemik meydan okumadır. Amerika Birleşik Devletleri (ABD) Başkanı Donald Trump döneminde ÇHC’nin bu yükselişine yönelik önlemler, Trump’ın NATO ittifakına yönelik şüpheci tavrı nedeniyle tek taraflı olarak kalmıştır. Joe Biden’ın ABD başkanlığına seçilmesiyle transatlantik ittifakını güçlendiren politikası NATO’nun ÇHC konusunda ortak bir tutum almasını kolaylaştırmıştır. ÇHC’nin Rusya’nın Ukrayna işgalinde Rusya’yı destekleyen bir tutum alması, Şincan bölgesinde Uygurlara yönelik uygulamaları ve Tayvan konusunda sertleşen üslubu Avrupa’nın ÇHC konusundaki tehdit algılamasını değiştiren faktörlerdir. Böylece, Avrupalı ülkeler de ÇHC konusunda ABD ile benzer konuma gelmeye başlamıştır. NATO, 2021 yılında ÇHC’yi sistemik bir meydan okuyucu olarak tanımlamış ve 2022 yılında da ÇHC’nin neden olduğu güvenlik tehditleri karşısında ortak hareket edeceğini açıklamıştır. NATO, politik, ekonomik ve dijital alanları ÇHC ile rekabet alanları olarak tanımlamıştır. NATO’nun ÇHC ile mücadele kapsamında Asya-Pasifik bölgesinde ortaklıklarını güçlendireceği, politik olarak ABD-Avrupa ülkeleri arasında ÇHC konusunda ortak bir tutum almak için iş birliğini tahkim edeceği ve ÇHC’nin siber alandaki faaliyetleri için siber güvenlik alanında aktif bir pozisyon alacağı beklenmelidir.

Keywords

• NATO
• Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti
• ABD
• AB
• rekabet

References

1. Adamczyk, M ve Rutkowska, P. (2017). China and Asia-Pacific region in China’s military strategy. Torun International Studies, 1(10), 83-99.
2. Allison, G. (2015). The Thucydides trap: Are the U.S. and China headed for war? Erişim adresi: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/09/united-states-china-war-thucydides-trap/406756/
3. Artecona, R., Perrotti, D., ve Welslau, L. (2022). China and Latin America and the Caribbean Exports competition in the United States market. Santiago: United Nations.
4. Avrupa Komisyonu. (2021). Global gateway. Erişim adresi: https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/stronger-europe-world/global-gateway_en
5. Avrupa Parlamentosu. (2022). MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the human rights situation in Xinjiang, including the Xinjiang police files. Erişim adresi: https://www.rferl.org/a/europe-china-uyghurs-genocide/31891097.html
6. Bechná, Z. ve Thayer, B. A. (2016). NATO’s new role The alliance’s response to a rising China. Naval War College Review, 69(3), 65–81.
7. Beyaz Saray. (2021). FACT SHEET: President Biden and G7 leaders launch Build Back Better World (B3W) Partnership. Erişim adresi: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/12/fact-sheet-president-biden-and-g7-leaders-launch-build-back-better-world-b3w-partnership/
8. Bloch, A. ve Goldgeier, J. (2021). Finding the right role for NATO in addressing China and climate change. Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

9. Brzozowski, A., Noyan, O. ve Bourgery, T. (2022). EU still split over China’s ‘threat or challenge.’ Erişim adresi: https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/eu-still-split-over-chinas-threat-or-challenge/
10. Castleberry-Hernandez, A. (2023). The US response to China’s strategic competition in the Middle East and North Africa. Orbis, 67(1), 16-20.
11. CCDCOE. (2021). NATO needs a multinational effort to secure 5G networks. Erişim adresi: https://ccdcoe.org/news/2021/experts-concluded-that-nato-needs-a-multinational-effort-to-secure-supply-chain-and-networks-of-commercial-and-military-5g-networks/
12. Chatzky, A. ve McBride, J. (2020). China’s massive Belt and Road Initiative. Erişim adresi:. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/chinas-massive-belt-and-road-initiative
13. Checking China: What is the Quad alliance. (2022). Erişim adresi: https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/quad-meet-quad-meeting-in-tokyo-checking-china-with-asian-nato-what-is-the-quad-alliance-3003474
14. Chellaney, B. (2017). China’s debt-trap diplomacy. Erişim adresi: https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/chinas-debt-trap-diplomacy/
15. China Aerospace Studies Institute. (2022). In their own words: Why China thinks “NATO is a ‘systemic challenge’ to global security and stability”. Erişim adresi: https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/CASI/documents/Translations/2022-08-26%20NATO%20is%20a%20Threat%20to%20the%20Global%20Order.pdf?ver=IkYdxnRXms-muRtY9I-bnA%3D%3D×tamp=1662148305851
16. China’s Belt and Road Initiative in the global trade, investment and finance landscape. (2018). Paris: OECD.
17. China overtakes US as EU’s biggest trading partner. (2021). Erişim adresi: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56093378
18. Conklin, A. (2022). Chinese cyberattacks on NATO countries increase 116% since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: study. Erişim adresi: https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/chinese-cyberattacks-nato-increase-ukraine
19. Council on Foreign Relations. (2020). Assessing China’s Digital Silk Road Initiative. https://www.cfr.org/china-digital-silk-road/
20. Danilin, I. (2020). The U.S.-China technological war: Digital technologies as a new factor of world politics?, Russia in Global Affairs, 78-96.
21. Darıcılı, A.B. ve Özdal, B. (2018). Analysis of the cyber security strategies of People’s Republic of China. Güvenlik Stratejileri, 28, 1-35.
22. Domecq, J. (2019). Strategic autonomy calls for more cooperation less rhetoric. European Defence Matters, 18, 28–31.
23. Dou, E. ve Wu, P. L. (2022, Mart 5). China says it seeks to ‘resolve’ Taiwan question, amid comparisons to Ukraine. Erişim adresi: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/05/china-taiwan-ukraine-report/
24. Erskine, A. (2021). NATO, AUKUS & The Indo-Pacific: Further proof of intra-alliance friction. Erişim adresi: https://natoassociation.ca/nato-aukus-the-indo-pacific-further-proof-of-intra-alliance-friction/
25. EU-China trade and investment relations in challenging times. (2020). Strazburg: Avrupa Parlamentosu.
26. Fortier, M. (2022). China’s 5G Technology in the NATO alliance: A Case Study on Italy. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato2030fellowship.org/china-s-5g-technology-in-nato
27. France’s Macron pushes for “true European army. (201(). Erişim adresi: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46108633.
28. Friis, K. ve Lysne, O. (2021). Huawei, 5G and security: Technological limitations and political responses. Development and Change, 52(5), 1174–1195.
29. Garamone, J. (2021). NATO Stands Together as Biden Reaffirms U.S. Commitment to Alliance. Erişim adresi: https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/2658794/nato-stands-together-as-biden-reaffirms-us-commitment-to-alliance/
30. Gilli, A. ve Bechis, F. (2020). NATO and the 5G challenge. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2020/09/30/nato-and-the-5g-challenge/index.html
31. Green Belt and Road Initiative Center. (2021). Countries of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Erişim adresi: https://green-bri.org/countries-of-the-belt-and-road-initiative-bri/
32. Gulick, E. V. (1955). Europe's classical balance of power. New York: W.W. Norton
33. Haeck, P. ve Kijewski, L. (2022). Why Europe needs Taiwan. Erişim adresi: https://www.politico.eu/article/nancy-pelosi-us-china-tensions-european-union-needs-taiwan/
34. He, K. ve Feng, H. (2023). International order transition and US-China strategic competition in the indo-Pacific. Pacific Review, 36(2), 234-260.
35. Herrero, A. G. (2019). Europe in the midst of China-US strategic economic competition: What are the European Union’s options? Erişim adresi: https://www.bruegel.org/sites/default/files/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/US_China_strategic_competition_EU_080419.pdf.
36. Herzinger, B. (2021). NATO’s China problem. Turkish Policy Quarterly, 20(2), 45-53.
37. Hinsley, F.H. (1967). Power and pursuit of peace: Theory and practice in the history of relations between states. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. Holslag, J. (2019). China, NATO, and the pitfall of empty engagement. The Washington Quarterly, 42(3), 137–150.
39. India says will study Biden’s infrastructure plan that rivals China’s Belt and Road Initiative. (2021, Haziran 13). Erişim adresi: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/india-says-will-study-bidens-infrastructure-plan-that-rivals-chinas-belt-and-road-initiative/articleshow/83487215.cms
40. Jinping, X. (2014). The governance of China. Pekin: Foreign Language Press Co. Ltd.
41. Kaim, M. ve Stanzel, A. (2022). The rise of China and NATO’s new strategic concept. NDC Policy Brief, 4, 1–4.
42. Kapustina, L., Lipkova, L., Silin, Y. ve Drevalev, A. (2020). US-China trade war: Causes and outcomes. SHS Web of Conferences, 73, 1–13.
43. Kishida seeks major upgrade of NATO partnership after Russia’s war. (2022, Haziran 30). Erişim adresi: https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2022/06/30/national/fumio-kishida-nato-ties/
44. Larsen, H. (2020). China’s rise can unite NATO. Policy Perspectives, 8(13), 1–4.
45. Maasho, A. (2018). Africa should avoid forfeiting sovereignty to China over loans: Tillerson. Erişim adresi:. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-africa-idUSKCN1GK114
46. Machi, V. (2022). NATO wants a say in 5G standardization talks. Erişim adresi: https://www.defensenews.com/battlefield-tech/it-networks/5g/2022/03/22/nato-wants-a-say-in-5g-standardization-talks/
47. Mancuso, M., Mullick, S., ve Iloulian, J. (2021). Cyber threats from North Korea and China: Risks and recommendations. The Review of Banking & Financial Services, 37(3), 31–41.
48. Mehra, J. (2022). An evolving agenda for the Quad. Erişim adresi: https://www.stimson.org/2022/an-evolving-agenda-for-the-quad/
49. Morcos, P. (2021). ‘Lifting up our Values at home’: How to revitalize NATO’s political cohesion. Erişim adresi: https://www.csis.org/analysis/lifting-our-values-home-how-revitalize-natos-political-cohesion
50. Morgenthau, H. J. (1948). Politics among nations: The struggle for power and peace. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
51. NATO. (t.y.). What’s NATO? Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/nato-welcome/index.html#:~:text=NATO is an alliance of,multinational crisis-management operations together.
52. NATO. (2016). Cyber Defence Pledge. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_133177.htm
53. NATO. (2019). London Declaration. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_171584.htm
54. NATO. (2020). Speech by NATO Deputy Secretary General Mircea Geoana at the CYBERSEC GLOBAL 2020 virtual conference. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_178335.htm
55. NATO. (2021a). Brussels Summit Communiqué. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_185000.htm
56. NATO. (2021b). Speech by NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg at the Raisina Dialogue 2021 conference. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_183011.htm?selectedLocale=ru
57. NATO. (2021c). Relations with partners across the globe. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49188.htm
58. NATO. (2021d). NATO 2030. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2021/6/pdf/2106-factsheet-nato2030-en.pdf
59. NATO. (2022a) NATO 2022 Strategic Concept. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2022/6/pdf/290622-strategic-concept.pdf
60. NATO. (2022b). Emerging and disruptive technologies. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_184303.htm#:~:text=Technologies such as artificial intelligence,and the way NATO operates.
61. NATO chief says on Huawei: UK review of 5G security is important. 2020. Erişim adresi: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-huawei-nato-idUSKBN23H0US
62. NATO Parliamentary Assembly. (2021). NATO PA President’s statement on the attribution of large-scale cyber hacks to China. Erişim adresi: https://www.nato-pa.int/news/nato-pa-presidents-statement-attribution-large-scale-cyber-hacks-china
63. NATO’s purpose after the Cold War. (2016). Erişim adresi: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/reportch1.pdf
64. Nouwens, M. (2022). NATO and digital cooperation with the Indo-Pacific. Erişim adresi: https://www.gmfus.org/news/nato-and-digital-cooperation-indo-pacific
65. Nouwens, M. ve Legarda, H. (2020). China’s rise as a global security actor: Implications for NATO. IISS The International Institute for Strategic Studies.
66. Odgaard, L. (2022). NATO’s China role: Defending cyber and outer space. The Washington Quarterly 45 (1),167–183.
67. Otero-Iglesias, M. ve Esteban, M. (2020). Introduction. M. Otero-Iglesias ve M. Esteban (Ed.), Europe in the face of US-China rivalry, içinde (ss. 19-35). Madrid: The ETNC.
68. Panda, J. (2022). Is ‘AUKUS plus’ a viable option? Erişim Adresi: https://thediplomat.com/2022/01/is-aukus-plus-a-viable-option/
69. Panda, J. P. (2022). Shifting China-NATO relations: From selective cooperation to strategic Rivalry? Erişim adresi: https://jamestown.org/program/shifting-china-nato-relations-from-selective-cooperation-to-strategic-rivalry/
70. Panda, J. ve Parrikar, M. (2022). Between AUKUS and the Quad scaling European interest in the Indo-Pacific. Lahey: The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies.
71. QUAD Is ‘dangerous’, akin to NATO’s eastward expansion in Europe: China. (2022). Erişim adresi: https://www.outlookindia.com/international/quad-is-dangerous-akin-to-nato-s-eastward-expansion-in-europe-china-news-187758.
72. Qi, H. (2019). China-U.S. institutional balancing in the Asia-Pacific and its implications to China’s foreign policy choices. Asian Journal of International Studies, 24(1), 1-19.
73. Sakman, T. (2021). ABD-Çin küresel rekabetinde yeni dönem: B3W. Erişim adresi: https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/analiz/abd-cin-kuresel-rekabetinde-yeni-donem-b3w/2303973#
74. Saeed, M. (2017). From the Asia-Pacific to the Indo-Pacific: Expanding Sino-U.S. strategic competition. China Quarterly of International Strategic Studies, 3(4), 499-512.
75. Schneider, J. ve Compton, O. (2021). Towards coexistence and cooperation: NATO and China. Toronto: The NATO Association of Canada.
76. Shambach, M. ve Gallo, A. (2022). NATO’s strategic awakening with China. Erişim adresi: https://thehill.com/opinion/international/3568349-natos-strategic-awakening-with-china/
77. Singh, T. (2023). China and the Indo-Pacific.New Delhi: Indian Council of World Affairs.
78. Smith, J. M. (2020). The Quad 2.0: A foundation for a free and open Indo–Pacific. Backgrounder, 3481, 1–29.
79. Simon. L., Desmaele, L., ve Becker, J. (2021). Europe as a secondary theater? Competition with China and the future of America’s European strategy. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 90-115.
80. Speranza, L. ve Crawford, J. (2021). Making 5G an ally of the Euro-Atlantic area. Erişim adresi: https://cepa.org/making-5g-an-ally-of-the-euro-atlantic-area/
81. Tatlow, D. K. (2021). China’s technological rise. Erişim adresi: https://dgap.org/en/research/publications/chinas-technological-rise
82. Tekir, G. (2020). Huawei, 5G networks, and digital geopolitics. International Journal of Politics and Security (IJPS), 2(4), 113–135.
83. Tian, G. (2022). The political economy of technology transfer rules of the US-China phase one trade agreement: Competition of global technology leadership. Indiana International & Comparative Law Review, 32, 531-563.
84. Tybring-Grejdde, C. (2020). China’s Belt and Road Initiative: A strategic and economic assessment. Paris: The NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
85. Ukraine conflict: What is Nato and how is it changing? (2022). Erişim adresi: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18023383.
86. Walt, S. W. (1987). The origins of alliances. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.
87. Wilkins, T. S. (2012). ‘Alignment’, not ‘alliance’ – the shifting paradigm of international security cooperation: toward a conceptual taxonomy of alignment. Review of International Studies, 38, 53-76.
88. Zhang, F. (2016). Challenge accepted: China’s response to the US rebalance to the Asia-Pacific. Security Challenges, (12) 3, 45-60.
89. Zhang, D. (2020). China’s military engagement with Pacific Island countries. Erişim adresi: https://dpa.bellschool.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/publications/attachments/2020-08/dpa_in_brief_202022_zhang_0.pdf.