In Focus

[12/05/2003] NATO in Afghanistan

The NATO alliance declined to expand its' participation in Iraq in response to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell's request for the members to play a larger role in the U.S. led coalition forces causing a rift within the trans-Atlantic alliance. “We urge the alliance to examine how it might do more to support peace and stability in Iraq which every leader has acknowledged is critical to all of us,” said Colin Powell. Instead, growing unanimity dictates that NATO foreign ministers focus on operations to strengthen peacekeeping operations in Afghanistan to complete its' mission there.

[12/05/2003] European Defense and NATO

Among other issues straining U.S.-European relations is the decision by leading European nations to create an autonomous European military planning unit challenging Washington's critical stance on the issue. According to Deutsche Welle news, the German Defense Minister Peter Struck said, “I think the agreement with Britain and France should strengthen the European part of NATO. This can and must be in the interest of our American friends.” Strategic Forecasting, a world leading private intelligence firm, raised the question of the relevance of NATO after the joint European force is established stating that the “role and functions of NATO as an entity would be unclear”. U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld allayed such fears while in Brussels saying that he is, “confident and hopeful that things will sort through in a way that we end up with an arrangement that is not duplicative or competitive.”

FPA Headline Series: NATO and Transatlantic relations in the 21st century: Crisis, Continuity or Change

To read more on issues facing the NATO alliance today, the origins and evolution of that alliance and the outlook for the transatlantic relations of tomorrow read Headline Series book “NATO and Transatlantic relations in the 21st century: Crisis, Continuity or Change” by Stanley R. Sloan, a Senior Specialist in International Security Policy.

"Working with NATO to end terrorism"

There has been much criticism of the United States for its reluctance to allow NATO to play a major role in the global fight against terrorism. Immediately following the Sept. 11th attacks, NATO allies cited Article 5 stating that, “an armed attack against one or more NATO country will be considered an attack against all,” for the first time in its' history. Some argue that the U.S. and Europe should form a broad-multilateral coalition in responding to current security issues and future threats. “All Dressed Up and No Place to Go: Why NATO Should Be on the Front Lines in the War on Terror,” argues for U.S. incorporation of NATO allies in combating terrorism so that it can actively fulfill its' operations affirmed by the NATO Strategic Concept agreement signed in 1999.

Expanding NATO membership

Using the Membership Action Plan (MAP), read about how NATO evaluates potential members of the organization using pre-conditions and specific criteria to determine the readiness and appeal of these countries to the organization. Furthermore, learn about the military consequences of the enlargement and how this may affect the organizations' defense system overall in the report, “NATO Enlargement, 2000-2015: Determinants and Implications for Defense Planning and Shaping,” released by RAND.

Recently In Focus

In Focus Archive »

• NATO
  
• NATO Crisis
  
• NATO and Consensus
  
• NATO Expansion
  
• European Defense Spending
  
• Macedonia
  
• NATO -Russia Council
  
• NATO's Democratic Values
  
• NATO in the Spring
  
• Yugoslavia, The Avoidable War?
  
• Terrorism
  
• Russia, NATO and the United States
  
• Russia and NATO
  
• NATO in Court
  
• NATO Transformed?
  
• Terrorism
  
• Macedonia
  
• NATO Members
  
• The Future of the Military
  
• Waging Modern War
  
• NATO
  
• NATO History
  
• Macedonia
  
• Depleted Uranium Ammunition
  
• Nuclear Missile Defense
  
• Defense Cooperation
  
• U.S. Elections