Posted by Andrew Zvirzdin in
Transatlantic Relations on Thursday, May 20. 2010
How will a military alliance continue to function if many of its members are opposed to armed interventions and if modern security threats have moved beyond concerns over territorial integrity?
Answer: Turn the military alliance into something completely different.
That at least seems to be the conclusion of the group of experts tasked with creating a draft of NATO's new strategic concept. Their findings, released this week, envision a NATO defined by a host of new responsibilities from multilateral weapons procurement to cyber defenses to expeditionary actions. In her presentation as the group's chairperson, Madeleine Albright said "NATO is more than a military alliance; it is also a political community."
I would agree with Albright's perspective on NATO. Since NATO's efforts in the 1990s to encourage democratization in Eastern Europe, the alliance has assumed greater responsibilities in political, economic, and security fields. NATO's scope has certainly expanded beyond preserving the territorial integrity of its members, though this remains a central aspect of the organization's DNA. In this sense, the group of experts are merely highlighting what is already the case: NATO is no longer simply a defensive alliance.
But what is NATO exactly? If not a military alliance, then what? Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has said that NATO should become the "the forum for consultation on global security." Secretary Albright sees the alliance developing "partnerships" with key countries, with Russia on the top of that list. And some EU leaders simply hope that NATO can act to help member states streamline military expenditures and reduce redundancies. I believe NATO must be careful to not try to be everything to everyone. It must seek to focus only on those areas where it can provide real added value to its members states and the international community.
What do you think? What is NATO's niche in the international community? How should the forthcoming strategic concept envision the future of NATO?
Latest Comments
because you're bad losers, and too arrogant to listen to advicesComments ()
Pat Patterson about U.S. Generals Indicate No Quick Withdrawal from Afghanistan
So the fact that I had to go to a French blog to read about the foot-in-mouth of a [...]Comments ()
Marie Claude about U.S. Generals Indicate No Quick Withdrawal from Afghanistan
Petraeus asks NATO for [...]Comments ()
Marie Claude about U.S. Generals Indicate No Quick Withdrawal from Afghanistan
"Faut-il continuer à laisser la technique diriger la stratégie générale ou doit-on la [...]Comments ()
Marie Claude about U.S. Generals Indicate No Quick Withdrawal from Afghanistan
hmmm you wouldn't have even known him if it wasn't "no pasaran" kind effort to flam [...]Comments ()
Pat Patterson about U.S. Generals Indicate No Quick Withdrawal from Afghanistan
Probably for the same reason we don't often publish anything truely negative about [...]Comments ()