In recent years, European countries have been engaged in an effort to “pivot” to the Indo-Pacific in order to counter China’s rise and its more assertive behavior. But in the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, this is not the best way Europe can contribute to allied security priorities.

This month, the secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Jens Stoltenberg, made a trip to Asia to try to deepen the alliance’s ties with the region. This trip took place after years of deepening European involvement in Indo-Pacific security. For instance, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the European Union published Indo-Pacific policy documents; the United Kingdom deployed a carrier strike group to the region as part of its self-declared “tilt” to the Indo-Pacific; NATO members held their first dedicated debate on Taiwan; and Germany took part in the Australian Air Force’s multinational exercise “Pitch Black” for the first time. Just last month, the U.K. and Japan signed an access agreement that would allow the U.K.to base troops in Japan.

Scholars have also written about how NATO should assume a greater role in countering China. In even more granular terms, a recent report by the RAND Corporation outlined how the United States and France could improve Army cooperation in the Indo-Pacific.

But for all France’s talk of being an “Indo-Pacific power,” or the U.K. “tilting” toward the Indo-Pacific, would European countries actually assume important security roles in potential key flashpoints in the Indo-Pacific? Posed more bluntly, in a Taiwan contingency, for instance, would European militaries actually show up? Given resource constraints and non-existent defense commitments, such an effort is unlikely. As such, Europe needn’t bolster its military presence in the Indo-Pacific and should instead focus on contributing more to European security, especially amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Continue reading at The Diplomat.