©1997 Center for Defense Information — Washington, DC I.S.S.N. # 0195-6450
Volume XXVI, Number 1 January 1997
Transforming NATO By Including Russia
• NATO was designed to fight the USSR. With the Cold War over, the Alliance has lost its mission. As an anachronism, logically it could be disestablished.
• Events are taking an unfortunate turn. Largely for domestic political reasons, the U.S. Administration is insisting that NATO be extended eastward to include nations like Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic.
• Russia, alarmed that NATO expansion will renew the Cold War division of Europe and push the dividing line closer to its borders, strenuously opposes such a move.
• If NATO is pushed eastward, peaceful cooperation between Russia and the West would be jeopardized and the danger of nuclear catastrophe increased.
• Any stable, constructive security alliance of major European nations must include Russia as a full member.
• The U.S. should end its military domination of Europe and should exercise wise political leadership to facilitate Russia's inclusion among the states joining a transformed and renamed European military alliance.
NATO's Longevity
Throughout the Cold War, avoidance of war's devastation has been a paramount policy objective of western European nations and one of America's fundamental interests. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), led by the U.S., was the means adopted in 1949 to preserve peace in the face of the military might of the Soviets. By the 1955 inclusion of West Germany in NATO the U.S. also reassured the rest of Europe that Germany would be restrained "by a net of embraces and mutual obligations."
Both of these objectives have been accomplished and NATO has fulfilled its mission. Logically NATO should be disestablished as an anachronism. But it survives and its members want it to continue indefinitely. There are both political and bureaucratic motives for this extended longevity.
• U.S. administrations and Congress want to preserve NATO because it gives America a vehicle for dominating (they say "influencing") European affairs.
• European governments want to continue relying on America's contribution to their security so as to reduce the cost of their own defense establishments.
• NATO has built an impressive bureaucracy, and bureaucracies do not willingly go away.
• NATO is a haven for senior military officers. Attached to it are a large number of generals and admirals who are supposed to plan and direct allied military operations and provide liaison with their national forces.
NATO's longevity is probably a fact of European life. As it stands, the Alliance is expensive but does not jeopardize the peace of the continent. However, recent events such as the search for a new role for NATO, and NATO expansion eastward, could well cause a revival of superpower confrontation, destabilize the region, disrupt economic development, and undermine the long-term outlook for peace in Europe. It is essential that the outcome of these events contributes to peace rather than becoming a source of divisiveness in Eurasia.
The Center for Defense Information believes
that strong social, economic, political, and military components and
a healthy environment contribute equally to the nation's security.
CDI opposes excessive expenditures for weapons and policies that
increase the danger of war.