SINGAPORE — The Shangri-La Dialogue, Asia’s largest defense summit, has recently highlighted the evolving dynamics between European and Asian security interests.
During a question and answer session, America’s Defense Secretary opened with a pointed remark directed at some members of the audience, suggesting they redirect their focus.
“We would much prefer that the overwhelming balance of European investment be on that continent,” he asserted.
This sentiment reflects the shifting U.S. stance towards a growing European military presence in Asia, a change prompted by the war in Ukraine and its impact on global security perspectives.
Until January, the United States has generally welcomed European engagement in the region.
However, the current administration’s outlook appears to discourage European military involvement in Asia, advocating instead for prioritization of European efforts on their home territory.
Notably, this year’s conference hosted a significant number of European attendees, including French President Emmanuel Macron, who emphasized the interconnectedness of European and Asian security.
Hegseth’s acknowledgment of Europe’s role during his speech, despite his reservations, emphasizes a nuanced conversation about collaboration and responsibility in defense.
“This is a convergence zone right now,” remarked Gilberto Teodoro, the Philippines Secretary of National Defense.
He noted the increased European advocacy at this year’s event, which stands in contrast to the historical focus on Asian security alone.
The narrative of shared security interests between Europe and Asia has gained traction since the commencement of the Ukraine conflict.
This strategic partnership was underscored last year when Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy unexpectedly attended the conference, meeting with then-U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin.
This meeting underscored the perception of a common security threat, especially against the backdrop of North Korea aligning with Russia and China’s support for the Kremlin’s military efforts.
Macron’s remarks echoed this sentiment, drawing a parallel between potential aggressions in Ukraine and Taiwan.
He asked, “If we consider that Russia could be allowed to take a part of the territory of Ukraine without any restriction, how would you phrase what would happen in Taiwan?”
The consensus within U.S. circles was that Europe needed to acknowledge the threat posed by China while simultaneously continuing its support for Ukraine.
As a result, several European nations, including Britain and Italy, dispatched naval vessels to the Indo-Pacific region, underscoring their commitment to Asian stability.
However, the political tides shifted with Donald Trump’s return to power, prompting a reevaluation of the European military role in Asia.
Recent statements from Pentagon officials indicate a strategic shift, urging Europe to carry a greater burden for its own continental defense, thereby allowing U.S. military resources to concentrate on Asia.
Despite the skepticism surrounding European military roles in Asia, Hegseth admitted to the potential benefits of a European presence as a deterrent to Chinese ambitions.
He noted, “There is something to be said for the fact that China calculates the possibility and does not appreciate the presence of other countries on occasion.”
From this perspective, a European presence might positively influence the strategic calculus of Beijing.
A U.S. defense official, speaking anonymously, reinforced this sentiment, indicating that there is evident concern in Beijing regarding European military engagement in Asia.
The dialogue surrounding European contributions at the conference reflected differing views among allies.
Finnish Defense Minister Antti Häkkänen emphasized his country’s security priorities, including an 800-mile shared border with Russia and considerations surrounding the Arctic and Baltic Sea.
“That’s why our role in the Indo-Pacific Area cannot be so big,” he stated, even as he engaged with partners about Finland’s defense technology and intelligence sharing capabilities.
Sweden’s defense Minister Pål Jonson echoed similar sentiments, highlighting opportunities for collaboration in intelligence and defense sales while advocating for support of Ukraine’s territorial integrity.
He stated, “We are here also to make the case: Why it is important to stand up for Ukraine’s territorial integrity and freedom.”
Meanwhile, Indo-Pacific nations like South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand have extended support to Ukraine, viewing Russia’s actions as a crucial test of resolve among democratic nations.
New Zealand’s Defense Minister Judith Collins remarked on her country’s commitment to training Ukrainian troops, along with plans to increase defense spending to 2% of GDP by the early 2030s.
This increase reflects a broader intent for New Zealand to enhance its self-reliance and security posture, separate from NATO-centric strategies.
Collins articulated this sentiment when she recounted a conversation with a NATO minister, leading her to contemplate New Zealand’s role in both regional stability and peace in Europe.
“The answer is: doing more for ourselves with our friends in our region — as well as being good contributors to peace in Europe,” she concluded.
As European and Asian nations navigate the complexities of defense collaboration, the future of their roles in each other’s security remains a compelling topic of discussion.
image source from：https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2025/06/03/europeans-map-out-pacific-aims-as-some-in-us-want-them-to-stay-home/
