NATO: Relevant and Useful? Flashcards
arguments to suggest that NATO is still relevant and useful
NATO successes
new and updated goals
Russia still poses a threat
arguments to suggest that NATO is no longer relevant and useful
NATO failures
outdated
Russia no longer poses a threat
NATO successes
NATO SUCCESSES
NATO success in the Balkans (Bosnia 1995, Kosovo 1999) – In the Balkans, NATO made huge contributions that helped end the fighting and subsequently begin highly successful nation building
the UN, by not taking sides in the conflict, proved unable to stop the fighting yet NATO could
its bombing of the Bosnian Serbs in 1995 led to the signing of the Dayton Peace Accords that ended the fighting in Bosnia
similarly, its bombing of Serbia in 1999 led to the liberation of Kosovo, as well as the subsequent overthrow of Milosevic by the Serbs themselves
NATO’s role in subsequent peacemaking in the Balkans has also been praised — following ceasefires in Bosnia in 1995 and then in Kosovo 1999 it had a key role nation building
NATO’s role in ending the fighting in the Balkans and subsequently maintaining peace has been very positive and highly effective. It launched large-scale air operations and deployed approximately 60,000 soldiers under Operation Joint Endeavour. NATO, by its bombing of the Bosnian Serb positions in 1995, led to the signing of the Dayton Peace Accords that ended the fighting in Bosnia, demonstrating its effectiveness in peace-making and peace-keeping where other organisations had failed
NATO has also played an important role in confronting Somali pirates as part of Operation Ocean Shield
the operation protected the ships of Operation Allied Provider which transported relief supplies as part of the World Food Programme’s mission in the region
the initiative also helped strengthen the navies and coastguards of regional states to assist in countering pirate attacks
consequently, piracy has been significantly reduced in the region
at the height of the crisis, pirates were seizing dozens of ships each year with a knock-on economic cost estimated to be in the billions of euros annually BUT since 2012, thanks to maritime patrols, armed guards aboard ships and a range of other defensive measures, not a single commercial vessel has been captured
the mission concluded in 2016 and is widely considered one of NATO’s most successful ever operations
NATO failures
NATO FAILURES
perhaps one of its biggest failures was in Libya. The action taken, such as establishing ‘no fly zones’ and providing air support to rebel forces, successfully secured the overthrow of Gaddafi but following this overthrow, NATO failed to engage in the necessary nation-building and peace-building and, as a result, Libya is now in a state of anarchy with rival militias and ethnic groups violently divided.
As was the case with NATO intervention in Afghanistan, ISIL is now operating within Libya. Arguably, instead of reducing the threat of terrorism and fostering peace across the globe, NATO action in Libya and Afghanistan has had the opposite effect, instead leading to a rise in terrorism as the overthrow of regimes has led to instability, thus allowing organisations like ISIL to extend its influence. These tragic failures suggest that NATO may not be entirely effective in peace-making and peace-keeping.
Following the 9/11 attacks, America led the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001 to take control from the Taliban
Article 5 of the NATO charter was then invoked and NATO was called on to provide security and stability
It led the fight against Al Qaeda through the International Security Assistance Force and maintained a presence in the country from 2003 to 2014
NATO’s role in Afghanistan is highly controversial, partly because it was operating ‘out of area’ in unfamiliar territory, meaning those they were fighting against had the territorial advantage
“When the British went into these districts they didn’t know who were Taliban or not, had no idea of tribal politics and upset local people by bringing fighting and none of the promised reconstruction. They basically created a local insurgency where there had been none before” – Christina Lamb
NATO action led to ISIL achieving a presence in Afghanistan, which suggests that little was achieved in stabilising the region
NATO members disagreed as to the causes if instability in Afghanistan and were therefore unable to develop a shared strategy for providing security
Afghan civilians were killed by NATO airstrikes. For example, the bombing of a wedding party by a US air raid in 2008. It was hard to make the case that NATO, a supposed defence organisation, was acting defensively in Afghanistan
Aside from causing the loss of innocent lives, NATO intervention and the casualties resulting from such action created tensions between the Afghan government and foreign forces, as well as controversy among other NATO nations
NATO intervention is also seen as a failure due to the effects on NATO troops – more than 2000 US and 400 UK personnel were killed, these losses were politically damaging as people questioned how NATO troops serving and dying in Afghanistan helped the national interests of the member states
According to the Watson Institute for International Studies Costs of War Project, roughly 31,000 civilians had been killed as a result of the war up to the middle of 2016. Another report concluded that 106,000–170,000 civilians have been killed as a result of the fighting in Afghanistan at the hands of all parties to the conflict
In 2011, NATO began military intervention in Libya to implement United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 which demanded “an immediate ceasefire in Libya, including an end to the current attacks against civilians… imposing a ban on all flights in the country’s airspace – a no-fly zone – and tightened sanctions on the Gaddafi regime and its supporters.”
The resolution was taken in response to events during the Libyan Civil War
Fighting in Libya ended in late October following the death of Muammar Gaddafi, and NATO stated it would end operations over Libya on 31 October 2011
NATO’s intervention in Libya is even more controversial than that in Afghanistan
The action taken, such as establishing ‘no fly zones’ and providing air support to rebel forces, successfully secured the overthrow of Gaddafi but this action is widely regarded as a failure due to the implications of the overthrow of Gaddafi
Following the overthrow of Gaddafi, NATO failed to engage in the necessary nation building and, as a result Libya is in a state of anarchy with rival militias and ethnic groups violently divided
As was the case in Afghanistan, ISIL is now operating within Libya
Deciding whether to take action in the first place was a challenge, with Germany and Turkey both opposing military force
There were numerous civilian casualties – for example, a NATO air strike hit a crowd gathered for Friday prayers in Brega leaving 11 religious leaders dead and 50 others wounded. Air strikes in Tripoli kill 19 civilians and wounded 150. NATO airstrike on a medical clinic in Zliten kills 11 civilians (though the claim was denied by NATO)
Libya claims that NATO strikes have left up to 718 civilians dead
Alleged long term consequences – Commentator Max Blumenthal claimed that “blowback from interventionist policies carried out in the name of human rights and ‘civilian protection’” contributed to the 2017 Manchester Arena bombing. The perpetrator was of Libyan ancestry, born into a family of Libyan refugees who had settled in south Manchester after fleeing to the UK to escape the government of Muammar Gaddafi
new and updated goals
NEW AND UPDATED GOALS
For the first four decades of NATO the Cold War defined the alliance and collective defence against the USSR was its main role
After the cold war ended And the USSR collapsed many said that NATO had fulfilled its purpose and was no longer needed but the alliance still exists today
But after the end of the Cold War in 1991 NATO reinvented itself….
1) peacekeeping and humanitarian intervention — NATO carried out 77 days of airstrikes to remove Serbian troops from Kosovo in 1999 and is currently involved in peacekeeping in Afghanistan Kosovo and various regions in Africa
2) Expansion beyond Europe NATO commanded the UN mandated international security force in 2003 to 14 and from 2015 has led mission resolute support to trade advise and assist Afghan security forces and structures
3) Eastward expansion — 10 countries which were part of the USSR and Warsaw Pact have joined NATO since 1999
The end of the Cold War raised questions concerning NATO the threat that need to happen set up the council had vanished so was NATO still needed
It was still committed to fighting militant nationalism in Europe as well as promoting democracy and political integration the ex-Communist states of central and eastern Europe soon made it clear that they saw membership of NATO and the EU as key to embedding democracy and stability in their countries demonstrating the NATO was not yet obsolete
NATO is primary role is collective security in Europe and with the decline of the Soviet union people started to question his role but soon NATO member states began facing different threats in the 21st-century
On September 11 2001 terrorists flew passage airlines into the world trade Towers in New York and into the Pentagon in Washington DC this triggered the first and only time that article 5 of the natal chart was invoked this attack on one member state was an attack on them all
These terrorist attacks provoked a huge reaction from the US and its allies in operation enduring freedom do US let the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001 to take control from the Taliban regime which had allowed Al Qaeda to use the country as a base
NATO was called on to take command of the international security assistance Force aiming to provide security and stability so that peace and democracy could flourish in Afghanistan
NATO maintain the presence of the country from 2003 to 2014 but NATO’s role in Afghanistan was controversial for numerous reasons
outdated
OUTDATED
NATO was formed during the Cold War to protect the West from the communist threat to the East, and was highly successful in doing so, but now the Cold War is over and the Soviet Union has fallen so arguably NATO is no longer relevant
Lord Ismay NATO is first secretary general supposedly said that NATO’s purpose was to “keep the Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down”
After World War II many countries were left devastated particularly economically
During times of crisis is when the far right or far left groups appear popular with public opinion as they often offer a dramatic change from times of hardship as a result there was a rise of Communist power in the east and with fear that this powered spread the beginning of the Cold War was marked
In response NATO was formed for a collective defence from the military threat from the Soviet bloc
NATO was successful as a number of events that took place in the Cold War including the Berlin blockade so the cooperation of western Europe and the US as the Soviets cut off all road access to Berlin, resources became scarce however western allies from a number of air forces US Canada UK France came together to take supplies directly into Berlin
As well as this and the eventual end of the Cold War which saw the demise of the Soviet union NATO can therefore be said to be successful as it prevented a military threat from Soviet Russia and Eastern Europe and prevented the Cold War becoming a ‘hot war’
NATO is still relevant because Russia still poses a threat
RUSSIA
Arguably, NATO is still relevant because Russia still poses a threat – resurgent Russia
For Russia this expansion of NATO into its former sphere of influence was not only a threat but also betrayal the Russians believed that the deal to brag about German reunification prohibited the expansion of NATO into central Eastern Europe but this was not the case it now sees this Eastwood expansion as a part of the west’s policy to encircle and isolate Russia
NATO’s relationship with Russia and its predecessor the USSR has always been strained in recent years concerns about Russia’s objectives in its near abroad have raised tensions in the region to what some have described as a new Cold War
After the collapse of the Soviet union Russia was not in a position to confront the power of the USA economically militarily or politically so NATO did not feel under threat and as they took in more European countries and many joined the EU Europe seemed like a haven of peace and stability
However recently there have been several crises and tensions between Russia and NATO as Vladimir Putin has tried to regain Russia’s position as a global power
The stakes are high and both Russia and NATO have sought to bolster their borders by bringing troops and military equipment to deter what each site sees as an aggressive neighbour this movement suggest a replay of the Cold War and a classic security dilemma and arms race
Enlargement of NATO has caused disquiet and anger in Moscow but there have also been other issues where NATO and Russia have different interests
such as the USA is placement of an anti-ballistic missile system in former Soviet bloc countries near Russia — The US maintains that the system is designed to protect against missiles from Iran and North Korea but the Russians have their suspicions
The 2008 military conflagration Between Russia and Georgia has also raised tensions and Russia has sided with Serbia is historic ally over Kosovo is succession and pursuit of independence, Georgia is a prospective member of NATO
Recently Russian actions in Ukraine which is not a member of NATO caused alarm in the west in 2014 Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula which belongs to Ukraine and supported the pro-Russian rebels this as well as its actions in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine or signs of the danger that Russia poses
Russia is also rearming and has used its military to support President Assad in the Syrian Civil War
NATO allies particularly those with better memories of Soviet domination are concerned that Putin’s tactics against Ukraine could be used against them too
Poland and the Baltic states are concerned about Russian tactics including the use of hybrid warfare which is a mixture of conventional warfare Subversive and destabilising Activities and cyber warfare that could test of the collective security commitments of the 28 members of NATO
They fear that the Russians could manufacture a crisis involving ethnic Russian minorities in the Baltic states to muddy the water is allowing Russia to intervene with troops were not actually beautiful to Russia as a card in Ukraine in such circumstances Russia could possibly deny responsibility therefore forcing NATO countries to decide whether to retaliate with limited evidence of the Russian state’s involvement
Any differing views within data on how to act would massively weaken the alliance and give strength to the Russians
Russia announced that it had constructed the world’s most lethal nuclear weapon, the RS:28 Sarmat, which can dodge radar, travel up to 10,000 km and carry up to 12 warheads. Additionally, there is a huge gap between the destructive capacity of the US military machine and what it can achieve politically, unlike Russia, which has proven to be much more willing to use its military capabilities.
Russia does not pose a real threat, making NATO irrelevant in terms of this
RUSSIA
Russia does not pose a real threat, making NATO irrelevant in terms of this
the USA still remains the dominant military power despite challenges from Russia and China. Not only does it have world’s largest military budget (in 2015 it spent $610 billion on defence, which is more than the rest of the world’s spending on defence put together, with its nearest rival China only spending $216 billion), but it also has 800 military bases in over 70 countries (Russia only has 10) and 13 operational aircraft carriers (whereas Russia and China both only have 1). The US Navy is also greater in size than that of the next 17 Navies combined. The USA is clearly the sole power that can intervene militarily in any part of the world and sustain multiple operations, having truly global military reach.
