Diplomacy and International Politics

Hong Kong is unique. While the writer Han Suyin’s description—“a borrowed place, on borrowed time” —seemed redundant upon the return of the territory to China on July 1, 1997, the former British colony appears to be perpetually exposed to uncertainty over its future. Despite long months of sociopolitical crisis and violence, Hong Kong has once again shown that it has lost none of its personality. Amidst the climate of upheaval and faced with a Chinese regime determined to obstruct any hopes of democracy, the people of Hong Kong have managed to attract international and media attention, marking them out from any other Chinese territory—including those that enjoy special status: Tibet, Inner Mongolia, Macao, and even Xinjiang, where nearly a million people from the minority Uyghur ethnic group are confined to “re-education” camps. No other Chinese region has been able to attract such attention.

President Trump has strongly criticized NATO and European countries on defense spending, publicly hectored European leaders, upset summits meetings, and pressured traditional allies with economic sanctions.  Transatlantic tensions have been called a “crisis”.  Yet the current situation echoes a certain historical continuity.  In its seventy years of existence, NATO has weathered more severe crises and proved itself capable of extraordinary resilience.  Then, as now, the alliance found renewed purpose in ambitious programs of adaptation.  In adapting to today’s challenges, Europeans and Americans have a shared interest in looking back to the future.   

This article identifies the importance of NATO’s role as a facilitator of multinational collaboration. The Alliance’s established processes and standards worked well, enabling countries whose available resources might otherwise prohibit their participation to fully-contribute to the mission in Afghanistan.