:NATO is also an acronym for the National Association of Theatre Owners.
NATO 2002 Summit in Prague
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), also called the North Atlantic Alliance, the Atlantic Alliance or the Western Alliance, is an international organisation1 for collective security established in 1949, in support of the North Atlantic Treaty signed in Washington, DC, on 4 April 1949. Its headquarters are located in Brussels[1], Belgium. Its other official name is the French equivalent, l'Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord (OTAN).
Purpose
The core of NATO is Article V of the NATO Treaty, which states:
- The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.
The Treaty cautiously avoids reference both to the identification of an enemy and to any concrete measures of common defence. Nevertheless, it was intended so that if the USSR and its allies launched an attack against any of the NATO members, it would be treated as if it was an attack on all member states. This marked a significant change for the United States, which traditionally harboured strong isolationists groups across parties in Congress. However, the feared invasion of Western Europe never came. Instead, the provision was invoked for the first time in the treaty's history on 12 September 2001, in response to the 11 September attacks on the United States the day before.
NATO Summit 2006 will take place in Latvia.
History
The US President, NATO Secretary General, and the Prime Ministers of Latvia, Slovenia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Estonia after a South Lawn ceremony welcoming them into NATO on 29 March 2004.
Beginnings
The Treaty of Brussels, signed on 17 March 1948 by Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg (the Benelux countries), France, and the United Kingdom, is considered the precursor to the NATO agreement. This treaty established a military alliance, later to become the Western European Union. However, American participation was thought necessary in order to counter the military power of the Soviet Union, and therefore talks for a new military alliance began almost immediately.
These talks resulted in the North Atlantic Treaty, signed in Washington, DC, on 4 April 1949, and also including (besides the United States and the five Treaty of Brussels states) Portugal and the three Nordic countries of Norway, Denmark and Iceland. Three years laters, on 18 February 1952, Greece and Turkey also joined.
The incorporation of West Germany into the organization on 9 May 1955 was described as "a decisive turning point in the history of our continent" by Halvard Lange, Foreign Minister of Norway at the time. [2] Indeed, one of its immediate results was the creation of the Warsaw Pact, signed on 14 May 1955 by the Soviet Union and its satellite states as a formal response to this event, firmly establishing the two opposing sides of the Cold War.
- 1966: Charles de Gaulle removes French armed forces from NATO’s integrated military command to pursue its own nuclear defence programme. All non-French NATO troops are forced to leave France. This precipitates the relocation of the NATO Headquarters from Paris to Brussels by October 16, 1967. While the political headquarters are located in Brussels the military headquarters, the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE), are located just south of Brussels, in the town of Mons.
- 1 July 1968: The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty opened for signature. NATO argued its nuclear weapons sharing arrangements did not breach the treaty as US forces controlled the weapons until a decision is made to go to war, at which point the treaty would no longer be controlling. Few states knew of the NATO nuclear sharing arrangements at that time, and they were not challenged.
- 30 May 1978: NATO countries define two complementary aims of the Alliance, to maintain security and pursue détente. This is supposed to mean matching defences at the level rendered necessary by the Warsaw Pact's offensive capabilities without spurring a further arms race.
- 12 December 1979: In light of a build-up of Warsaw Pact nuclear capabilities in Europe, ministers approved the deployment of US Cruise and Pershing II theatre nuclear weapons in Europe. The new warheads are also meant to strengthen the western negotiating position in regard to nuclear disarmament.
- 1983–84: Responding to the stationing of Warsaw Pact SS-20 medium-range missiles in Europe, NATO deploys modern Pershing II missiles able to reach Moscow within minutes. This action leads to bitter peace movement protests throughout Western Europe.
- November 1983: A NATO manoeuvre code-named Able Archer 83, which simulates a NATO nuclear release, causes panic in the Kremlin. Soviet leadership, led by ailing General Secretary Yuri Andropov becomes concerned that US President Ronald Reagan may intend to launch a genuine first strike. In response, Soviet nuclear forces were readied and air units in Eastern Germany and Poland were placed on alert. Though at the time written off by US intelligence as a propaganda effort, many historians now believe Soviet fear of a NATO first strike was genuine.
Post-Cold War
- 8 July 1997: Three former communist countries, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, are invited to join NATO. They join in 1999.
- 24 March 1999: NATO sees its first broad-scale military engagement in the Kosovo War, where it wages an 11-week bombing campaign against what was then the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The United States has opposed efforts to require the UN Security Council to approve NATO military strikes, such as the ongoing action against Yugoslavia. France and some other NATO countries have said the alliance needs UN approval. American officials say that would undermine the authority of the alliance, and they note that Russia and China would have exercised their Security Council vetoes to block the strike on Yugoslavia. Conflict ends on 11 June 1999, when Yugoslavian leader Slobodan Milošević agrees to NATO’s demands. Currently, NATO operates the military peacekeeping mission in Kosovo as part of the 18,000 personnel KFOR force.
- 12 September 2001: NATO provisionally invokes, for the first time in its history, the collective security clause of its charter. Article 5 states that any attack on a member state is considered an attack against the entire alliance. This comes in response to the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack against the United States.
- 5 October 2001: NATO confirms the invocation of Article 5, having determined that the attacks of 11 September were eligible under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty. [7]
- 21 November 2002: During the Prague summit, seven countries are invited to start talks in order to join the Alliance: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania. The invited countries join NATO on 29 March 2004. Further countries express the wish to join the alliance, including Albania, the Republic of Macedonia, and Croatia. The summit also launches the NATO Response Force (NRF).
- 10 February 2003: NATO faces a crisis when France and Belgium veto the procedure of silent approval concerning the timing of protective measures for Turkey in case of a possible war with Iraq. Germany does not use its right to break the procedure but says it supports the veto.
NATO Defence Ministerial Conference in Nice 2005
- 16 April 2003: NATO agrees to take command in August of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. The decision comes at the request of Germany and the Netherlands, the two nations leading ISAF at the time of the agreement. All 19 NATO ambassadors approve it unanimously. The handover of control to NATO takes place on 11 August, and marked the first time in NATO’s history that it takes charge of a mission outside the north Atlantic area. Canada had originally been slated to take over ISAF by itself on that date.
- 19 June 2003: A major restructuring of the NATO military commands begins as the Headquarters of the Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic was abolished and a new command, Allied Command Transformation (ACT), was established in Norfolk, Virginia, US and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) became the Headquarters of Allied Command Operations (ACO). ACT is responsible for driving transformation (future capabilities) in NATO, whilst ACO is responsible for current operations.
- 29 March 2004: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia join NATO. They attend their first NATO meeting the following month.
Membership
Membership of NATO in Europe
- Founding members (4 April 1949)
- States that joined during the Cold War
- Former Eastern Bloc states that joined after the Cold War
12 March 1999:
29 March 2004:
France withdrew from the integrated military command in 1966. Since then it's only a member to NATO's political structure.
Iceland, the sole NATO member that does not have its own military force (the Icelandic Defense Force being the US Military contingent permanently stationed in Iceland), joined on the condition that they would not be expected to establish one.
Greece withdrew its forces from NATO’s military command structure from 1974 to 1980 as a result of Greco-Turkish tensions following the 1974 Cyprus dispute.
Cooperation with non-member states
██ NATO member states
██ Partnership for Peace countries
██ Mediterranean Dialogue countries
Euro-Atlantic Partnership
Main articles: Partnership for Peace, Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council
A double framework has been established to help further cooperation between the 26 NATO members and 20 "partner countries".
- The Partnership for Peace (PfP) program was established in 1994 and is based on individual bilateral relations between each partner country and NATO: each country may choose the extent of its participation. The PfP program is considered the operational wing of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership.
- The Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council on the other hand was first established on 29 May 1997, and is a forum for regular coordination, consultation and dialogue between all 46 participants.
The 20 partner countries are the following:
-
|
- 5 countries that (though militarily neutral) possessed capitalist economies during the Cold War:
-
- 3 Balkan nations also on the Eastern side of the Iron Curtain during the Cold War:
-
|
Mediterranean Dialogue
The Mediterranean Dialogue, first launched in 1994 is a forum of cooperation between NATO and seven countries of the Mediterranean:
NATO-Russia Council
- Main article: NATO-Russia Council
NATO and Russia made a reciprocal commitment in 1997 "to work together to build a stable, secure and undivided continent on the basis of partnership and common interest."
In May 2002, this commitment was strengthened with the establishment of the NATO-Russia Council, which brings together the NATO members and Russia. The purpose of this council is to identify and pursue opportunities for joint action with the 27 participants as equal partners.
Structures
Political structure
Like any alliance, NATO is ultimately governed by its 26 member states. However, the North Atlantic Treaty, and other agreements, outline how decisions are to be made within NATO. Each of the 26 members sends a delegation or mission to NATO’s headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. The senior permanent member of each delegation is known as the Permanent Representative and is generally a senior civil servant or an experienced ambassador (and holding that diplomatic rank).
Together the Permanent Members form the North Atlantic Council (NAC), a body which meets together at least once a week and has effective political authority and powers of decision in NATO. From time to time the Council also meets at higher levels involving Foreign Ministers, Defence Ministers or Heads of Government and it is at these meetings that major decisions regarding NATO’s policies are generally taken. However, it is worth noting that the Council has the same authority and powers of decision-making, and its decisions have the same status and validity, at whatever level it meets.
The meetings of the North Atlantic Council are chaired by the Secretary General of NATO and, when decisions have to be made, action is agreed upon on the basis of unanimity and common accord. There is no voting or decision by majority. Each nation represented at the Council table or on any of its subordinate committees retains complete sovereignty and responsibility for its own decisions.
- The second pivotal member of each country's delegation is the Military Representative, a senior officer from each country's armed forces. Together the Military Representatives form the Military Committee, a body responsible for recommending to NATO’s political authorities those measures considered necessary for the common defence of the NATO area. Its principal role is to provide direction and advice on military policy and strategy. It provides guidance on military matters to the NATO Strategic Commanders, whose representatives attend its meetings, and is responsible for the overall conduct of the military affairs of the Alliance under the authority of the Council.
Like the council, from time to time the Military Committee also meets at a higher level, namely at the level of Chiefs of defence, the most senior military officer in each nation's armed forces.
The NATO Parliamentary Assembly is made up of legislators from the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance as well as 13 associate members[3].
Military structure
NATO’s military operations are directed by two Strategic Commanders, both senior American Officers assisted by a staff drawn from across NATO. The Strategic Commanders are responsible to the Military Committee for the overall direction and conduct of all Alliance military matters within their areas of command.
Before 2003 the Strategic Commanders were the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and the Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic (SACLANT) but the current arrangement is to separate command responsibility between Allied Command Transformation (ACT), responsible for transformation and training of NATO forces, and Allied Command Operations, responsible for NATO operations world wide.
The commander of Allied Command Operations retained the title "Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR)", and is based in the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) located at Casteau, north of the Belgian city of Mons. This is about 80 km (50 miles) south of NATO’s political headquarters in Brussels. Allied Command Transformation (ACT) is based in the former Allied Command Atlantic headquarters in Norfolk, Virginia, USA.
NATO operates a fleet of E-3A Sentry AWACS airborne radar aircraft based out of Geilenkirchen Air Base in Germany.
List of officials
Research and Technology (R&T) at NATO
NATO currently possesses three Research and Technology (R&T) organisations:
- NATO Undersea Research Centre (NURC) ([5]), reporting directly to the Supreme Allied Command Transformation;
- Research and Technology Agency (RTA) ([6]), reporting to the Research and Technology Organisation (RTO);
- NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency (NC3A) ([7]), reporting to the NATO Consultation, Command and Control Organisation (NC3O).
Possible NATO expansion
The admission of further Partnership for Peace-nations is very likely. PFP often is considered a route to full scale NATO-membership. As a corollary NATO would become even more divergent in many respects, and harder to stir institutionally, which might further dilute the commitment of the traditionally strong member states to their partners.
Albania, Croatia, and the Republic of Macedonia are the three countries currently in the NATO MAP (Membership Action Plan); they are likely to join NATO in the future.
Ukraine
Defense Minister of Ukraine Anatoly Hrytsenko has declared that Ukraine will have an Action Plan on NATO membership by the end of March 2006, to begin implementation by September of the same year. A final decision concerning Ukraine's membership in NATO is expected to be made in a 2008 NATO-Ukraine, with full membership possibly attained by the year 2010. [8]
The idea of Ukrainian membership in NATO has achieved supported from a number of NATO leaders, including president Traian Basescu of Romania [9] and president Ivan Gašparovič of Slovakia. [10]
Currently however, a majority of Ukrainian citizen oppose NATO membership. Protests have taken place by opposition blocs against the idea, and petitions signed urging the end of relations with NATO. Prime Minister Yuri Yekhanurov has indicated Ukraine will not enter NATO as long as the public continues opposing the move. [11]
Finland
Finland is participating in nearly all sub-areas of the Partnership for Peace program, and has provided peacekeeping forces to the Afghanistan and Kosovo missions. The possibility of Finland's membership in NATO was one of the most major issues debated in relation to the Finnish presidential election of 2006.
The main contester of the presidency, Sauli Niinistö of the National Coalition Party supported Finland joining a "more European" NATO. Fellow right-winger Henrik Lax of the Swedish People's Party likewise supported the concept. On the other side, incumbent president Tarja Halonen of the Social Democratic Party opposed changing the status quo, same as most other candidates in the election. Her victory and reelection to the post of president has currently put the issue of a NATO membership for Finland on hold for atleast the duration of her term.
Other political figures of Finland who have weighed in with opinions include former President of Finland Martti Ahtisaari who has argued that Finland should join all the organisations supported by other Western democracies in order "to shrug off once and for all the burden of Finlandisation" [12]. Another former president, Mauno Koivisto opposes the idea, arguing that NATO membership would ruin Finland's relations with Russia. [13]
Polls in Finland indicate that the public is strongly against NATO membership. [14]
Israel
Israel is currently a Mediterranean Dialogue country and has been recently seeking to expand its relationship with NATO. The first visit by a head of NATO to Israel happened on 23-24 February, 2005 [15] and the first joint Israel-NATO naval exercise occurred on 27 March 2005. [16]. In May of the same year Israel was admitted in the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. Israeli troops also took part in NATO exercises in June 2005.
There have been advocates for the NATO membership of Israel, among them the former Prime Minister of Spain Aznar and Italian Defense Minister Antonio Martino. However Secretary-General of the organization Jaap de Hoop Scheffer has dismissed such calls, saying that membership for Israel is not on the table. Martino himself said that a membership process could only come after an Israeli request; such a request has not yet taken place. [17]
Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom stated on February 2005 that his country was looking to upgrade its relationship with NATO from a dialogue to a partnership, but that it wasn't seeking membership, saying that "NATO members are committed to mutual defense and we don't think we are in a position where we can intervene in other struggles in the world," and also that "We don't see that NATO should get engaged in our conflict here in the Middle East." [18]
The issue of Israel's potential membership was reenvigorated in early 2006 after heightened tensions between Israel and Iran. Former Prime Minister of Spain, Jose Maria Aznar argued that Israel should become a member of the organization alongside Japan and Australia, saying that "So far, expansion of NATO was an attempt at the growth and consolidation of democratic change in the former Communist countries. Now it is time to do the opposite, to expand toward those democratic nations that are committed to the struggle against our common enemy and ready to contribute to the common effort to free ourselves from it." [19] [20] Aznar also proposed a strategic cooperation with India and Colombia.
Debate on the benefits and necessity of NATO
Lack of main enemy
The crumbling of the main "enemy of the west" in Eastern Europe removed for many observers the necessity of a collective defence organisation. The debate about the necessity of NATO has increased due to dissension between members about the American led invasion of Iraq, makes some wonder (largely in North America) whether NATO has not become obsolete.
The presumed threat of terrorism could give the institution a new life, but some think also that fighting terrorists needs a completely different political and military organisation, as well as completely different weapon systems to those on which NATO was built. Others see the reorganizations currently taking place (e.g. see Allied Command Transformation) as providing already the evolution needed to counter new challenges.
Benefits for the United States
In the US, some emphasise the discrepancy in military spending between the USA and most European members. While the USA has the largest total military budget in the world, European nations have decreased their budgets significantly after the end of the Cold War. The gap in military capabilities is thus increasing, which raises questions about what the USA gains from membership. The lack of European capabilities was highlighted during the Kosovo crisis. Former NATO-secretary Lord Robertson criticised the European members in 1999, pointing out European nations must commit substantially more funds to defence just to meet their existing commitments to NATO. [8]
However, this commitment was not fulfilled in the following years, and this is expected to remain the case for the foreseeable future. That the US wants to continue to benefit from military ties with Europe (though not necessarily through NATO) can be seen by the fact that the US has had talks with Poland and other European countries over the possibility of setting up a European base to intercept long-range missiles, as part of the American NMD programme. This programme is designed to shoot down long-range missiles fired at North America. A European base would also protect some European nations (as well as the US). [21]
Issues with European integration
Many argue that NATO is in conflict with the prospect of deeper European integration in the fields of foreign policy and security within the framework of the EU institutions. Some advocates for a strong EU Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) would like to see NATO dismantled and a common defence and foreign policy created within the existing EU institutions. In November 2004, after the re-election of United States President George W. Bush, the Norwegian Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik publicly discussed whether Norway would benefit from strengthening her defence relations with the EU.
Notes
Note 1: NATO uses British English spelling as its standard. This convention is discussed in its online frequently asked questions: "Q: Why do you spell 'organisation' with an 's' and not a 'z'? A: By tradition, NATO uses European English spellings in all public information documents...". NATO has two official languages, English and French, defined in Article 14 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
References
- ↑ Boulevard Léopold III, B-1110 BRUSSELS, which is in Haren, part of the City of Brussels, NATO homepage. URL accessed on 2006-03-07.
- ↑ http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/9/newsid_2519000/2519979.stm
- ↑ http://www.nato-pa.int/Default.asp?SHORTCUT=1
- ↑ a b http://www.nato.int/cv/secgen.htm
- ↑ http://www.nurc.nato.int
- ↑ http://www.rta.nato.int
- ↑ http://www.nc3a.nato.int
- ↑ http://en.for-ua.com/news/2006/03/20/114232.html
- ↑ http://www.sofiaecho.com/article/bulgarias-capital-to-host-nato-talks/id_14114/catid_66
- ↑ http://www.slovakspectator.sk/clanok.asp?cl=22855
- ↑ http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=4735634&PageNum=0
- ↑ Helsingin Sanomat: Former President Ahtisaari: NATO membership would put an end to Finlandisation murmurs
- ↑ Helsingin Sanomat: Finland, NATO, and Russia
- ↑ Helsingin Sanomat: Clear majority of Finns still opposed to NATO membership
- ↑ [1]
- ↑ [2]
- ↑ [3]
- ↑ [4]
- ↑ [5]
- ↑ [6]
- ↑ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4445284.stm
See also
External links
| Main events (1945-1967) |
Main events (1968-1991) |
Specific articles |
Primary participants |
Other important figures |
|
1940s:
1950s:
1960s:
|
1960s (continued):
1970s:
1980s:
1990s:
|
Other conflicts:
|
Political leaders:
|
Political leaders:
|
