NATO: Should The NATO Exist?
Should the NATO exist?
From the early 1949-ties when NATO started the existence till the end of the Cold War there was no doubt about NATO necessity. The entire world was living of new war fair between western countries and the Soviet Union. Western countries were convinced about the western countries necessity to have NATO alliance as sustainable power of Soviet Union.
But the Cold War ended after collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. And on the same day NATO faced with the question – what is the object of the alliance in the changed world? At the same time western countries societies thought about the more complicated question – should the NATO exist?
For more than twenty past years, NATO was involved in some doubtful opera-tions for such …show more content…
Heads of state, ministers of defense and foreign affairs, intelligence officers, and current and former members of U.S. Congress were among the respondents who answered our call. Although none of them thought NATO should cease to exist’ (2012).
Sudden crisis in Ukraine changed even the people’s opinion. Western coun-tries realised that illusions about Russia were wrong. And dreams about the peaceful future world are not realistic still. Is it Russia, is it China or is it another big power, can make a challenge for NATO countries anytime. For this reason NATO should exist and has to be prepared for future challenges.
The reason for alliance continued existence
NATO is called as an alliance. The organisation was created as a military alli-ance and political alliance of western countries to enforce the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949. In the official NATO website (www.nato.int) NATO decelerates that the alliance countries cooperates on security and defence issues and the military capacity needed to undertake crisis-management operations just after diplomatic efforts …show more content…
To say exactly NATO is an only mili-tary alliance. NATO, as military alliance, faced with the identity problem after collapse of the Soviet Union. The main threat disappeared. For NATO it was hard times. NATO started to look for it new identity and for a new job. It was not easy and not very successful. The key words for this situation were described by former US Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates in 2010: ‘… for a dim, if not dismal future for the transatlantic alliance’ (Gates, 2011). The allied countries ‘were less certain about whether NATO can adapt to a changing geopolitical and military landscape -- and just who will foot the bill for future operations’ (Good, 2012). NATO started to act in a doubtful way. The actions against Yugoslavia in 1999 without United Nations approval, actions in Libya as ‘humanitarian intervention’ (Patrick, 2011) were criticised. In some cases real goals were hidden. In other cases NATO acted as United States directed. The actions out of NATO borders were criticised too. All it showed that NATO was searching how to survive. According to Ted Galen
From the early 1949-ties when NATO started the existence till the end of the Cold War there was no doubt about NATO necessity. The entire world was living of new war fair between western countries and the Soviet Union. Western countries were convinced about the western countries necessity to have NATO alliance as sustainable power of Soviet Union.
But the Cold War ended after collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. And on the same day NATO faced with the question – what is the object of the alliance in the changed world? At the same time western countries societies thought about the more complicated question – should the NATO exist?
For more than twenty past years, NATO was involved in some doubtful opera-tions for such …show more content…
Heads of state, ministers of defense and foreign affairs, intelligence officers, and current and former members of U.S. Congress were among the respondents who answered our call. Although none of them thought NATO should cease to exist’ (2012).
Sudden crisis in Ukraine changed even the people’s opinion. Western coun-tries realised that illusions about Russia were wrong. And dreams about the peaceful future world are not realistic still. Is it Russia, is it China or is it another big power, can make a challenge for NATO countries anytime. For this reason NATO should exist and has to be prepared for future challenges.
The reason for alliance continued existence
NATO is called as an alliance. The organisation was created as a military alli-ance and political alliance of western countries to enforce the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949. In the official NATO website (www.nato.int) NATO decelerates that the alliance countries cooperates on security and defence issues and the military capacity needed to undertake crisis-management operations just after diplomatic efforts …show more content…
To say exactly NATO is an only mili-tary alliance. NATO, as military alliance, faced with the identity problem after collapse of the Soviet Union. The main threat disappeared. For NATO it was hard times. NATO started to look for it new identity and for a new job. It was not easy and not very successful. The key words for this situation were described by former US Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates in 2010: ‘… for a dim, if not dismal future for the transatlantic alliance’ (Gates, 2011). The allied countries ‘were less certain about whether NATO can adapt to a changing geopolitical and military landscape -- and just who will foot the bill for future operations’ (Good, 2012). NATO started to act in a doubtful way. The actions against Yugoslavia in 1999 without United Nations approval, actions in Libya as ‘humanitarian intervention’ (Patrick, 2011) were criticised. In some cases real goals were hidden. In other cases NATO acted as United States directed. The actions out of NATO borders were criticised too. All it showed that NATO was searching how to survive. According to Ted Galen