Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of NATO after the cold war
The role of NATO after the cold war
The role of NATO after the cold war
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The role of NATO after the cold war
NATO After the Cold War and Changing Role OUTLINE 1. Introduction 2. NATO’s main functions 3. NATO’s new missions after Cold War 4. NATO in the 21’th century 5. Europe after the Cold War 6. NATO’s relations with OSCE and WEU 7. Conclusion 1. Introduction (1) After the end of World War II, all involved countries, with no exception of being victorious or defeated, have started seeking of the prevention of a new disaster by reconstructing and maintaining the security and peace primarily in Europe. All huge and disastrous events (such as World Wars) which affected whole world were originated from the uncomfortable conditions and conflicts in the continent. Thus the main task was to settle a mechanism that would eliminate any emerging threat against the continental security and maintain the order and peace. For this purpose, in 1949 West European countries established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in order to protect the member countries against any possible attack which was primarily expected from the East European Countries led by the Soviet Union. During the Cold War, NATO’s primary goal was to circumvent any aggression held by the iron-curtain countries. Military deterrence (by developing high-tech and nuclear weapons and locating them to the eastern frontier of the Alliance, Germany and Turkey) was the main strategy in preventing any large-scale attack from the Soviet Union and other Warsaw Pact countries. By the end of Cold War many debates were made and still is going on whether the Alliance completed its mission in the territory. In spite of all, The North Atlantic Treaty has continued to guarantee the security of its member countries ever since. Today, following t... ... middle of paper ... .... “NATO’s Quality of Life”. New York Times (www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/havl/nato.htm) Kent, Randolph and Mackinlay, John. May/June 1997. “International Responses to Complex Emergencies: Why a new approach is needed?” NATO Review, 27-29. Kugler, Richard L. 1995. “Defence Program Requirements”. In NATO Enlargement: Opinions and Options, Jeffrey Simon (Ed), Washington D.C. National Defence University Press, Fort McNair, 184-207. Kupchan, Charles A. Summer 1999. “Rethinking Europe”. The National Interest, 73-79. Morrison, James W. April 1995. NATO Expansion and Alternative Future Security Alignments. McNair Paper 40 (http://www.ndu.edu/ndu/inss/macnair/m040cont.html) NATO’s (formal) Web Page; http://www.nato.int Okman, Cengiz, October-November 1998, “Savunma”, vol 3, 54-55, 73 WEU’s (formal) Web Page; http://www.weu.int/eng/
This book showed NATO as being an organization that is very unorganized. It came across as though the countries involved did not respect each other’s thoughts and opinions. It dwells on the mistakes made by countries for example the United States, various other European countries. It made it seem as though NATO was in conflict within each other making the organization as a whole seem incapable of compromise and the defence of anything. At many points NATO wanted to vote the United States out of the organization but this obviously never happened. At one point it was a problem “about the possibility of being dominated and ultimately overwhelmed by too close an association with the United States” (pg.30) for Canada and their relationship.
The author doesn’t forget to mention the relationship between USA and NATO. He thinks that Americans welcome NATO as a weapon for America’s affairs, not of the world’s. In his final words, it is suggested that either Europe should invite USA to leave NATO or Europe should expel America from it.
Canada was influential in the development of NATO; it had been a member of NATO since it was founded in 1949. The purpose of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was to unify the western allies and strengthen the military as a reaction to a possible threat from the Soviet Union and its allies. In 1949 many countries signed a contract to be part of the organization including: Belgium, Great Britain, Italy, Iceland, Luxembourg, United States, Canada, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Portugal.² Canada gained benefits from being part of NATO such as the ability to have a say in alliance policy, and now Canada would be able to “deal with the US on a multilateral context.” ¹ NATO also provided safety for Canada from the potential aggression of the Soviet Union. Canada’s armed forces were the most engaged, and active responsive armed forces within NATO. Canada’s priority in NATO was to ensure that all allies remain modern and are able to face the threats during the time period.
In doing so, this assessment of U.S. interests in Crimea supports the options of non-intervention and a non-provocative stance in order to maintain long-term stability because the Russian invasion has only violated peripheral interests of EUCOM and SACUER. One of EUCOM's primary roles is to strengthen NATO's collective defense and assist its transformation since the fall of the Soviet Union. This is accomplished through building partner capacity to enhance transatlantic security. EUCOM supports American interests in Europe as outlined in the National Security Strategy: The security of the United States, its citizens, and U.S. allies and partners; A strong, innovative, and growing U.S. economy in an open international economic system that promotes opportunity and prosperity; Respect for universal values at home and around the world; and An international order advanced by U.S. leadership that promotes peace, security, and opportunity through stronger cooperation to meet global challenges.
Shalikashvili, J.M. (n.d.). Shape, Respond, Prepare Now -- A Military Strategy for a New Era. National Military Strategy. Retrieved September 14, 2004, from http://www.dtic.mil/jcs/nms/index.html#Top
On March 24, 1999, the united countries of North Atlantic Treaty Organization, under pressure from the United States, launched an illegal assault upon a sovereign nation. The evidence is overwhelming that leaders within the United State government sponsored this decision with the extreme perseverance from President of the United States. NATO should have dismissed the request for assault and involvement for it was clearly illegal. It’s perpetrators showed total disregard for Article One of the NATO Charter, which incorporates by reference the United Nations Charter, Chapter One, Article Two, Sections Three, Four and Seven. These sections make it clear that NATO’s role is to be purely defensive. The aggression that NATO has undertaken did not come from or with approval of the UN Security Council, which NATO’s Charter clearly states numerous times that the UN Security Council will convene and approve of any such matter or action. It is a brutal violation of NATO’s Charter and of all principles of international law.
International organizations such as NATO and the UN are essential not only for global peace, but also as a place where middle powers can exert their influence. It is understandable that since the inception of such organizations that many crises have been averted, resolved, or dealt with in some way thro...
“Ready for War.” Intelligence Reports Iss. 131 (Fall 2008). 46-54 SIRS Researcher. Web. 03 Feb. 2011.
In the 1950s, French insecurity feelings forced the state to strengthen its military and presumed Germany as their potential enemy. The state decided not to join the European Defence Community (EDC); where Britain and United States excluded, to stay away from its former archenemy. In other hand, the members of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO); particularly the hegemons US and Britain provided guarantees as the security providers to European in against potential German aggression. The guarantee triggered the French National Assembly to...
Wendt, Alexander. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security. Cambridge: President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1995. 71-81. Print.
Mingst, K. (2011). Essentials of international relations. (5th ed., p. 70-1). New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company
The Cold War (1945-1991) was a substantial war that was fought on an. economic, philosophical, cultural, social and political level. This impacted globally and changed the majority of the world’s societies to a. liberated fashion, rather than the archaic and conservative ways. Global war is a war engaged in by all if not most of the principle nations of the world, a prime example of such would be of the two great wars. Therefore the cold war can’t be classified as a global war in terms of the military and actual warfare’s, as the two superpowers (Soviet Union and USA) fought indirectly with each other, however to an extent the cold war can be said it’s a global war in terms of its politics and economics. The The effects of the Cold War were definitely felt globally and had an aftermath.
John Lewis Gaddis, Strategies of Containment: A Critical Appraisal of American National Security Policy During the Cold War, (Oxford: OUP, 1982), 206.
The end of the Second World War brought about great change in the world. This was especially true in Europe, where some battles left areas completely devastated. With Hitler regime fallen, it was clear the leaders of not only European nations but other nations like the United States wanted to change the structure of land that was once occupied by the Nazi army. The U.S. and Western Bloc would be in a chess match over this land with the Soviet Union and the Western Bloc. This chess match is better known as the Cold War. The following paragraphs will discuss how this war where no blood was shed played out throughout Europe. These paragraphs will examine and provide examples of how the Cold War created a new a set of geopolitical, social and economic relationships throughout the continent as well as which of these factors was of most importance.
Geissmann, Hans J. 2001. “The Underrated OSCE” Working paper presented for Consultation on NATO Nuclear Policy, National Missile Defence & Alternative Security Arrangements in Ottowa, Canada. http://www.ploughshares.ca/libraries/WorkingPapers/Simons%20Conf%20Ottawa/Giessmann.html