Şevval Tufan – As Sweden recently joined NATO, bringing the total member count to 31, questions arise regarding Hawaii’s absence from the pact. Despite being a part of the United States, Hawaii remains outside NATO’s purview due to its geographical and historical peculiarities.
In the event of an attack on Hawaii, such as targeting the US Navy’s Pearl Harbor base or the Indo-Pacific Command headquarters, NATO member states would not be obliged to come to its defense. This anomaly, often overlooked even by Hawaii residents, stems from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s focus on Europe and North America, as per its name.
The exclusion of Hawaii is explicitly outlined in the Washington Treaty, which established NATO in 1949, predating Hawaii’s statehood. While Article 5 of the treaty mandates collective self-defense, Article 6 limits the geographic scope of this defense to territories in Europe or North America, specifically north of the Tropic of Cancer.
Despite Hawaii’s exclusion from Article 5, the US State Department asserts that Article 4, which calls for consultation in the face of threats to member states’ security, should cover any situation affecting Hawaii. However, amending the treaty to include Hawaii faces challenges, as other members have territories beyond the boundaries set by Article 5.
Experts argue that the geopolitical landscape has evolved since the treaty’s inception, especially in the Indo-Pacific region. With Hawaii’s strategic significance in countering North Korean aggression and supporting Taiwan’s defense, some advocate for a reconsideration of its exclusion from NATO’s protection.
The absence of Hawaii from NATO’s coverage also raises concerns about the credibility of deterrence against potential aggressors, such as China. Including Hawaii could enhance deterrence and underscore the solidarity of NATO allies in defending US territories.
Additionally, the strategic importance of Guam, another US territory in the Pacific, is highlighted, suggesting its inclusion under NATO’s umbrella would bolster regional security and deterrence against potential adversaries.
While some argue that NATO’s collective defense mechanism may not directly apply to Hawaii, others believe that in the face of an attack, the deep bonds between the US and its allies would lead to a coalition of support, mirroring past instances like the response to the 9/11 attacks.
Despite Hawaii’s exclusion from NATO’s formal coverage, experts emphasize the unwavering commitment of NATO members to US security and the shared values of the transatlantic alliance, which remain fundamental pillars of international security and cooperation.
Image/News Source: CNN
