European elites primarily view the Pacific as part of a new geopolitical contest within the broader Indo-Pacific framework, rather than solely as a strategic extension of their historical empires.

While the enduring historical connections, particularly through France's and the UK's overseas territories, provide a vital foundation for their presence, the overarching strategic rationale today is overwhelmingly driven by the dynamics of great power competition, specifically the rise of China and its implications for global order, trade, and security.

The European Union (EU) and its key member states have pivoted their focus from the older "Asia-Pacific" concept to the more geographically and strategically expansive "Indo-Pacific."

This shift is inherently a reaction to contemporary geopolitical realities, signaling an acknowledgment of the region's centrality in the emerging multipolar world and a desire to shape its future, often aligning closer to the United States and other regional partners like Japan and Australia.

The Dominance of New Geopolitical Contest

The language and structure of the EU and national Indo-Pacific strategies clearly indicate that the primary driver for European engagement in the region is the recognition of a new geopolitical and geoeconomic reality.

Great Power Rivalry and the China Factor

The core of the European strategic calculus is the intense Sino-American great power competition. European elites recognize that their economic prosperity and the stability of the rules-based international order are fundamentally linked to the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.

• Economic Stakes: The Indo-Pacific hosts many of the world's fastest-growing economies and is a crucial nexus for global trade. Nearly one-third of total worldwide trade and the majority of maritime oil trade passes through key sea lanes, including the South China Sea. The potential for conflict or disruption in these crucial passage points directly impacts Europe's supply chains and economic security. Therefore, maintaining freedom of navigation and overflight is a central theme in all European strategies.

• China's Assertiveness: The EU and member states express serious concerns about China's increased assertiveness, including the militarization of disputed areas and its use of economic and diplomatic coercion. European documents increasingly frame their engagement as a commitment to a "free, open, and rules-based Indo-Pacific," which serves as a clear, though often carefully worded, counter-narrative to Beijing's regional ambitions. The growing willingness to participate in monitoring United Nations sanctions against North Korea and deploying military assets to the region (e.g., naval presence in the South China Sea) demonstrates a move away from purely economic engagement toward security concerns.

• Strategic Autonomy and Alignment: European elites are debating their position between Washington and Beijing, often aiming for a stance of "strategic autonomy" or a "third way." However, the discernible trend, especially since the release of the EU's 2021 Indo-Pacific Strategy and the 2022 Strategic Compass, has been a gradual alignment with the US and other like-minded regional players. This recalibration is a pragmatic response to the deteriorating security environment and the perceived need to uphold the existing international system against revisionist pressures.

The Indo-Pacific Concept as a Geopolitical Construct

The very adoption of the term "Indo-Pacific," replacing the older "Asia-Pacific," is a geopolitical move. It links the strategic theatres of the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Rim into a single, cohesive security system. For Europe, this construct allows for a more comprehensive and forward-leaning strategic engagement that transcends purely commercial ties.

• Multilateralism and Norms: European engagement emphasizes multilateral cooperation, adherence to international law (especially the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)), and the promotion of democratic values. For the EU, a supranational organization, this emphasis on an effective multilateral order is a means to wield influence and to counterbalance the zero-sum logic of great power rivalry. This is a deliberate effort to shape the geopolitical contest in line with European interests and values.

The Enduring Role of Historical Empires

While the current geopolitical contest is the main driver, the Pacific's status as a former imperial frontier is not irrelevant. For specific European powers, particularly France and the United Kingdom, their historical legacies and remaining territories provide the practical means and legal justification for their persistent presence. This historical layer acts as a critical enabler for their contemporary strategic ambitions.

France: A Pacific Power by Sovereignty

France is the only European Union member state that considers itself a fully-fledged Indo-Pacific nation. This self-identification is entirely rooted in its colonial history and the maintenance of overseas collectivities like New Caledonia, French Polynesia, and Wallis and Futuna.

• Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ): These territories give France the largest EEZ in the world, with the vast majority of it (around two-thirds) located in the Indo-Pacific. This maritime domain is rich in resources and strategically vital, making its defense a core national interest.

• Military Projection: France's sovereignty over these islands necessitates the permanent stationing of military forces (e.g., in New Caledonia and French Polynesia), providing the forward operating bases necessary for conducting freedom of navigation operations, joint exercises, and security cooperation across the region.

• Geopolitical Lever: French elites skillfully use their sovereign status to cloak national interests—such as resource protection and global power projection—with the mantle of an EU mandate. This historical presence is instrumentalized to justify a leading role in the EU's regional strategy and to secure a seat at high-level regional security dialogues. However, the internal political tensions in territories like New Caledonia, with ongoing decolonization processes, present a political liability that complicates France's strategic posture, as foreign powers seek to exploit these divisions.

The United Kingdom: Returning East of Suez

The UK's strategy, confirmed in its 2021 Integrated Review, signals a commitment to a sustained and prominent presence in the Indo-Pacific, often characterized as a "tilt" or a "return East of Suez." This is a deliberate attempt to project itself as a global actor post-Brexit.

• Historical Infrastructure and Alliances: The UK leverages its historical network, including the Commonwealth and its base in Diego Garcia (Indian Ocean), to deepen strategic ties, particularly in the maritime domain with allies like India and Australia. The AUKUS security pact (with the US and Australia) is the most significant manifestation of this strategy, a clear response to the contemporary security challenges posed by China.

• Limited Direct Pacific Assets: Unlike France, the UK has fewer direct territorial assets in the Pacific, making its engagement more reliant on diplomatic partnerships, naval deployments, and its role as a key US ally. The narrative of "returning" invokes the symbolic weight of its imperial past but is primarily focused on serving present-day geopolitical objectives.

Conclusion: A Fusion of the Past and the Present

In summary, European elites see the Pacific not as a relic of their historical empires but as an arena for a new geopolitical contest that profoundly impacts European prosperity and security. The language, objectives, and resources dedicated to the Indo-Pacific strategies are all centered on managing the strategic shifts caused by the rise of China and the resulting great power competition.

However, the historical imperial presence—chiefly France's sovereign territories and the UK's residual networks—provides the infrastructure and justification that allows these two nations to be credible, permanent players in the Pacific theatre today. Their ability to project power, influence policy, and shape the EU’s approach is a direct, though often problematic, legacy of their imperial past.

Therefore, the Pacific is viewed as a new geopolitical contest that is strategically underwritten by the remnants of historical empires. The primary motivation is the future of the rules-based global order, while the persistent, tangible connections from the past offer a crucial advantage in executing that modern strategy.