As diplomatic defence agreements become more common throughout the Indo-Pacific, the region is quickly re-militarized.
That contrasts dramatically with most of the post-Cold War time, when the country’s focus shifted toward financial prosperity and a degree of de-militarization, including in the case of the Philippines, seen in the closure of big Cold War-era American military bases.
On the other hand, over the past few weeks and months, a complex web of inter- and intra-regional links has been established or strengthened across this great land and coastal area.
This is occurring as a result of the US, its NATO allies, and its regional partners fighting for control and influence in response to the rise of rising powers like China, Russia, and other local states, which the West sees as potential proper or dangerous rivals.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s ( NATO ) expansion into the area is the most recent example of re-militarization. Although NATO does not, as yet, have a physical existence anywhere in the Indo-Pacific, the transatlantic firm is forging relationships in new circles with its main partners it, including Japan, Australia, South Korea and New Zealand.  ,
At its annual summit in Washington, DC, the group came to an agreement on several new initiatives, including improving interoperability, tackling hybrid threats, and strengthening general defense cooperation.  ,
It’s not just the Indo-Pacific’s most advanced economies that are forming military partnerships: The Philippines is foremost among the region’s developing economies to launch a series of new defense deals.  ,
The most recent and notable was its security pact with Japan, which was symbolically signed on the eve of the NATO summit.
The agreement facilitates the deployment of each other’s forces on their respective territories for joint drills, which was partially motivated by growing concerns over Manila’s recent clashes with China in the South China Sea.
Since the end of World War II and the former’s brutal occupation of many regional nations, including the Philippines, have Japan and another Asian nation signed their first defense agreements. Similar Visiting Forces Agreements had already been signed with Australia, as has Japan in fact.
The Philippines ‘ Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement ( EDCA ) was one of the most contentious military pacts the country has ever signed.
Former late-president Benigno Aquino founded the EDCA a decade earlier. Some members of the general public and the media in particular are concerned about the expansion of Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. this year.
Marcos has grown from the five bases that first housed the “rotational” US forces to four more on coastal areas facing Taiwan and the South China Sea.
According to the US Department of Defense, their stated goal was to “address a range of shared challenges in the Indo-Pacific region.”
Other notable military cooperation agreements include Japan’s ten-year mutual security agreement signed in June 2024. While non-binding, it provides for the supply of non-lethal assistance to Ukraine.
A similar cooperation agreement is being considered by South Korea. However, Yoon Suk Yeol, the president, announced last month that he would reconsider supplying Ukraine with lethal weapons after declining to do so the previous month.  ,
Putin hits back with new defense agreements
Yoon may have reconsidered after Kim Jong Un, the leader of North Korea, and Vladimir Putin’s defense agreement, agreed on his trip to Pyongyang in June 2024.
In the event that either state is the subject of an armed invasion from a third nation, the agreement provides for mutual military assistance.
In June, in another regional trip that irked Washington, Putin traveled to Vietnam. Since the Cold War, Russia has been Vietnam’s primary supplier of weapons. Under the condition that it is” not directed against any third country,” the two sides agreed to improve their mutual defense and security cooperation.
Nonetheless, the big regional elephant in the room was Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Moscow, his first since the Ukraine conflict began. Given that it took place during the opening days of the NATO Summit in Washington, the Indian government downplayed the timing of the trip.  ,
Both leaders agreed to expand their military cooperation with an emphasis on the joint production of advanced technology and systems, aside from the eminently renowned Putin-Modi bonhomie on display at their meeting.
These include establishing new joint ventures to produce military equipment and parts in accordance with the” Make in India” initiative, which is supported by Russian-led exports to “friendly” third countries and technological transfer transfers.
Ukraine’s weakening positions
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky heavily criticized Modi’s Moscow visit, calling it a “huge disappointment and devastating blow to peace efforts”.
Zelensky’s response may also reflect how Ukraine’s war effort is failing and how unlikely it is to eject Russia from its territorial gains, which Zelensky’s visit may also reflect.  ,
NATO’s support for Ukraine is largely confined to rhetoric and a limited amount of military and economic support, though. There are no authorized NATO “boots on the ground.”
The current Ukrainian position’s military weakness is obvious. The military’s potential manpower is greatly hampered by the army’s lack of young men in their 20s. The average age of Ukraine’s frontline soldiers is 43.
Ukraine’s economy is weak, though growth has been higher than anticipated in 2023. Nonetheless, under recent scenarios, it is unlikely to recover its GDP level until the late 2020s. The Russian missile attacks on Ukraine’s power grid and rail network, which are both destructive and persistent, are further deteriorating the economy.
The rhetoric of NATO and Ukraine that aims to retake all of the territory that Russia has occupied since the invasion and that the Russians have held in Crimea before the invasion is blatantly unrealistic.
More of the same rhetoric and constrained commitments of additional support are what are emerging from the NATO summit. Whether these promises will actually be fulfilled will depend on how far the conflict goes on the battlefield.
Russia does n’t appear to be bucking its military or economic woes, despite NATO’s claims to the contrary. According to the World Bank’s revised measurements this year, the fourth largest economy in the world is often overlooked because, in purchasing power parity terms, it is the fourth largest economy in the world.
According to the US, Ukraine should have a clear “bridge to NATO membership.” What this would entail in practice is meaningless. Moreover, it cannot guarantee membership. All NATO members are required to consent before becoming a member. Additionally, until the conflict is resolved, entry into NATO cannot happen.
Overdue Ukraine armistice
Resolution of the conflict is most likely to occur, at some point, via an armistice. It should be noted that an armistice allows both parties to agree to end hostilities over the current border positions, with Russia retaining the four oblasts it effectively controls plus Crimea, without either party giving a consensual victory.
The conflict then becomes frozen, with a military-free zone at the border. This was the way the Korean War came to an end. It is hoped that an armistice will be reached later this year, before another winter sets in, if only to put an end to the suffering of the Ukrainian people.
Ironically, a situation like this could lead to Ukraine joining NATO and preventing NATO troops or military installations from stationing close to the border after several hundred miles.
A similar situation exists in Norway, a long-standing member of NATO, where no NATO installations or troops are stationed north of Trondelag, which is far south of the border with Russia.
Finally, it is important to mention that China should play a role in any successful resolution of the conflict. Given its influence on Russia, it is the only nation that can guarantee the existence of an armistice.
Chinese President Xi Jinping demanded a ceasefire agreement from Russia and Ukraine as well as from other major powers to create a dialogue-friendly environment while speaking with Hungary’s Prime Minister Victor Orban. A ceasefire only occurs when all major powers “project positive energy rather than negative energy,” Xi said on CCTV.