China delivered a stark message to Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) this week, asserting that NATO should not exist and warning that the alliance fuels global instability. This rare and direct confrontation from Beijing reflects the escalating geopolitical tensions between China, the West, and the evolving strategic landscape in Europe.
The remarks came during a heated session in Strasbourg, where Chinese officials addressed the parliament as part of broader diplomatic engagement. The blunt critiques of NATO mark a shift in China’s traditionally cautious rhetoric, signaling Beijing’s increasing willingness to challenge Western security institutions openly.
Beijing’s Challenge to NATO’s Legitimacy
At the core of China’s message was the assertion that NATO no longer serves legitimate security interests but rather perpetuates divisions and confrontations. A senior Chinese diplomat told MEPs,
“NATO’s existence itself is a root cause of many conflicts and tensions today. It is outdated and anachronistic in the current world order.”
The diplomat argued that the alliance’s continuous eastward expansion and military spending contribute to heightened risks rather than collective safety. This criticism echoes long-standing Russian objections to NATO growth but is notably significant coming from China, which rarely targets European security bodies so explicitly.
China’s critique aligns with its broader vision of a multipolar world where regional security architectures replace alliances they view as relics of the Cold War. Chinese officials framed NATO as a vehicle for US dominance rather than genuine collective defense, urging the EU to pursue “strategic autonomy” and reduce its reliance on the American-led security umbrella.
The EU’s Role Under Scrutiny
The remarks prompted intense debate within the European Parliament, exposing divergent views on Europe’s security future. Some MEPs pushed back vigorously against China’s characterization, stressing NATO’s crucial role in guaranteeing peace and stability on the continent.
A prominent European Parliament member responded,
“NATO has been a cornerstone of European security for decades, deterring aggression and maintaining peace. To suggest it ‘shouldn’t exist’ ignores the realities we face.”
This sentiment was widely shared across mainstream European political groups, which remain committed to the transatlantic alliance despite occasional frictions.
The debate also brought forward questions about the EU’s strategic autonomy ambitions. Several MEPs acknowledged the importance of developing Europe’s independent defense capabilities but warned that an outright rejection of NATO would be reckless and destabilizing.
Strategic Autonomy Versus Transatlantic Ties
The concept of European “strategic autonomy” has gained momentum in recent years, fueled by concerns about overdependence on the US, unpredictable American policies, and the desire for stronger EU defense integration. However, China’s intervention complicated the narrative by framing autonomy as a reason to abandon NATO altogether.
European policymakers face the difficult task of balancing deeper defense cooperation within the EU while maintaining strong ties to NATO allies. A senior EU foreign policy analyst explained,
“Europe wants to strengthen its own defense, but not at the expense of the NATO alliance. These are complementary, not mutually exclusive, objectives.”
Nonetheless, Beijing’s message struck a chord with some far-left and far-right MEPs, who have long advocated for distancing from the US-led military alliance for ideological or nationalist reasons. The Chinese portrayal of NATO as an aggressive, outdated entity dovetails with their calls for a more neutral or multipolar European security stance.
Implications for China-EU Relations
China’s hardline comments come at a sensitive time in EU-China relations, which have experienced growing strains due to trade disputes, human rights concerns, and competing global influence narratives. The stark NATO criticism risks deepening mistrust, even as both sides seek pragmatic dialogue on issues like climate change and economic cooperation.
Several MEPs voiced apprehension that China’s position is part of a broader strategy to weaken Western alliances and divide Europe politically and militarily. An experienced EU diplomat noted,
“Beijing aims to exploit divisions and create fault lines within Europe, undermining cohesion especially at moments of geopolitical stress.”
The EU’s official stance remains cautious, emphasizing dialogue and engagement with China while reaffirming commitment to collective security frameworks. The European External Action Service released a statement underscoring the importance of NATO for European stability, subtly pushing back against Beijing’s assertions.
NATO’s Evolving Challenges and Response
In recent years, NATO has faced renewed challenges including Russian aggression in Ukraine, emerging threats in the Indo-Pacific linked to China, and debates over burden-sharing among allies. The alliance’s commitment to collective defense was reaffirmed in its latest strategic concept, which now explicitly names China as a systemic challenge due to its military modernization and global ambitions.
Meanwhile, China’s growing military presence and assertiveness in the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait have reinforced NATO’s calls to consider global security dynamics beyond its traditional Euro-Atlantic focus. NATO Secretary General expressed concern over China’s actions while stressing the alliance’s defensive nature, reiterating,
“NATO is a defensive alliance committed to peace and security, not a threat to anyone.”
Political Reactions Across Europe
Political leaders and security experts across Europe have taken varying stances on the issue. Some politicians in Eastern Europe, which has faced direct Russian threats, view NATO’s presence as non-negotiable. Meanwhile, in some Western and Southern EU countries, there is more openness to debating the future shape of Europe’s defense.
Far-right groups, already skeptical of NATO’s cost and American influence, welcomed China’s critique, seeing it as an external validation of their critiques. Conversely, the mainstream center-right and center-left reaffirmed NATO’s importance while calling for a balanced approach to China that mixes economic engagement with caution.
Potential Impact on EU Defense Policy
The confrontation over NATO’s legitimacy presents significant implications for the EU’s ongoing efforts to strengthen its own defense identity. The EU’s new defense initiatives, such as the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) and the European Defence Fund, aim to enhance capabilities complementing NATO rather than replacing it.
Experts warn that reducing reliance on NATO too rapidly or allowing China’s narrative to dominate EU discourse could weaken Europe’s collective security posture. However, they also recognize the pressure on EU policymakers to assert more independence in military and strategic matters.
An EU security analyst summarized,
“The EU needs to navigate between reinforcing NATO as the backbone of European defense and developing its own strategic autonomy without alienating partners or emboldening rivals.”
China’s unprecedented call for the abolition of NATO during talks with MEPs represents a significant escalation in geopolitical rhetoric and a direct challenge to the Western security order. This confrontation carved a deep divide within the European Parliament and highlighted ongoing complexities in EU security policy as Europe grapples with balancing ties to the US and responding to China’s rise.
