Why is NATO not popular in countries like India and China?

NATO, primarily a Western military alliance, often faces skepticism in countries like India and China due to perceptions of geopolitical alignment and sovereignty concerns. Both India and China prioritize strategic autonomy and view alliances through the lens of their own national interests and regional ambitions. For India, its non-aligned stance during the Cold War and its desire to maintain strategic independence in global affairs make the Western-centric NATO alliance less appealing. China, on the other hand, perceives NATO's expansion and activities, especially those highlighting the Indo-Pacific strategy and relationships with China's neighbors, as encroachments on its sphere of influence and potential threats to its national security. This underlying tension shapes their cautious or critical stance toward NATO, emphasizing a broader preference for multipolarity in international relations.

NATO's unpopularity in countries like India and China can be attributed to a complex interplay of historical, geopolitical, and strategic factors that align with each nation's unique worldview and foreign policy priorities. For India, its foundational approach to international relations has been deeply influenced by its post-colonial history and a strong commitment to non-alignment. This principle guided India during the Cold War, allowing it to navigate the bipolar world without aligning closely with either the Western or Eastern blocs. The ethos of non-alignment, although evolved, continues to shape India's foreign policy, making the prospect of aligning with a military bloc like NATO unattractive. India values strategic autonomy, seeking to balance its relations among global powers while avoiding entanglements in alliances that could compromise its sovereignty or draw it into conflicts not of its choosing.

China's stance towards NATO is informed by its perception of the alliance as an instrument of Western, particularly U.S., strategy aimed at containing China's rise as a global power. The expansion of NATO's interest into areas China considers within its sphere of influence, particularly through partnerships and dialogue in the Asia-Pacific region, is viewed with suspicion. China sees such moves as attempts to undermine its security and to thwart its ambitions to assert itself as a dominant player in the region. Furthermore, NATO's criticisms of China's human rights record and its military activities in the South China Sea and around Taiwan are seen by Beijing as unwarranted interference in its internal affairs, exacerbating tensions.

From a strategic perspective, both India and China are engaged in a delicate balance of power within Asia and globally. India's security concerns are primarily regional, focusing on its borders and its rivals, including China. The potential of aligning closely with a Western military alliance like NATO could further strain its relationship with China, with whom it shares a long and contested border. Moreover, India's engagement with other multilateral forums and partnerships, such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) with the U.S., Japan, and Australia, reflects its preference for more flexible and less binding forms of international cooperation.

In contrast, China's global strategy involves projecting its power and influence to counterbalance the U.S. and its allies, including NATO. China invests heavily in developing its military capabilities and in initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to expand its influence. For China, NATO represents a challenge to its ambitions, particularly as the alliance begins to take a more pronounced interest in Indo-Pacific affairs. The competitive dynamics between China, the U.S., and other NATO members make cooperation difficult and fuel perceptions of NATO as antagonistic to Chinese interests. In sum, the unpopularity of NATO in India and China is rooted in these nations' historical experiences, strategic priorities, and perceptions of the alliance as being at odds with their own interests and aspirations on the global stage.