Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Authors
Christopher Chappell,
University of Illinois
Oli Cotton,
University of Leeds
Jack Heidecker,
Westflische Wilhelms-Universitt
Sandra Houzvickova,
University of Pavia
Redefining Relationships
Inside and Outside the Alliance
Anna Jordanova,
Masaryk University
Chenoa Sly,
University of Alberta
Connor Smart,
University of Plymouth
INTRODUCTION
NATO has made mistakes that have jeopardized its future as a collective defense
alliance. The North Atlantic Treaty was signed with the intention of ensuring the
security of its members. That should remain the focus.
NATO-Russian relations have failed to advance beyond the Cold War mentality,
wherein each was the others principle enemy. The Alliance should seek to mitigate
tensions with Russia rather than pursuing policies that will further entrench the
Alliance's original goal of countering the Soviet sphere of influence. NATO missions
since the Cold War taken on for reasons other than the collective defense of its
members have subjected the Alliance to much criticism and have not contributed to
ensuring the security of its members.
NATO members' uneven commitment to defense spending has affected the stability
of the Alliance and has created distrust on both sides of the Atlantic.
This memo points out NATOs biggest mistakes of the last 25 years and offers
policy recommendations to remedy them.
Andrew Snell,
Virginia Tech
Jolana Veneny,
University of Oxford
Atlantic-community.org is the
Open Think Tank on Foreign Policy
with more than 9000 members
Editor-in-Chief: Jrg Wolf
wolf@atlantic-community.org
Publisher
Atlantische Initiative e.V.
Forststr. 51
14163 Berlin
Germany
Tel: +49.30.206 337 88
Fax: +49.30.246 303 633
Directors
Dr. Johannes Bohnen
Jan-Friedrich Kallmorgen
2. Internal mistakes
2.1 European members failed to enforce consistency on defense spending.
NATO member countries have pledged to spend at least 2% of GDP on defense, but
have failed to specify any consequences for non-compliance. Since 1991, European
governments have slashed defense budgets, decreasing military readiness. Lower
levels of financial commitment and capability of European members have impacted
their ability to work alongside the US. Recent training exercises have shown that
European troops are not capable of the long term deployments that their US counterparts are. The intervention in Libya showed the inability of European members to
conduct such a mission on their own; US forces had to provide the backbone of a
supposedly European-led mission.
This transatlantic imbalance in military spending contributes to the European perception that NATO is synonymous with the United States and the US perception that
European states are free riding on US power. The gap between US and European
defense spending causes distrust on each side of the Atlantic, evidenced by recent
rhetoric in the US presidential election.
2.2 NATO has not reacted sufficiently to trends of authoritarianism.
NATO defines itself as a political and military organization of sovereign states,
founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty, and the rule of law. The
unwillingness of some member countries to respect these fundamental principles has
affected the internal cohesion of the Alliance and the willingness of member countries
to cooperate in other areas and within other organizations. Such conflicts jeopardize
the ability to reach consensus and thus inhibit NATO's ability to act quickly.
that has the potential to be used for the self-interest of the intervening state. Members
should advocate for the protection of minority rights abroad and should address any
human rights concerns at home. NATO should not unilaterally take on human rights
interventions and should disavow the R2P doctrine.
CONCLUSION
A quarter of a century has passed since the fall of the Soviet Union and the disappearance of NATOs original adversary. Since then, simultaneously with many
rewarding activities, NATO has also made mistakes and wasted resources, manpower, and political capital muddling through mired conflicts in searching for a new
mission.
NATO ought to strengthen its commitment to the goal of collective defense, rather
than engaging in activities outside of the original mandate. The Alliance should strive
to create a cooperative relationship with Russia, using the conditional offer of future
membership to open a fruitful dialogue needed to resolve the conflicts in Ukraine and
Georgia. These conflicts can be tackled either through a non-aggression pact or
immediate admittance of these vulnerable East European countries to the Alliance.
Out of the current muddled approach, the Alliance must pursue a clear path forward in
either direction.
To remain a credible, stable organization, NATO has to improve its inner coherency,
including the issues of spending and military collaboration, and of inconsistent
adherence to fundamental principles. Balancing these issues can improve the military
readiness of European members, and also improve relations between Europe and the
US.
Christopher Chappell is a student at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. He
studies Political Science with emphasis in International Relations and Transnational
Issues.
Oli Cotton is a student of international relations at the University of Leeds, UK. His
focus is on American foreign policy, the global balance of power and the realismliberalism debate.
Jack Heidecker studied German and Political Science at the University of Pittsburgh
and will be studying European Governance at the Westflische Wilhelms-Universitt
Mnster. He is interested in national security collaboration between the EU and the
US.
Sandra Houzvickova is a student of the Master Program in World Politics at the
University of Pavia. She is working as an intern in the Permanent Representation of
the Czech Republic to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg.
Anna Jordanova studies media, journalism and history at the Masaryk University in
Brno, the Czech Republic. She focuses on the issues of historical memory and its
influence in the contemporary societies of the post-Soviet area.
Chenoa Sly is a Master of Arts student at the University of Alberta in Edmonton,
Canada. Her work focuses on humanitarian interventions, and the tension between
human rights and territorial sovereignty.
Connor Smart studied international relations at the University of Plymouth. He has his
own current affairs blog and is planning to work in London with an International
education charity.
Andrew Snell is a senior at Virginia Tech studying political science. He focuses on US
national security, specifically terrorism and Russia.
Jolana Veneny is currently an MPhil candidate in Russian and East European Studies
at St Antonys College, University of Oxford. She focuses on Central Europe, its
politics, and its relations with the Russian Federation.
The authors wish to thank all online commenters for their valuable input.
http://www.atlantic-community.org/nato-mistake
The authors have written this Memo after qualifying with individual submissions, which
provide more detailed information on the aforementioned policy recommendations for
those interested:
Christopher Chappell: NATO's Biggest Mistake? Public Relations
http://www.atlantic-community.org/-/nato-s-biggest-mistake-public-relations
Oli Cotton: Why NATO Must Revert to Basics and Adapt to Russian Aggression
http://www.atlantic-community.org/-/why-nato-must-revert-to-basics-and-adapt-to-russian-aggression
Sandra Houzvickova: NATO is Synonymous with the US. Europe Must Be Included
http://www.atlantic-community.org/-/nato-is-synonymous-with-the-us-europe-must-be-included
Chenoa Sly: The Post-Cold War NATO: Decoupling Regime Change and Human
Rights Promotion
http://www.atlantic-community.org/-/the-post-cold-war-nato-decoupling-regime-change-and-human-rights-promotion
Connor Smart: NATO's Greatest Mistake was Libya: the Alliance Should Have Nothing
to do with R2P
http://www.atlantic-community.org/-/nato-s-greatest-mistake-was-libya-the-alliance-should-have-nothing-to-do-with-r2p
The articles have been written for category B NATO's Biggest Mistake and Lesson
Learned of the Shaping our NATO competition and respond to the questions: What
do you consider to be NATO's biggest mistake in the last 25 years? What lessons
should be drawn and how to prevent similar mistakes in the future?
The competition has been made possible by generous contributions from the NATO
Public Diplomacy Division, the Konrad Adenauer Foundation and the Foundation for
Polish-German Cooperation.