The Future Role of NATO

NATO was founded in the post-WWII environment as a means of Western nations defending their interests against the Soviet Union. With the fall of the U.S.S.R. and the ending of the Cold War, the role of NATO has changed, and to a point it is still going through those changes. The initial concept of NATO was to combine North America and Western Europe in military alliance, capable of and willing to respond with nuclear force if there were any Soviet attacks on its members.

This was in response to the Soviet-backed overthrow of the democratic government in Czechoslovakia. By 1952, Mediterranean countries like Greece and Turkey were in NATO, which served as an extension of all nations with Western democratic values. The first major operation after the end of the Cold War came in the Balkans in the 1990s. NATO at this time sought to preserve the security of its members even while there was chaos and war nearby.

But the move to back Kosovo against Serbia represented a role for NATO in lending support to a non-member on combat mission against another non-member. This was a shift in NATO's role in the world. NATO's role today has evolved from the post-Cold War roles that it started to define for itself at that time. Defining a new Role NATO's first several decades were entirely defined by the Cold War. Without that, NATO changed radically, such that some observers argued it was basically an entirely new organization (Jackson, 1997).

Most particularly, NATO moved beyond the collective defense of its members with the actions in the Balkans, which because they involved third parties were outside of NATO's traditional theater (Jackson, 1997). The actions in the Balkans essentially served to extend NATO's sphere of influence, and came at a time when the organization was shifting its influence eastward into the former communist nations. This action has been extended more recently with NATO actions in theaters such as Afghanistan.

Peacekeeping NATO became involved in peacekeeping efforts in the 1990s, something that occurred as a means of protecting NATO's interests in conflict regions. In both the Balkans and in the Caucasus, NATO worked to not only calm open conflicts but to extend its interests as well. NATO had allies and interests in these regions, and there were clear enemies as well -- Russia in the Caucasus and Serbia in the Balkans. As such, NATO would not only take on a prominent peacekeeping role but would blend this with military actions.

NATO peacekeepers have remained relevant in other theaters since then, in particular Afghanistan. Influence NATO is also seeking to build on the peacekeeping role. With NATO actions having successfully garner victory in places like Kosovo, the organization established itself as willing to use its combined military power against third parties if there was sufficient interest. NATO became a means by which its powerful nations could hide their battles behind a larger, international body. NATO it seems has more credibility because it is comprised of many nations.

This credibility is also something that it utilizes on the world stage, and in politics. NATO seeks to build coalitions with other bodies for major projects, such as reconstruction in Afghanistan. NATO will sometimes cooperate with the United Nations, as occurred with its intervention in Libya in 2011. "Peace Through Security" NATO's projection of power has been cited by the agency as one of the major means by which it works.

It has, occasionally, demonstrated a willingness to fight, and that is something that can guarantee a higher degree of security among NATO nations. The reality is that smaller nations like Serbia and Libya may be regionally strong, but cannot withstand NATO. NATO seeks to act and operate on the edges of its borders, something that projects more power than otherwise might be the case. So peace through security is a concept where NATO's mere presence brings security to a region, because no nation wishes to cross NATO.

There are still exceptions, of course, but greater security is achieved with NATO becoming involved in areas that are outside of its boundaries. Full Circle One of the interest issues with NATO's role is the relationship that it has with Russia. In 2002, NATO made moves to become closer to Russia, something that was viewed at the time to reshape NATO's organization and reason for existence (Chollet & Goldgeiger, 2002). The relationship with Russia has gone backwards since that point.

Today, after NATO member Turkey shot down a Russian jet over its soil, NATO and Russia appear closer to open conflict since 1989. The conflict is presently between Turkey and Russia, but if Turkey invokes Article 5 then NATO will have to respond, or be moot as an organization (Daniels, 2015). Going Forward NATO will continue to exert its military and political muscle. Asa coalition of some of the most powerful militaries in the world, NATO has the ability to win conflicts and protect its members.

It will continue to use this power in the future to influence different regions. Yet, the future is going to be tested -- if not over Syria then somewhere else -- because NATO is starting to bump up against forces that it cannot easily defeat. NATO will need to maintain its military activity in order to maintain its political strength. Yet, NATO will need to be careful because invoking Article 5 could end up being a bluff called. What NATO should do, however, it continue to expand its sphere of influence.

One of the structural things it did was to expand its influence around the Mediterranean. It did not accept Israel, Morocco and other regional nations as members, but it did come an understanding with those countries about the need to keep security in the Mediterranean region. NATO, thus, remains a focal point for Western interests. These are usually political in nature. By supporting a country or a people, NATO can win allies. It won the support of Albania with its defense of the ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.

It has been compelled to support Turkey's position with the Kurds, to the point where after the intervention in Iraq there was no consideration of Kurdish independence, even though they enjoyed de facto independence in northern Iraq. Going forward, NATO should also take a bigger role on this like food, energy and water security.

Thus far, NATO's security mandate has been almost entirely military in nature, but the organisation has to recognize that food, water and energy are all security issues, and that NATO members have the power to look after themselves to preserve the access that they need to these essentials of life. I believe that NATO will expand its role in the 21st century to include those particular mandates, and this will expand the role of NATO "s military as well, in particular if the stakes are raised by climate change devastation.

Article 5 The one complicating factor in NATO is Article 5. This was created during the Cold War to state that any attack on a NATO member will be an attack on all NATO members. This was, essentially, a nuclear deterrent. But it was really only aimed at the U.S.S.R., the other superpower. An attack on NATO then would invoke mutually assured destruction. Today, the security environment is much more complex. There are many enemies, and many have nuclear capabilities.

It is much more difficult to NATO to argue that it needs to invoke Article 5 in this setting. To do so runs the risk of needless escalation, especially in environments where such escalation could prove to be exceptionally destructive. For example, this issue with the Russian jet could see.