Whether West Europe Considered NATO as Burden or Protector

7/28/2019 Whether West Europe Considered NATO as Burden or Protector

1/13

1 Whether West Eur

Whether Wes

as Burden or

Introduction

What was Cold War?

The Cold War was a peri

most of the world betw

actors in the Cold War w

Russia and countries alig

potentially devastatingthe Cold War jockeyed for

When did the Cold War

USSR came out of the uni

reform the vulnerable ec

became a matter of time.

Post-Cold War Soviet States

pe Considered NATO as Burden or Prot

Europe Considered

rotector

d of tension and subdued hostility

en the 1940s and the early 1990s.

re the United States and its allies,

ned with that nation. Rather than

out and out war, the countriesposition in more subtle ways.

nd?

The Cold

ended

Soviet U

in 1991

Gorbach

The sym

collapse

Union,

consecuti

control t

various

were see

Countries

Ukraine,

Germany

controlle

n in the first days of 90s. After the p

nomy of the union failed, the fall of

ctor

NATO

hich gripped

The primary

countered by

ngaging in a

involved in

War virtually

when the

ion collapsed

and Mikhail

v resigned.

ptoms of the

of Soviet

which was

vely failing to

he unrest in

parts of it,

n in late 80s.

like the

West

who were

by the

olicy taken to

Soviet Union


2/13

2 Whether West Europe Considered NATO as Burden or Protector

Virtually Soviet Union was seen as a victim of the Cold War. But In 1992

Geroge F.Kennan, one of the three leading fighters of the Cold War, made a

point of stating that nobody won the cold war. It had been a long, costly

tragedy, fuelled on both sides by unreal and exaggerated estimates of the

intentions and strength of the other side.

Effects of Cold war in West EuropeIn many ways it was very good for Western Europe. For the first time ever,

France, Germany, the United Kingdom and Italy worked together with the

USA and forge an alliance. Their economies grew together, and modern.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)

NATO is an alliance of countries from Europe andNorth America. It provides a unique link between

these two continents for consultation and

cooperation in the field of defense and security,

and the conduct of multinational crisis-

management operations.

NATO was a byproduct of the Truman Doctrine in

one sense. By 1947, US president Harry S. Truman's advisers urged him to

take immediate steps to counter the Soviet Union's influence, citing Stalin's

efforts (amid post-war confusion and collapse) to undermine the US by

encouraging rivalries among capitalists that could precipitate another war.

Trumans response to this was the adoption of containment, the goal of

which was to stop the spread of communism.

West Europe and NATO

Recent research has revealed secret armies have existed across Western

Europe, during the Cold War. Coordinated by the North Atlantic Treaty

Organization (NATO), they were run by the European military secret services

in close cooperation, with the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the

British foreign secret service Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, also MI6).

Trained together with US Green Berets and British Special Air Service (SAS),

these clandestine NATO soldiers, armed with underground arms-caches,

prepared against a potential Soviet invasion and occupation of Western


3/13

3 Whether West Eur

Europe, as well as the c

communist parties. The

clandestine NATO armies

guarded secret through

until 1990.

As a Cold War mechanis

primary function of bein

economic rival of th

However, with the disban

Pact, the organization wa

for a new role in order to

the post-Cold War worl

attempting to handle th

disarmament and the rep

with the former Soviet Un

By the mid-1990s, there

NATO as disarmament

proceeded relatively sm

Western Europe apparat

that both strengthened

encompass the Eastern E

Partnership for Peace (initiatives, which aimed t

the former Soviet bloc.

pe Considered NATO as Burden or Prot

ming to power of

xistence of these

remained a closely

ut the Cold War

, NATO served the

the political and

Warsaw Pact.

ing of the Warsaw

s forced to search

remain relevant to

d. It did so by

e immediate post-Cold War conce

sitioning of a unified Germany, as w

ion.

was a need to reconsider the securit

as in process and the German u

othly, with the new state integra

s. The organization consequently s

xisting partnerships and expanded

uropean states. This can be seen es

fP) and the North Atlantic Cooperstrengthen NATOs relationships wit

NATO and Warsaw

ctor

rns involving

ll as relations

approach of

ification had

ted into the

ught policies

eastwards to

ecially in the

ation Councilmembers of

act States


4/13


Content

By the end of the century, there was a need to critically question NATOs

changing role. This was especially true after the NATO bombing of Kosovo,

which further questioned NATOs security role, given that the organization

had made a military offensive against the Serbian forces, a change from its

original defense-related aims. In addition, questions remained about the

need for continued US involvement in Europe as well as the possible

inclusion of Russia into NATO, as postulated by then Acting President

Vladimir Putin. NATO is therefore in the process of addressing such

concerns, and its functions have tended to head towards crisis management

and peacekeeping. It has, however, remained as the key European security

institution, as reflected in the centrality of the organization in determining

European security issues.

Now, we will try to discuss whether the West Europe countries considered

NATO as a burden or protector. As France, Germany and Britain were the

superpowers, we will focus on these three West European countries.


5/13


Germany and NATO

NATO has been important for Germany especially because of the value of the

transatlantic partnership with the United States, which Germany believes to

be an important anchor of its security policies. This is because American

military ties to Europe have been essential towards maintaining peace and

stability on the European continent.

NATO has also been important in maintaining the strategic balance in

Europe, and in offsetting Russias military power, especially since Germany

lacks a nuclear arsenal, and has to depend on the US to provide such a

security guarantee. An important aspect of German interests in NATO lies in

the idea that the organization serves as an avenue for the denationalizationof the German military, especially as seen in the Kosovo bombings.

Consequently, Germanys involvement in NATO has served to address issues

of increased German responsibility in security issues while at the same time

allaying neighboring countries fears of a German military resurgence.

In order to attain these aims in NATO, Germany has mainly sought to

revitalize NATO in the wake of the Cold War. It has been critical in the

development of NATOs post-1990 strategic concept, especially in the

adaptation of NATOs nuclear policy of flexible response, altering it to

promote no first use of nuclear weapons. In addition, Germany has also

worked to change the nature of NATO itself, steering it from a defense

organization to one actively participating in crisis prevention and

management. The country has also been essential in reshaping NATOs

conventional force structure, increasing military integration through the

establishment of increased multinational units, which also helped to allay

Germanys neighbors fears now that it was part of a multinational force

committed to multilateral European security. In attempting to establish ties

with Eastern and Central Europe, Germany has been instrumental in the

development of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) with the aim

of bringing together NATO countries and the former Soviet bloc states so as

to stabilize the countrys eastern borders. It has also approached NATO

enlargement in a similar manner, favoring a more conservative position so

as not to isolate Russia.


6/13


France and NATO

In the post-Cold War era, France has increased its appreciation of the

transatlantic relationship with the US, and has seen NATO as a means of

enhancing this partnership. This is because Paris, like Berlin, sees NATO as ameans of anchoring the US to Europe, and the American military as a force

to ensure the security of Europe, as can be seen from the Yugoslav and

Kosovo crises. Moreover, an enlarged NATO with a strong integrated

command, linked by charters to Russia and Eastern Europe, ensured the

primacy of the organization over pan-European organizations like the OSCE.

In addition, differences over the role of European security organizations like

the WEU have relegated their importance as secondary to NATO, allowing

the institution a greater contribution towards the security of Europe.

However, despite French recognition that a US role is important to Europes

security, the country has also expressed a desire to maintain its national

independence, as can be seen by its military isolation from NATO until the

late 1990s. This can be explained by the countrys reluctance to allow

America to totally dominate the proceedings in Europe. Indeed the French

agreed to NATOs Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) concept only because it

allowed the country to join in peacekeeping operations without being a part

of NATOs integrated military command. French interest in the WEU has

been geared towards the promotion of European integration and the creation

of an independent defense entity separate from the influences of the US and

NATO. This is because France, like Germany, recognizes the importance of

European autonomy, which it believes should exist alongside the NATO

alliance. There was therefore a consequent shift from the 1980s stance that

any European defense organization served merely as European pillar of

NATO, towards the position that Europe deserved a more separate entity of

its own. This can be reflected in the promotion of the Maastricht Treaty to

bind Germany to a Western European alliance, as well as the promotion of

the CFSP as a means of advancing European collective security in an era of

German post-unification, so as to counterbalance the US influence in Europe.

In addition, the development of the Eurocorps has also served to emphasize

a French need for competing European and transatlantic security structures.

Despite such French initiatives at creating a distinct European defense

identity, the country also believes that in the short to medium term,


7/13


European initiatives cannot replace the primacy of US-led NATO.

Consequently, any WEU initiatives should only be made within the auspices

of a NATO framework, embodying the policy of NATO first, Europe second.

To this end, France has pursued a different path from Germany, and

rejected the idea of totally integrating the WEU and the EU, proposing thatthe WEU should serve only as the defense arm of the EU.


8/13


Britain and NATO

Like Germany and France, Britain believes that America should be involved

in European security. This has resulted in London adopting a strongly

positive stance towards NATO, as reflected in its belief that Europeansecurity should be underwritten by a strong US/NATO leadership. NATOs

importance is therefore linked to the value ascribed to transatlantic debates

and armament cooperation. In addition to the primary role of NATO as a

means to engage the US in Europe, Britain also values the organization as a

credible and effective guarantee of its members territory, especially in the

peaceful engagement of military forces within the continent, with the aim of

maintaining the security of Europe as a whole.

To this end, Britain has consistently pursued policy measures increasing its

role in NATO, such as by undertaking a leading role among the European

powers in NATOs Allied Command Europe Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC).

This involved a British commitment of at least 8 out of the 15 initial brigades

constituting the initial ARRC force. By adopting such a leading posture in the

ARRC, Londons leadership of the European NATO countries was confirmed

within the context of a NATO-led security system. In addition to British

involvement in the ARRC, the country was also supportive of NATOs

initiatives to be linked to the peacekeeping process. This could be seen in

the British acceptance of NATOs role as an organizing body for the

peacekeeping needs of both the UN and the OSCE.

Despite Britains strong support of NATOs operations in Europe, the country

is hesitant to expand NATO membership because it is cautious about having

to guarantee the territorial sovereignty of additional states. In addition, if

states are admitted to NATO because they are free democracies, there is the

possibility of having to agree to Russian membership or face a

destabilization of ties with Moscow, especially if it was to be refused

membership.

Unlike Germany and France, Britain views the WEU primarily as a means of

strengthening the European pillar of its Atlantic alliance, and not purely to

promote greater Europeanization. Consequently, London holds the view

that any European security framework should be complimentary to NATO,

even though it promotes a European identity independent of NATO. To this

effect, the WEU could be involved directly in peacekeeping operations either


9/13


as a secondary role to NATO or in the event of US disinterest. This is not to

mean that European interests should be subjugated to US interests, but

should be viewed more as a hedge against overwhelming American influence

in Europe, as can be seen in the British refusal to lift the Bosnian arms

embargo in 1993.

So, we can see that that in most cases West Europe considered NATO as

protector. But at the same time, West European countries were very much

conscious of their national independence. So, to some extent, West

European countries considered NATO as burden it was hindering their

national independence in one way or other.


10/13


West Europe and the USA

In any discussion on the construction of Western European security, it is

important to consider the role of the United States. This is because America

has been a crucial player in European security since the post-World War Tworeconstruction of the continent, which left the country facing its Cold War

foe, the Soviet Union. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the important

Atlantic relationship did not diminish in significance, and was instead

strengthened, reaffirming the primacy of America in European security. This

continued significance of the US to post-Cold War Europe can be explained

by two main reasons the remaining possibility of a Russian threat and the

lack of European unity and strength.

A Poster on the NATO bombing campaign in Yugoslavia

A continued need for the US to serve as a European power can be seen by

Western Europes lack of military strength as well as its failure to agree on a

cohesive collective security policy. This is illustrated by the decreased

military spending policies in Western Europe despite American calls for

increased burden sharing, which have led to concerns that European

nations are free riders in preserving continental security. There has also

been the failure of consensus among Western European nations with regards

to European security arrangements such as the European Security and

Defense Identity (EDSI) and the Common Foreign and Security Policy

(CFSP). This lack of a cohesive European response to crises has ensured the

USs primacy in ensuring European security, as can be seen by the increased

role of US-led NATO in the Balkans.


11/13


In attempt to retain control over Western Europe, as in the Cold War years,

Washington has utilized NATO as its institution of choice in post-Cold War

Europe. This can be seen through the numerous changes America has

initiated in NATO to facilitate the evolution of the organization to a post-Cold

War world. For instance, the development of the North Atlantic CooperationCouncil (NACC) was initiated to promote rapprochement with former

Communist states as part of Americas Partnership for Peace (PfP) efforts. In

addition, NATOs Combined Joint Task Force (CJTF) concept enabled America

to assert leadership in European security because it retained veto power

over use of NATO assets despite allowing the WEU the power to use the CJTF

for its initiatives such as the CFSP. Similarly, Western Europes efforts at

developing an EDSI were allowed to continue provided it established the US

as the cornerstone of its policy, and operated only as a European pillar

within NATO. This was similar to the US agreement to the WEU being thedefense arm of the EU only if it acknowledged the primacy of NATO in the

European security arena. As can be seen in all these multilateral

agreements, the US allowed Western Europe greater autonomy in European

affairs, but only if it acknowledged the continued significance of Americas

role in Europe.

So, we can see that that in most cases, West Europe considered NATO as

protector. But at the same time, West European countries were very much

conscious of their national independence. So, to some extent, West

European countries considered NATO as burden it was hindering their

national independence in one way or other.


12/13


ConclusionThe shaping of European security is a delicate process involving a consensus

in foreign policy making by the major Western European actors of Germany,

France and Britain, as well as by the only superpower of the post-Cold War

world, the United States. In their search for a consensus on the new security

structure, these four major powers have modified some of their foreign

policy preferences in exchange for the acceptance of some of their other

policy objectives. This can be seen not only in the multilateral discussions,

but in the bilateral relationships such as the Franco-German partnership or

the Anglo-American friendship. Hence, the shaping of post-Cold War

European security has been through interplay of power between these four

major countries, which has been the underlying issue behind the tensions of

European assertiveness and American dominance.

One of the most realistic future partners to NATO would be The Western

European Union (WEU) which was formed in 1955 as a result of the failure of

the European Defense Community (EDC). The WEU has followed the work of

NATO. There is a string case for improving coordination between the two

international institutions. The objective of WEU is to build up WEU in stages

as the defense component of the European Union. To this end, WEU is

prepared, at the request of the European Union, to elaborate and implement

decisions and actions of the union which have defense implications.

Furthermore, WEU may become an important link between NATO and theEuropean Union.

We can assume that there is a future for NATO, even though the institution

has not got any principal enemies (such as the threat from the former

Warsaw pact). The North Atlantic Treaty Organization can effectively

coordinate its efforts, and its military power with the activities of the

Western European Union.

At the end of the day the quote of Lewis Gaddis, the biographer of George F.

Kennan, can be depicted.

American imperial powerhas been a remarkable force for good,

for democracy, for prosperity.


13/13


Documents

Whether West Europe Considered NATO as Burden or Protector