NATO opens its arms to Russia in an attempt to become allies. Has the destruction of September 11th brought on this change of heart? Will it be a smooth transition from former enemy to trusted ally? Are the winds of change really blowing? Only time will tell whether NATO's new valued ally is a friend or foe.

The Uncertain Future of NATO
by Susan Hollis

As members of Generation X, we came of age in the midst of the Cold War when there was no greater enemy than the "evil empire" of the Soviet Union. However with the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, our generation has witnessed the transformation of a bitter enemy into a valuable ally. Nothing demonstrates how far we have come in this evolution then the recent Russia NATO Summit held in Italy this past May.

NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was established in 1949 by 12 Western nations committed to the defense of one another against the common threat of communist aggression. Since NATO's inception, the alliance has grown to include 19 countries, Belgium, Britain, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Turkey and the United States, with more countries seeking admittance every year. Of the nations to be considered this November in Prague, there are several former Soviet Union satellite countries, such as Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia, thus illustrating the ever changing dynamic of the NATO alliance and causing many in Russia to feel threatened by the continuing expansion of an organization historically designed to oppose the former communist country. Nevertheless, the shared goal of fighting terrorism has encouraged both sides to overcome past prejudices, making this tentative collaboration between Russia and NATO a truly monumental accomplishment.

However, just as the nations of NATO and Russia are taking significant steps to reconcile after 50 years of hostilities, many are questioning the organization's relevance in a post Cold War world. The attacks of September 11th and the ensuing war on terrorism have both strengthened and weakened these concerns. After September 11th NATO was quick to show its support for the United States, by enacting Article 5 of its treaty, which states that an attack on one nation in the alliance will be considered an attack upon all, with every nation pledging to aid and defend one another. Since 9/11 the US has received the assistance of various NATO nations, whose invaluable help has come in many forms, from shared intelligence and extradition agreements to sending troops into combat in Afghanistan. However, the nature of NATO support has also depicted the one-sidedness that exists within the alliance.

While America is enlarging its defense budget in order to fight the war on terrorism, most European allies have chosen not to increase their spending, and therefore they are unable to maintain the same level of military advancements as the United States, making it problematical to engage in joint actions. This leaves some critics in the US questioning the need to include NATO in military exercises at all, and many within the alliance irritated at being left on the sidelines with little or no say in the operations. Although several nations did send troops to Afghanistan, the operation was almost entirely a US action, causing the impression among some in the American military community that, while it is politically advantageous to receive allied support, it is not militarily necessary. Furthermore, America and its European allies hold differing political views on several key issues concerning how to proceed with the war on terrorism, such as the scoop and nature of the war and especially any impending attacks upon Iraq. A number of European nations have become disgruntled with their marginal role as peacekeepers, resenting the insinuation that they have been reduced to"cleaning up the mess" left behind after US military actions, but as one European politician put it, "with America, you have to pay to play." If European nations want a greater voice in NATO military operations, then they will have to increase their military spending as well as their troop deployments to rival those of the United States.

With the relevance of NATO being questioned on both sides of the Atlantic and with the world's new view of Russia as a valued friend and ally, many view NATO as an obsolete relic of the Cold War that should pass into history along side the Soviet Union. However, advocates of the organization cite the fact that with numerous nations still vying for acceptance into NATO, it remains a legitimate and useful organization, especially now when the resources of all nations are urgently needed to combat terrorism across the world. The remarkable partnership between the two former foes, Russia and NATO, illustrates the metamorphous that this alliance must continually undergo if it wants to remain an influential entity in the ever-changing realm of international relations.

***

Susan Hollis graduated with a degree in Political Science from Oklahoma State University. Her educational background consists of a mixture of studies in both domestic and foreign affairs. She has been an intern for a United States Senator at the US Capitol in Washington DC, where she obtained firsthand knowledge of the legislative process by watching it in action. During her internship, Susan had the opportunity to observe congressional hearings, deal with constituent services, and contribute to legislative research. Ms. Hollis has also had the chance to participate with a congressional campaign for the US House of Representatives.

Disclaimer:The expressed views and the opinions of any content/columns/articles within Gx Webzine is not neccessarly the expressed views and opinions of Gx Webzine. All information provided on this site is offered 'as is', without warrenty. All authors/columnist are responsible for their own articles/columns and Gx Webzine is unaware of any acts of unlawfulness and/or plagerism. If plagerism is found within the content of Gx Webzine, the author of the article/column will be responsible for any legal action that maybe taken by the original author of the content and Gx Webzine will be held blameless thereof.