Table of Contents

Letter from the Secretariat Dear delegates, ............................................................................. 2

Welcome Letter from the Chairs .............................................................................................. 3
Introduction to the Institution .................................................................................................. 4
History ................................................................................................................................................ 5
Background ........................................................................................................................................ 6
Operations and Missions .................................................................................................................. 6
Collective Defense.............................................................................................................................. 7
Crisis Management ........................................................................................................................... 7
Peacekeeping ...................................................................................................................................... 7
Humanitarian Assistance .................................................................................................................. 8
Challenges and Changes ........................................................................................................ 10
Assessing the distributions ..................................................................................................... 11
Competences of NATO ........................................................................................................... 11
Competences on the Problem ................................................................................................. 12
Statement of the Problem ....................................................................................................... 12
History of the Topic................................................................................................................. 14
The framework of the topic .................................................................................................... 18
Present situation outlook ........................................................................................................ 19
Country profiles, Main Actors ................................................................................................ 21
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 22
Further Research .................................................................................................................... 23
Bibliography............................................................................................................................ 24

1
Letter from the Secretariat
Dear delegates,

It is our honour to welcome you to Maastricht for the 15th iteration of EuroMUN, our crystal
jubilee!

At its very core, MUNs capture the warmth in finding lasting friends with whom you share a
relationship rooted in mutual growth: duking it out ferociously in a debate on international
affairs, then spending the entire lunch break together sharing your different ideas and
backgrounds. Maastricht, in the springtime and with friends, is something of a fantasy.

The academic rigour and informed eccentricity of EuroMUN was well-received last year which
made it an straightforward decision to work to provide the same quality and experience for all
attending delegates this year. The theme of the conference is, ‘Sowing Seeds of Stability to
Harvest the Solutions of Tomorrow’. It aims to empower delegates to discuss and propose
solutions that create or reinforce systems that will preserve collaborative venues for building
peace and dialogue, as well as provide a sustainable base upon which future generations can
continue to benefit from an inclusive synergy of global governance. We feel comfortable
asserting that our chairs have already begun ensuring that the message will stay with you by
choosing and preparing for riveting topics, and hope you find it an enriching theme that informs
your committee’s debates.

At this point, we would also like to convey our gratitude and heartfelt thanks to our team
members. Each of them has made irreplaceable contributions that will be present everywhere
over the course of the four days of the conference, from the academics to the catering and
socials as well as marketing and finance that made it all possible. Our thanks also goes out to
our Chairs for producing their fascinating and pertinent topics and study guides, and the
International Press Corps, courtesy of the Maastricht Diplomat, who will cover all the
committees.

Additionally, we thank UNSA Maastricht, our parent organisation: to the Governing Board for
all their support, understanding and collaboration throughout the year; and to the Executive
Board, who did not hold back with the faith and respect they placed in all of us involved in
organising this year’s conference. Finally, of course, we thank you delegates. Your
participation has given us all something to work towards, and we cannot wait to share
everything we have planned with you.

Best Wishes,

The Secretariat
Krithik Rock, Salomé Chemla, Katarzyna Kuliberda, Esther Friemond, Lisa Krapp, Paulina
Moody, David Čurilla.

2
Welcome Letter from the Chairs
Dear Distinguished Delegates,

We are honored to greet you all at the EuroMUN conference taking place this year. Our names
are Cèlia and Roy and we shall be the North Atlantic Treaty Organization's Chairs for this
conference. It is our honor to have worked on and created this study guide. The goal of this
conference is to give an unforgettable experience to delegates like yourselves. We want you to
participate in constructive debate and develop answers to some of the world's most serious
concerns.

Our committee will be discussing the challenging situation in the Indo Pacific Ocean between
the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of China, also known as Taiwan. In recent
years, tensions between the two sides have risen, with China boosting its military presence in
the region and making territorial claims. The international community, particularly NATO, has
been closely monitoring the situation, hoping for a peaceful end to long-running tensions. We
are excited to hear your thoughts and suggestions on how the alliance should address this issue.

As delegates, you will have an opportunity to act as diplomats and negotiate on behalf of your
allocated country. You will also get the opportunity to network with others who share your
interests and hone your public speaking and critical thinking abilities.

We would like to remind you that the conference will follow a rigorous process, and we would
like to encourage you to acquaint yourself with the Rule of Procedure before the meeting
begins, no matter how advanced you are in your MUN career it is important to stick to the
specific rules. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us for
academic matters such as any doubt regarding the study guide or the position papers.

We are once again delighted to welcome you all to this conference and look forward to working
with you to make it a fruitful and successful event.

Best Regards,
Roy Weisman and Cèlia Burrel

3
Introduction to the Institution

NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is an intergovernmental military alliance

formed in 1949 to promote collective defense and security among its member countries. The
organization's original purpose was to provide a military counterweight to the Soviet Union
and its allies in Eastern Europe during the Cold War. Since the fall of the USSR, NATO has
shifted its focus towards cooperative security and crisis management in areas such as
Afghanistan and the Balkans.

NATO is headquartered in Brussels, Belgium and is composed of 30 member countries,

primarily in Europe and North America. The United States is the largest contributor to NATO's
budget and military capabilities, followed by Germany, the United Kingdom, and France.

The organization's founding treaty, the North Atlantic Treaty, was signed on April 4, 1949, by
the United States, Canada, and 10 European nations, including Belgium, Denmark, France,
Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, and the United Kingdom. The
treaty established the principle of collective defense, stating that an attack on one member
would be considered an attack on all. The treaty also established a system of collective
decision-making and mutual aid in the event of an attack.

Over the years, the organization has expanded both in terms of its membership and its areas of
activity. In 1952, Greece and Turkey joined the alliance, followed by West Germany in 1955.
Spain became a member in 1982, and the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland joined in 1999.
In 2004, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia also joined the
alliance. Montenegro became the 29th member of NATO in 2017, followed by North
Macedonia in 2020.

NATO's military capabilities are designed to support its core mission of collective defense.
The organization has a range of assets at its disposal, including land, sea, and air forces, as well
as specialized units such as cyber and special operations forces. NATO also operates a number
of strategic command centers, including Allied Command Operations and Allied Command
Transformation. These command centers are responsible for planning and executing NATO's

4
military operations and ensuring that member countries are able to work together effectively
in the event of an attack.

NATO also plays an important role in promoting political and economic cooperation among
its member countries. The organization provides a forum for member countries to discuss
issues of common concern, and it coordinates efforts to address a range of global challenges,
including terrorism, cyber threats, and climate change. NATO also supports the development
of democratic institutions and human rights in its member countries and in partner countries
around the world.

In recent years, NATO has faced a number of challenges, including growing tensions with
Russia, the rise of extremist groups in the Middle East, and the ongoing refugee crisis in
Europe. NATO has responded to these challenges by increasing its military presence in Eastern
Europe and stepping up its efforts to counter terrorism and extremism. The organization has
also worked to strengthen its partnerships with non-member countries, including Ukraine and
Georgia, to promote regional stability and security.

History
The formation of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) was a response to the growing
threat of communism and the Soviet Union's expansionist policies in Europe after World War
II. The idea of a collective defense pact was first proposed by British Foreign Secretary Ernest
Bevin in 1948, and was met with support from the United States and other European countries.

On April 4, 1949, representatives of twelve countries signed the North Atlantic Treaty in
Washington D.C. The signatories included Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy,
Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
The treaty was a mutual defense agreement, which provided for a collective response in the
event of an attack against any member state.

The treaty established a framework for cooperation and collaboration in the areas of defense,
economic development, and political consultation. The core principle of NATO was collective
defense, which meant that an attack on one member state would be considered an attack on all
member states, and would be met with a collective response.

5
Background

The origins of NATO can be traced back to the 1947 Truman Doctrine, which declared that the
United States would provide economic and military assistance to countries threatened by
communism. The doctrine was a response to Soviet expansionism and the perceived threat of
communist infiltration in Europe.

The original NATO treaty was based on the principle of collective defense, which was
enshrined in Article 5 of the treaty. The article states that an armed attack against one or more
of the parties in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against all, and that
each party agrees to assist the others in taking such action as may be necessary, including the
use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

The creation of NATO marked a significant shift in the balance of power in Europe and North
America. For the first time, the United States and its allies had a formalized military alliance
to counter the Soviet Union and its communist allies.

In addition to its military role, NATO also played a key role in promoting economic and
political cooperation among its members. The alliance helped to facilitate the integration of
Western Europe, both through the establishment of the European Economic Community (EEC)
and through initiatives aimed at strengthening democratic institutions and human rights.

Despite these changes, however, the commitment to collective defense and cooperative
security has remained a core principle of the alliance. Today, NATO remains a critical
institution for ensuring the security and stability of Europe and North America in an
increasingly complex and uncertain global security environment.

Operations and Missions

NATO has been involved in a wide range of operations and missions throughout its history,
spanning from collective defense to crisis management, peacekeeping, and humanitarian
assistance.

6
Collective Defense

Collective defense is the core mission of NATO, and the alliance's Article 5 provides for a
collective response in the event of an attack against any member state. While NATO has never
invoked Article 5 in response to an attack, the alliance has undertaken a range of measures to
promote collective defense and deterrence.

Crisis Management

In addition to collective defense, NATO has also been involved in a number of crisis
management operations. These operations are aimed at preventing or resolving conflicts,
reducing tensions, and promoting stability in areas of potential conflict or instability.

One of NATO's most significant crisis management operations was in the Balkans, where the
alliance played a key role in ending the wars in Bosnia and Kosovo. In Bosnia, NATO's
Implementation Force (IFOR) was responsible for implementing the Dayton Peace Accords
and ensuring the safe return of refugees and displaced persons. In Kosovo, NATO's Kosovo
Force (KFOR) was responsible for stabilizing the security situation and promoting
reconciliation between ethnic Albanians and Serbs (See below).

NATO has also been involved in crisis management operations in other regions, including
Afghanistan, where the alliance led a major military operation from 2001 until 2014. The
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), which was led by NATO, was responsible for
stabilizing the security situation, rebuilding infrastructure, and promoting democracy and
development.

Peacekeeping

NATO has also been involved in a number of peacekeeping operations, which are aimed at
monitoring ceasefires, separating conflicting parties, and promoting reconciliation and
stability. These operations typically involve the deployment of troops and equipment to areas
of potential conflict or instability.

7
Humanitarian Assistance

In addition to military operations, NATO has also been involved in humanitarian assistance
and disaster relief operations. These operations are aimed at providing relief and assistance to
populations affected by natural disasters, conflicts, or other crises.

One of NATO's most significant humanitarian assistance operations was in response to the
earthquake that struck Pakistan in 2005. The alliance deployed a range of assets, including
aircraft, ships, and medical personnel, to provide assistance to the affected population.

NATO has been involved in a number of operations in various countries over the years, ranging
from crisis management to peacekeeping and stabilization missions. These operations have
been aimed at promoting stability and security, providing humanitarian assistance, and
preventing conflicts from escalating.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

One of NATO's most significant operations was in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where the alliance
played a key role in ending the Bosnian War and promoting reconciliation between ethnic
groups. The NATO-led Implementation Force (IFOR) was deployed to Bosnia in December
1995 to enforce the Dayton Peace Agreement, which ended the conflict. IFOR was replaced
by a smaller NATO-led force, the Stabilization Force (SFOR), which remained in Bosnia until
2004.

During its mission in Bosnia, NATO helped to monitor the ceasefire, disarm combatants, and
promote the return of refugees and displaced persons. The alliance also played a key role in
promoting reconciliation between ethnic groups, including organizing joint training exercises
and conducting community-building activities.

Kosovo

NATO was also heavily involved in the Kosovo War, which took place from 1998 to 1999.
The alliance launched a military campaign against Serbia in March 1999, following the failure

8
of diplomatic efforts to end the conflict. The bombing campaign lasted for 78 days and resulted
in the withdrawal of Serbian forces from Kosovo.

Following the end of the conflict, NATO established the Kosovo Force (KFOR), a
multinational force tasked with providing security and stability in the region. KFOR remains
in Kosovo to this day, and its mission has expanded to include a range of activities, including
border control, mine clearance, and support for the development of democratic institutions.

Afghanistan

NATO's mission in Afghanistan was one of the alliance's largest and most complex operations.
Following the 9/11 attacks, NATO invoked Article 5 for the first time in its history, declaring
that the attack on the United States was an attack on all NATO member states. The alliance
launched a major military operation in Afghanistan in 2001, with the goal of dismantling Al-
Qaeda and removing the Taliban from power.

NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) was responsible for providing security
and stability in Afghanistan, and the mission involved troops from 51 countries. Some of the
goals of NATO that did not involve direct military occupation but that helped in the peace
process were: to rebuild infrastructure, promote democracy and development, and train Afghan
security forces.

The mission in Afghanistan lasted for over a decade and ended in 2014, with the withdrawal
of NATO forces. The main objective of NATO, to remove the Talibans from power was
reached but it was also marked by high levels of violence and instability.

Libya

In 2011, NATO launched a military operation in Libya, in response to the country's civil war
and the threat posed by Muammar Gaddafi's regime. The alliance enforced a no-fly zone over
Libya and conducted airstrikes against Libyan military targets.

9
The operation was controversial, with some critics arguing that NATO overstepped its mandate
and exceeded its authority. Nevertheless, the operation was seen by some as a success, as it
helped to protect civilians and ultimately led to the overthrow of Gaddafi's regime.

Other Operations

In addition to these major operations, NATO has been involved in a number of other operations
in various countries, including Iraq, Somalia, and the Mediterranean. These operations have
ranged from counter-piracy and counter-terrorism to humanitarian assistance and disaster
relief.

Challenges and Changes

One of the most significant challenges to NATO came with the end of the Cold War. With the
fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, NATO's primary adversary disappeared, and the alliance was
faced with the challenge of redefining its role in the world. NATO responded by expanding its
membership and taking on new roles, such as peacekeeping operations in the Balkans.

Another significant challenge came with the rise of terrorism in the early 2000s. In the wake
of the 9/11 attacks, NATO has had to adapt to a new threat environment, with a greater focus
on counterterrorism operations. NATO's involvement in Afghanistan has been one of the most
prominent examples of this new role, with the alliance leading a large-scale international
mission to combat the Taliban and other extremist groups.

More recently, NATO has had to confront the challenge of cybersecurity. As technology has
advanced, cyber attacks have become an increasingly significant threat to national and
international security. NATO has responded by establishing a Cyber Defence Centre of
Excellence and taking steps to strengthen the cyber defenses of its member states.

In addition to these challenges, NATO has also undergone significant changes over the years.
One of the most notable changes has been the alliance's expansion. Since its establishment,
NATO has grown from 12 members to 30, with the most recent additions being Montenegro
in 2017 and North Macedonia in 2020. NATO's expansion has helped to spread stability and

10
security across Europe, but it has also raised concerns in Russia and other neighboring
countries.

Another significant change for NATO has been the evolution of its relationship with Russia.
After the end of the Cold War, NATO sought to engage with Russia as a partner, but tensions
have risen in recent years due to Russia's annexation of Crimea and its involvement in conflicts
in Ukraine and Syria. NATO has responded by increasing its military presence in the Baltic
region and strengthening its collective defense measures.

Assessing the distributions

NATO has also undergone changes in its approach to defense. In the early years, NATO
focused primarily on collective defense, with member states committing to come to each other's
aid in the event of an attack. However, in recent years, NATO has adopted a more flexible
approach, with a greater emphasis on crisis management, conflict prevention, and cooperation
with partners outside the alliance.

Competences of NATO

The world we live in is full of complex challenges that require strong and effective responses.
NATO, is one such response, providing its member countries with the means to protect their
citizens and promote global security. At its core, NATO is dedicated to collective defense,
working to ensure that an attack on one member country is considered an attack on all members.
This approach has been successful in maintaining peace and stability in the North Atlantic
region for over 70 years.

In addition to its primary responsibility of collective defense, NATO has a range of other
competences that help it meet the evolving security challenges of the 21st century. These
competences include crisis management, cooperative security, and partnership building.
NATO has the ability to plan and execute crisis management operations to prevent or manage
conflicts, and it works closely with partner countries and organizations around the world to
promote security and stability.

11
Cooperative security is another key competence of NATO, which seeks to enhance security
through cooperation and dialogue with non-member countries. NATO has established
partnerships with many countries and organizations, including the European Union, the United
Nations, and individual countries in regions such as the Middle East and Asia.

Overall, NATO's competences are designed to ensure that its member countries are able to
work together effectively to address the security challenges of our time. By working together,
NATO member countries are better able to promote peace, security, and stability both in the
North Atlantic region and around the world.

Competences on the Problem

In the Summit held in Madrid in June 2022 NATO defined the Russia as the main challenge
for global security after the War in Ukraine broke the 24th of February of the same year, but
the most relevant statement to came out of that discussions is the one in which they define the
People’s Republic of China as an imminent thread.

Although NATO technically has no competences in the matter it considers that China might be
a threat to international security, and many members of the alliance are heavily implicated in
the protection of Taiwan. It is important to highlight that until recently the economic and trade
ties between China and NATO countries have been so strong that it has made it very difficult
for the different countries to react to the security threat presented by China.

Statement of the Problem

Over the last couple of years, the People's Republic of China (PRC) under the leadership of
CCP General Secretary Xi Jinping, has made it very clear it is moving closer to a confrontation
of sorts with the Republic of China (Also known as the ROC or simply as Taiwan). Back in
2021, Xi went as far as declaring that “The historical task of the complete reunification of the
motherland must be fulfilled, and will definitely be fulfilled" (Garcia & Tian, 2021). This type

12
of rhetoric from the communist party may not be new. Nevertheless, the situation becomes
concerning when one takes into account China's recent hypersonic missile tests (Sevastopulo
& Hille, 2021) and the expansion of its nuclear arsenal (Macias, 2021). These developments
highlight the main challenge that NATO will need to address.

Looking at the other side, The United States holds on to its infamous "Strategic Ambiguity"
when it comes to a possible Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Official US policy about the matter
is vague on purpose. While officially The United States sticks to the "One-China" policy:
recognising the PRC and not the ROC government, if an invasion were to take place, full
commitment by The United States to defend Taiwan is not off the table (BBC, 2021). This is
puzzling to say the least - getting a clear understanding of what The United States government
will do seems impossible. While President Biden unequivocally stated in 2022 that U.S. forces
would defend Taiwan in case of need (Brunnstrom & Hunnicutt, 2022), the White House
swiftly dismissed that remark - officially "Strategic Ambiguity" remains. When trying to ‘dig
deeper’ in order to find some sort of official policy, one may read “The 2022 National Security
Strategy Guidance”. This document is written by the executive branch of the United States, it
details the official national security concerns and appropriate strategies. Looking for Taiwan
in this document would yield us a single vague result “We will support Taiwan…in line with
longstanding American commitments” the policy regarding China is equally vague: ”We will
stand up for democracy, human rights, and human dignity, including in Hong Kong, Xinjiang,
and Tibet” (Biden, 2021, p. 21).

So, in this regard, NATO must consider this possibility: Its largest contributor to budget and
military capabilities may be dragged to a war against the Chinese army with its 2 million active
soldiers, maybe even as soon as in the next few years. While officially, NATO shows no
interest in moving into the Indo-Pacific, the alliance does recognize The People’s Republic of
China’s ambitions and policies as challenges to NATO interests (NATO,2022). China has
been, at least on paper, adopting Russia’s narrative regarding NATO expansion and behavior
as causes for the war in Ukraine, as part of a “no limits” partnership between Xi and Putin
(Trinkwalder,2022). As it stands, the alliance is torn: many members wish to change the official
policy and to push for further involvement in the region to counter China (In fact, NATO has
already formed official partnerships with several countries in the Indo-Pacific region, NATO
also partakes in out-of-area missions in the region such as anti-piracy, stabilization, and

13
training operations) mainly due to political-economic factors (Trinkwalder,2022). This
approach is often countered by members from Central and Eastern Europe, these members hold
deeper economic ties with China (Dubow,Greene & Rzegocki, 2022).

The economic influence of China all over Europe is a major issue the alliance will have to
debate before any major policy change. To quote Ivo Daalder, a former U.S. permanent
representative to NATO: “How do you fight a war in the Mediterranean when the ports that
you might want to visit are not only built by but owned by Chinese?"

In simple terms, the main issue is the need to redefine NATO policy regarding China and
Taiwan in light of the Chinese threat, American ambiguity, and conflicting economic interests
of the different members.

History of the Topic

For thousands of years, China was ruled by Dynasties, it was governed by emperors and nobles.
The final dynasty was the Qing dynasty who ruled China for more than 200 years. That all
changed due to the Xinhai Revolution of 1911. This Revolution had many causes. In short, the
leading causes to the end of the Qing Era were: economic challenges, foreign (mostly Western)
influence, internal unrest and discontent with the monarchy, failure to modernize, the spread
of new ideas - nationalism and republicanism.

In 1912, child emperor Puyi was forced to abdicate the throne, and the Republic of China was
established. The head of this young republic is Sun Yat-sen, this arch revolutionist forms the
Nationalist Party: the Kuomintang (KMT). He resigned shortly after. From here things get
complex yet again, the leader who replaces Sun Yat-sen is called Yuan Shikai - he becomes
the de facto dictator of China, declaring himself emperor in 1915 only to die a year later. During
this chaos that followed, the already fragile Chinese Republic lost direct control of most of the
country to different military cliques, these were headed by a ‘warlord’ giving the era from
1916-1928 its name: ‘The Warlord Era’.

During World War I, with Europe fighting itself, Japan sought to conquer China. The young
Japanese nation issued the so-called “Twenty-one Demands” in 1915. Accepting all of these
demands would essentially turn China into a Japanese protectorate. Yuan Shikai was not in a

14
position to risk war with Japan and China agreed to a revised version of the original demands.
China gave away land to Japan, choosing appeasement over conflict (Ironically foreshadowing
what would happen in Europe 20 years later). China expected Western support against Japanese
aggression, but Japan's participation in the Great War led to the United States and other
European nations withholding support for China's autonomy restoration. Japan's claims were
then officially recognized in the Treaty of Versailles. This ‘western betrayal’ caused a
significant upsurge in KMT nationalism in addition to a counter-reaction - The May Fourth
Movement (Luo, 1993).

The May Fourth Movement came as a direct result of the appeasement taken by the Republican
government. This movement achieved many things: The removal of Pro Japanese/appeasement
officials, China did not sign the Treaty of Versailles, and the weakening of the Chinese
government. The most important outcome was the birth of Chinese communism (Schwarcz,
1986). The first Chinese communists simply looked for new ideals to follow after they were
disappointed with both nationalism and western values. They soon turned to the newly created
Soviet Union and communism. The Chinese Communist Party was established in 1921. The
two main actors finally appeared, and the stage was set for the modern Chinese power struggle.

As stated before, Sun Yat-sen, the father of the KMT and first leader of the Republic of China,
initially resigned but later opposed Yuan Shikai's government. In 1917, Sun returned to China
and established a military junta with the aim of transforming China into a modern democratic
nation. By 1919 Sun was head of the resurrected ‘Kuomintang of China’ in Shanghai. In a
surprising move, the Soviet Union offered the KMT help in its mission to end warlordism in
China. Yet again, the reasons for USSR support of the KMT are complex, in short - the Soviets
saw Sun and his movement as a potential anti-imperialist ally, they hoped the movement would
be influenced by socialist and Marxist ideas (Taylor,2009). And so, in 1923 the KMT officially
accepted Soviet aid. The USSR helped tremendously to prepare the crumbling Kuomintang for
the coming struggle. Moscow even ordered the Chinese Communist Party to fully join the
KMT. This process culminated with the ‘First United Front’ in 1924, an official KMT–CCP
Alliance.

Sun died a year later, and while on paper, others led the KMT afterward, the real leader from
that point onwards was the ‘Generalissimo’ Chiang Kai-shek. Chiang assumed official

15
leadership by 1926 and the alliance formed the National Revolutionary Army (NRA). By this
point, several warlords had already submitted to the KMT. The final major obstacle in the way
of a unified China is what remains of the original national government (the one Sun helped
establish in 1912 only for it to fall to the dictatorial clutches of Yuan Shikai) - it was also called
"The Beiyang government". The alliance engaged in a fierce military campaign against The
Beiyang government and other northern warlords, this “Northern Expedition” succeeded and
by 1928 the Kuomintang was victorious. However, Chiang’s troubles were far from over.

During the Northern Expedition itself, a split began to emerge between The CCP and KMT.
This split has many causes, with the main one being (unsurprisingly) ideological differences
as well as personal rivalries and pressure on the KMT by foreign powers (mostly the United
States) to eliminate Communist influence in China (Fenby, 2003). Chiang purged the
Communists and from that point onwards he relied increasingly on foreign intervention. This
marked the beginning of the first phase of the Chinese Civil War (1927-1936).

The KMT clashed with the CCP who incited several uprisings. However, the CCP was
eventually forced to fall back north in a brutal military retreat, also known as ‘The Long
March’, it is hard to get an exact estimate, but generally, only about 10% of the red army in
China survived its retreat north. However, Mao used the march in order to secure his leadership
over the party (and eventually over mainland China). The long march also helped the CCP gain
support and legitimacy among the Chinese people (Salisbury, 1986). By 1936 Mao established
a strong opposition to the KMT in northwestern China. During what is now called the ‘Xi'an
Incident’ Chiang was detained by two of his own generals and forced to negotiate a temporary
end to hostilities with the CCP in order to fight the Japanese invasion. The result was the
creation of the ‘Second United Front’.

In 1937, Japan and China plunged into war. The Second Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945) saw
tens of millions die in China. However, the cease-fire between nationalists and communists
lasted throughout the war. During the war several key events occurred: During the fighting, the
image promoted by the Chinese Red Army was that of a noble force waging guerrilla warfare
in order to defend the people. Mao and his communist movement gained even more support.
In addition, the USSR invaded Manchuria (northern China) near the end of the second world
war, and the territory was given to the CCP shortly after the end of the war. The communist

16
People's Liberation Army used war to become a well-trained and disciplined force. In the
meanwhile, the Nationalist government and army under Chiang were weakened by years of
war and corruption, and the KMT's military was poorly trained and under-equipped.

Once the second world war ended, the resumption of the Chinese Civil War was quick. And
because of the reasons stated above the KMT was defeated by 1949. Chiang and his nationalist
remnants were forced to retreat to the island of Taiwan. Mao then proclaimed the People's
Republic of China in most of modern-day mainland China. Without many options remaining
Chiang was forced to proclaim Taipei, Taiwan, the temporary capital of the Republic of China.
The KMT viewed this as a temporary halt, they wished to ‘liberate the homeland from
communist control in the future. To this very day, both the ROC and the PRC claim both
mainland China and the Taiwan Area as their rightful territory.

Despite the name, this ‘Republic’ of China was anything but democratic. In reality the remnants
of the Kuomintang and their supporters - about 1.5m people ruled with an iron fist over Taiwan
despite only accounting for 14% of the population. Chiang effectively established a Military
dictatorship in Taiwan, martial law was in effect from 1949-1987 (!). After assuming power,
Chiang Ching-kuo, the son of Chiang Kai-shek, initiated a process of democratization in
Taiwan. Despite facing resistance from local people who were resentful of the previous
authoritarian regime, Chiang continued to promote political liberalization amidst a growing
democracy movement. Subsequently, President Lee Teng-hui, widely regarded as the "father
of democracy" in Taiwan, spearheaded constitutional reforms that paved the way for the
election of the island's first non-KMT president, Chen Shui-bian, in the year 2000 (BBC,2021).
Today Taiwan is seen as a modern democracy, and a western ally.

During the second world war and the following Chinese civil war, The United States intervened
many times in Chinese affairs. At first, Washington did not support the KMT, mainly due to
differences and the sketchy reputation Chiang had with corruption. Many times, American
action (or lack of action) helped shape the results of the civil war. With the cold war, The
United States officially changed its position to full support of the ROC. The ROC held China’s
seat on the United Nations Security Council and was acknowledged by numerous Western
nations as the sole legitimate government of China. At the height of relations, The United States

17
even had nuclear weapons and troops in Taiwan itself. This all changed when United States
President Richard Nixon visited China in 1972 (Culver, 2020).

This historic visit marked a shift in United States foreign policy. The United States began
having formal relations with the People's Republic of China and severed ties with the ROC in
1979. Today, unofficial relations between The United States and Taiwan mainly include the
sale of US defensive weapons to the island nation. The United States officially follows the
‘One China Policy’ - meaning it believes there is only one Chinese nation, that is mainland
China under the Communist Party. Despite this, The United States opposes the use of force as
a solution to the conflict and expresses a commitment to selling defensive weapons and
maintaining economic and cultural ties with Taiwan. The United States retains the option to
defend Taiwan when necessary but has never pledged that it will definitely defend it (Also
known as "Strategic Ambiguity"). Many other NATO members follow a similar module
(without the commitment to defend Taiwan) (Maizland, 2021). In 1971 the UN switched
diplomatic recognition, and the Beijing government received the Chinese seat at the security
council

The framework of the topic

There was never an official peace deal or cease-fire to officially end the war. But ever since
1950 the “war” is more symbolic, no real fighting is taking place. Both the People's Republic
of China and the Republic of China do not recognize each other as legitimate entities.

When discussing this issue, one must remember that the heart of the argument is the Taiwanese
desire for freedom and legitimacy. The people of Taiwan see what is happening in Hong Kong
and Xinjiang, they simply do not want to live under the PRC. There is a strong ideological
clash between the two sides. This want for freedom and democracy clashes with PRC foreign
policy: Taiwan is a province that has separated from the mainland, and eventual reunification
with the island is anticipated. (BBC, 2021) This clash makes any possible peaceful solution
very difficult.

During the cold war, there were several attempts at a peaceful solution to the issue, in order to
keep things relatively short let us focus on the most major one: The 1992 Consensus. This was

18
the result of a meeting held by the Chinese Communist Party and the Kuomintang. Both sides
agreed on an altered version of the One China Policy: they both acknowledged that there could
only be one China, however, they did not clarify which government is the rightful one. Things
were kept vague on purpose yet again. This Consensus marked a more relaxed time in Cross-
Strait relations. Tensions escalated in 2016 when a new government was elected in Taiwan,
with the Democratic Progressive Party under Tsai Ing-wen rejecting the One China Policy and
the 1992 Consensus due to a lack of trust in the CCP. The current Taiwanese government views
itself as the defender of democracy against the CCP. In response, Beijing severed the limited
diplomatic relations it had with Taiwan. The issue lies in the lack of negotiation prospects,
increasing the risk of the PRC resorting to military measures. (Chin, D'Souz, & Chin, 2021).

Throughout the cold war, NATO did not focus much on the Asian theater. As the name of the
alliance suggests it was mostly focused on Europe and North America. The basic policy of
NATO regarding the Taiwan issue remains unchanged to this day “...emphasize the importance
of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait as an indispensable element in security and
prosperity in the international community. We encourage a peaceful resolution of cross-Strait
issues” (NATO, 2023). Unlike The United States, NATO has no obligation (even not a vague
one) to defend the ROC in case of a PRC invasion. However, if you look at some very recent
history: NATO had no obligation to help Ukraine, but several NATO members have sent
weapons and aid to Ukraine. NATO itself is supporting the delivery of humanitarian and non-
lethal aid to the country (NATO, n.d). Even without any change of policy, it is safe to assume
at least some members would do the same in case of war in the South China Sea.

Present situation outlook

As stated before, the main clash between both sides remains to this day. The PRC has, in the
last couple of years, amped up its rhetoric regarding Taiwan. Recently, on August 2, 2022,
speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan. The main goal of
this visit was to show “unwavering commitment to supporting Taiwan's vibrant democracy”
(Reuters, 2023). In response, the PRC condemned the visit and announced that it would start a
series of military exercises in response. These exercises were done as a show of force. They
took place between August 3 and 8, this was an unprecedented matter, the first time live-fire
exercises were conducted in six zones surrounding Taiwan. The PRC deployed several military

19
naval and aerial assets, additionally, China fired at least 11 cross-ballistic missiles in Taiwan's
exclusive economic zone (EEZ). After these exercises, the PRC stated that regular "patrols"
would be launched in the Taiwan Strait (Zhen, 2022; Klare, 2022). All of this did bring NATO
to have its first real talks regarding the China threat to Taiwan in the alliance's history (Foy &
Sevastopulo, 2022).

In addition, one must remember the aforementioned Chinese influence in Europe

(Dubow,Greene & Rzegocki, 2022), some NATO members in Central and Eastern Europe
would lose a lot if their countries cooperate with a decision that may upset Beijing. Another
matter to consider is the constant push by the Indo-Pacific allies of NATO, in addition to
Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and Australia are all strong supporters of further NATO presence
in the region to counter Chinese dominance (Ridgwell, 2022).

So, your interests as the NATO alliance, at the bare minimum, entail keeping the peace.
However, at this point, negotiations seem impossible and war is closer than ever before. Should
NATO consider a policy change regarding Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific as a whole? will it help
keep stability or do the opposite? Can NATO as a whole even agree on such policy change
considering the economic influence the PRC has over some of the members?

20
Country profiles, Main Actors

The Republic of China - As stated before, the current government of Taiwan is not willing to
cooperate with the PRC. Since the founding of modern Taiwan in 1949, the island has been
preparing for a potential PRC invasion. Presently, many Taiwanese policymakers hold the
belief that with the current government in place, Beijing has lost all hope of a peaceful
reunification. They believe Xi might start a full war soon. The invasion of Ukraine got the
Taiwanese government to further their preliminary measures in case of an invasion
(Sevastopulo & Hille, 2022). At best, NATO holds unofficial relations with Taiwan, nothing
more (Wang & Hamacher, 2023).

The People's Republic of China- It is important to remember that The People's Republic of
China and NATO had no official relations before the early 2000s. At the height of NATO-
China relations, they mostly consisted of informal visits and military staff talks. China is now
(for the most part) supporting the Russian narrative regards to the invasion invasion.
Unsurprisingly NATO has officially, for the first time, declared China as a threat to the alliance
(Foy & Sevastopulo, 2022; Trinkwalder, 2022). While it may be easy to group China and
Russia together, economic warfare and sections against China may be a lot more dangerous to
the West.

The United States - The leading power in NATO is currently the most outspoken
against Beijing. Theoretically, The United States is also the most likely to enter a war in order
to defend Taiwan (in addition to being the only country capable to bear such a war on its own).
Washington has recently shown an increased sense of urgency regarding this matter. The
United States fears (among other things) the economic ramifications of a Chinese invasion, a
blockadeof Taiwan is estimated to cost the global economy $2.5tn per year (Foy &
Sevastopulo, 2022). Some believe that the recent actions taken by the American government
(The visit, and Biden’s speech) mark a shift from ambiguity to clear American
commitment.

Europen NATO Members - Somewhat surprisingly, European members of NATO, especially

member states of the EU, are acting as a dominant voice, trying to convince other NATO
members to take a more aggressive stance against China. As a whole, the EU stands as a natural

21
partner for NATO in the politico-economic sphere. European member states hold expertise in
security analysis, strategic foresight, and military risk assessment, NATO uses this to
strengthen the Euro-Atlantic response to China's rise, especially in regard to the security
implications of Chinese investments in Europe. On the other hand, the relationship between
China and the EU has deteriorated in recent years. The ongoing war in Ukraine only helped
boost pro-NATO and anti-China policy makers within the EU and europe in genral
(Trinkwalder,2022; Brattberg & Le Corre, 2020)

Australia, Japan, and South Korea - While these countries are not NATO members, they are
the main NATO allies in the Indo-Pacific region. These countries have voiced their concern
over the last couple of years, calling on NATO to be more involved in the region. This only
became far more extreme after Nancy Pelosi visited the island. During the military drills that
followed the visit, Japan had five Chinese missiles land in its exclusive economic zones. All
Indo-Pacific allies feel threatened by China, and as a result, they seek closer ties to Europe and
NATO in particular. Both in Japan and Australia, the fear of a Chinese invasion (no matter
how unlikely) is present at least to some extent (Ridgwell, 2022; NATO,2023; Hartcher &
Knott, 2023).

Conclusion

Taking the perspective of the CCP into consideration, China's history is fraught with
disappointment and betrayal by Western powers. The party's policy decisions today are
influenced by their version of history, which often involves responding with hostility to
interactions with the West. It is crucial to question whether the intervention of a "Western-
centric alliance," as perceived by the CCP government, would contribute to resolving the
current situation or exacerbate it.

Some argue that ending "Strategic Ambiguity" and taking a firm stance against the CCP would
prevent the threat of war for good. Some argue it would do the exact opposite. While preparing
for the committee keep in mind that you are debating the policy of NATO and not that of your
specific country. However, the amount of influence China has on your specific economy and
politics should be one of the main guides to your position in the debate.

22
Further Research

Foundational Treaty of NATO

Interim National Security Strategic Guidance

NATO 2022 STRATEGIC CONCEPT

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

The Defence Planning Process

The Partnership for Peace Framework Document

Timeline of China’s Modern History

Tracking Chinese Online Influence in Central and Eastern Europe

23
Bibliography

BBC. (2021, May 26). What's behind the China-Taiwan divide? BBC News. Retrieved March
10, 2023, from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34729538

Biden J.R. (2021), "Interim National Security Strategic Guidance", The White House
Washington.

Biscop, S., & Coolsaet, R. (Eds.). (2017). European Security and Defence Policy: An
Implementation Perspective. Routledge.

Brattberg, E., & Le Corre, P. (2020, February 19). The EU and China in 2020: More
competition ahead. The EU and China in 2020: More Competition Ahead. Retrieved March
11, 2023, from https://carnegieendowment.org/2020/02/19/eu-and-china-in-2020-more-
competition-ahead-pub-81096

Brunnstrom, D., & Hunnicutt, T. (2022, September 19). Biden says U.S. forces would defend
Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion. Reuters. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from
https://www.reuters.com/world/biden-says-us-forces-would-defend-taiwan-event-chinese-
invasion-2022-09-18/

The largest, most impactful war ' .(Chin, C. (2021, December 11 & ,.Chin, N. C., D'Souza, A
CNA. Retrieved March 10, ?the world's ever seen': Can the US, China avoid Taiwan face-off
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/cna-insider/largest-most-impactful-war- 2023, from
worlds-ever-seen-can-us-china-avoid-taiwan-face-2369936

Culver, J. (2020, September 30). The unfinished Chinese Civil War. The Interpreter. Retrieved
March 11, 2023, from https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/unfinished-chinese-civil-
war

Dubow, B., Greene, S., & Rzegocki, S. J. (2022, November 14). Tracking Chinese online
influence in Central and Eastern Europe. CEPA. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from
https://cepa.org/comprehensive-reports/tracking-chinese-online-influence-in-central-and-
eastern-europe/

24
Feaver, P. D. (1992). The Making of the NATO Alliance. International Security, 17(1), 5-43.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2539025

Fenby. (2003). Chiang Kai Shek : China's generalissimo and the nation he lost (1st Carroll &
Graf ed..). Carroll & Graf Publishers.

Foy, H., & Sevastopulo, D. (2022, November 30). NATO holds first dedicated talks on China
threat to Taiwan. Financial Times. Retrieved March 11, 2023, from
https://www.ft.com/content/d7fa2d2b-53be-4175-bf2b-92af5defa622

Garcia, C., & Tian, Y. L. (2021, October 9). China's XI vows 'reunification' with Taiwan.
Reuters. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from https://www.reuters.com/world/china/chinas-xi-
says-reunification-with-taiwan-must-will-be-realised-2021-10-09/

Gheciu, A. (2005). NATO in the Wake of the Cold War: Theoretical Reflections on Institution-
Building. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(5), 880-899.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760500148661

Griswold. (1962). The Far Eastern policy of the United States. Yale University Press.

Harnisch, S. (2011). The NATO-Russia Council: From Cold War to Cooperative Security.
Palgrave Macmillan.

Hartcher, P., & Knott, M. (2023, March 7). Australia faces the threat of war with China within
three years – and we're not ready. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved March 12, 2023,
from https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australia-faces-the-threat-of-war-with-china-
within-three-years-and-we-re-not-ready-20230221-p5cmag.html

Joint statement issued on the occasion of the meeting between H.E. Mr Jens Stoltenberg, NATO
secretary general and H.E. Mr Kishida Fumio, prime minister of Japan. NATO. (2023, January
31). Retrieved March 11, 2023, from
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_211294.htm?selectedLocale=en

Klare, M. (2022, September). China Reacts Aggressively to Pelosi's Taiwan Visit | Arms
Control Association. Arms control Today . Retrieved March 11, 2023, from

25
https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2022-09/news/china-reacts-aggressively-pelosis-taiwan-
visit

Kowalski, T. (2009). The Future of NATO: Enlargement, Russia, and European Integration.
Praeger Security International.

Luo. (1993). National Humiliation and National Assertion: The Chinese Response to the
Twenty-One Demands. Modern Asian Studies, 27(2), 297–319.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0026749X00011501

Macias, A. (2021, November 3). China is rapidly expanding its nuclear arsenal, Pentagon says
in New report. CNBC. Retrieved Marc 10, 2023, from
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/03/china-is-rapidly-expanding-its-nuclear-arsenal-pentagon-
says.html

Maizland, L. (2021, May 10). Why China-Taiwan relations are so tense. Council on Foreign
Relations. Retrieved March 11, 2023, from https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-taiwan-
relations-tension-us-policy-biden

Mastanduno, M. (1998). Economic Interests and Regional Security: Explaining the Origins and
Character of NATO. Mershon International Studies Review, 42(2), 189-219.
https://doi.org/10.2307/222645

NATO 2022 - strategic concept. NATO 2022 - Strategic concept. (2022). Retrieved March 10,
2023, from https://www.nato.int/strategic-concept/

NATO's response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. NATO. (n.d.). Retrieved March 11, 2023,
from https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_192648.htm

Reuters. (2022, August 3). Nancy Pelosi: America's Solidarity with Taiwanese people more
important than ever. The Economic Times. Retrieved March 11, 2023, from
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/nancy-pelosi-americas-
solidarity-with-taiwanese-people-more-important-than-ever/articleshow/93304357.cms

26
Ridgwell, H. (2022, August 5). Indo-Pacific allies seek NATO solidarity amid China's show of
force over Taiwan. VOA. Retrieved March 11, 2023, from https://www.voanews.com/a/indo-
pacific-allies-seek-nato-solidarity-amid-china-s-show-of-force-over-taiwan-/6688012.html

Rynning, S., & Smith, M. E. (2019). NATO in the 21st Century: The Alliance, Security, and
Emerging Global Challenges. Polity Press.

Salisbury. (1986). The Long march : the untold story. Pan Books.

Schwarcz. (1986). The Chinese enlightenment : intellectuals and the legacy of the May Fourth
movement of 1919. University of California Press.

Sevastopulo, D., & Hille, K. (2021, October 16). China tests new space capability with
Hypersonic Missile. Financial Times. Retrieved March 10, 2023, from
https://www.ft.com/content/ba0a3cde-719b-4040-93cb-a486e1f843fb

Sevastopulo, D., & Hille, K. (2022, June 7). Taiwan: Preparing for a potential Chinese
invasion. Financial Times. Retrieved March 11, 2023, from
https://www.ft.com/content/0850eb67-1700-47c0-9dbf-3395b4e905fd

Taylor. (2009). The generalissimo : Chiang Kai-shek and the struggle for modern China.
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Trinkwalder, M. (2022, October 7). NATO's China Challenge. The Diplomat. Retrieved March
10, 2023, from https://thediplomat.com/2022/10/natos-china-challenge/

Wang, A., & Hamacher, F. (2023, January 12). Taiwan officer reveals details of rare
interaction with NATO. Reuters. Retrieved March 12, 2023, from
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/taiwan-officer-reveals-details-rare-
interaction-with-nato-2023-01-11/

Zhen, L. (2022, August 3). China vows military operations around Taiwan in response to
Pelosi visit. South China Morning Post. Retrieved March 11, 2023, from
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3187506/china-vows-military-operations-
around-taiwan-response-us-house

27