NATO: History, Structure, and Post-Cold War Operations

Introduction and Historical Background

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was founded in 1949 when twelve nations from Western Europe and North America signed the North Atlantic Treaty in Washington, DC (NATO.int, 2011). The first NATO members are listed in Appendix A along with the current membership roll. The key stipulation in the treaty was that "an armed attack against one or more…" of the members "…shall be considered an attack against them all." The structure of NATO began to take shape in 1950, when the outbreak of the Korean War heightened the sense of urgency felt by NATO members. General Eisenhower was appointed Supreme Allied Commander Europe and began the task of setting up NATO's organizational structure.

The first forty years of NATO were defined largely by the organization's role in the Cold War, standing to defend Western Europe against the communist nations of Eastern Europe. Other critical incidents that helped define NATO's role were the Yom Kippur War between the Arabs and the Israelis, and the 1974 Cyprus crisis between Turkey and Greece, both NATO members at the time (NATO.int, 2011).

Modern NATO history begins with the end of the Cold War, a development that brought NATO into its current role in conflict resolution around the world in areas of interest to NATO members. The organization has been a major contributor to a number of missions in the Balkans, beginning in 1991. NATO's operations during that period included monitoring embargoes, peacekeeping, and active conflict, such as enforcing the no-fly zone over Libya. The first no-fly zone monitoring was conducted over Bosnia-Herzegovina after the United Nations declared a no-fly zone over that country in 1992.

NATO has expanded in the post-Cold War environment as well, adding the central European nations of Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary. NATO's missions have expanded in recent years to include areas of northern Africa such as Libya and Sudan, as well as the shipping lanes off the Horn of Africa that have been subject to significant piracy (NATO.int, 2011).

Raison d'Etre: From Cold War Alliance to Cooperative Security

NATO has essentially had two reasons for existing throughout its history. The first was to protect against communist incursions into Western Europe. After the end of World War Two, NATO was created as a counterweight to the Soviet Union's extensive sphere of influence. The Soviet Union was strong at the end of the war, while the armies of the Western nations were generally weak. Soviet troops began suppressing all non-communist political opposition, and Europe was being divided along communist and non-communist lines. The newly created United Nations was quickly breaking down in terms of its ability to protect the sovereignty of nations, a situation which led the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada to forge their own solution. When France and the Low Countries joined the talks, the North Atlantic Treaty was formed (Haglund, 2011).

Thus, NATO from the beginning was set up as a military opposition to growing Soviet influence, and to provide the West with equivalent might during the Cold War to staunch the spread of communism. When the Cold War ended in the late 1980s and early 1990s and the once-powerful communist states began to either break apart or transition to capitalism, NATO's role shifted. Haglund (2011) argues that after the Cold War ended, NATO was "reconceived as a cooperative-security organization." NATO would thereby have two mandates. The first was to foster dialogue with former adversaries in the Warsaw Pact, many of whom would eventually join NATO. The second was to manage conflicts in areas on the European periphery. This brought NATO's involvement to the Balkans, where a succession of conflicts emerged after the breakup of Yugoslavia. NATO's geographic scope has since extended into North Africa, and — following the September 11th terrorist attacks — into Afghanistan as well.

Admissions Policies and Internal Structure

Appendix A shows NATO's membership and the timeline for each country's accession. After West Germany joined, there were no new members until Spain joined in 1982, and then no more new members until 1999. Since that point, there have been three enlargements of NATO, adding twelve new members. Ten of these were once part of Warsaw Pact nations and three were once part of the U.S.S.R. The other two are the former Yugoslav constituent states of Slovenia and Croatia.

Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treaty covers the rules for joining NATO. Essentially, it is an invitation-only arrangement, wherein current members can invite other European states to join. For example, Turkey has long blocked Cyprus from joining because of the disputed status of that island.

NATO has twin structures — civilian and military — along with a number of subsidiary organizations. The civilian structure consists of several divisions, including those related to defense policy and public diplomacy. The civilian headquarters is located in Brussels and has a staff of 4,000. It is home to the North Atlantic Council, which is the senior political decision-making body. The Council consists of high-level representatives of each member country. There is no single person who heads NATO, though the political leaders of the constituent countries carry varying degrees of influence. The Council is chaired by the Secretary General, who is selected by the representatives of the member countries (NATO.int, 2011).

Within the military structure there is the Military Committee, Allied Command Operations, and Allied Command Transformation. It is possible for a country to be a member of NATO's civilian organization while not participating in the military organization — a position that both France and Greece have taken at different points in history. Most of NATO's bodies exist within the Military Structure; however, the Military Structure does not shape policy — the Civilian Structure does. The one exception is the Nuclear Planning Group, which is the only body within NATO that holds the same level of authority as the North Atlantic Council, but only within its specific area of expertise (NATO.int, 2011).

The most prominent position within NATO's civilian leadership is the Secretary General. At the time of this paper, the Secretary General was Anders Rasmussen of Denmark. The role functions as a chair and coordinator among the different bodies, and the Secretary General has the ability to work with all major divisions of NATO. While the Secretary General does not hold sole decision-making power, this position is nonetheless the most important and influential within the organization.

Conclusion: NATO's Evolving Role

As Wesley Clark (1999) noted, since the end of the Cold War, NATO has "continuously adjusted its strategic concepts so as to remain current and relevant." This shift has been evident in the different campaigns in which NATO has engaged since the end of the Cold War. Initially without much sense of mission during that era, NATO quickly found one with its historic Bosnia campaign. NATO was now an active body for armed combat as part of its mandate. Kosovo expanded that mission into post-conflict reconstruction.

Clark's comments reveal a deeper understanding of the nature of NATO's role. As a cooperative security organization, NATO has evolved into a body that plays different roles in conflict zones according to the specific situation. This flexibility reflects that security and stability for NATO and its allies remains at the heart of its objectives. For the first forty years of its history, NATO framed security in the context of the Cold War, but with the decline of that confrontation the geopolitical world order lost much of its stability.

During the Cold War, the two superpowers controlled most global conflict, thereby containing it and leaving every conflict with a clear protagonist and antagonist from NATO's perspective. The modern geopolitics of conflict are quite different. Each conflict is unique, and there will not necessarily be clearly determined interests. NATO's response, therefore, must be to tailor each solution to each individual conflict. Some cases will require swift military action followed by disengagement; others will require a multi-year commitment to reconstruction.

The terrorist attacks of September 11th also shifted NATO's role by introducing the idea that attacks could come from anywhere. During the Cold War, the West and the U.S.S.R. fought numerous proxy wars and, out of mutual interest, kept conflict to zones in the developing world. Without a clear enemy and such implicit rules of engagement, the possibility emerged that an entity could take the conflict directly to any NATO member's most visible institutions. NATO responded to this new type of threat by expanding its geographic field of operations. Having previously been focused on Europe — the key site of the Cold War and then the Balkan conflicts — NATO was now faced with the possibility of its enemies being located anywhere in the world and had to shift its outlook accordingly.

Overall, NATO has performed well. Since it began engaging in conflict, NATO has either won the conflict or remains engaged in it. From a military perspective, NATO remains successful and the threat of NATO intervention likely carries significant weight in light of these successes. However, NATO has been less successful in its post-conflict reconstruction roles. The organization entered that role in Kosovo without an exit timetable and remains in that country, awaiting a sovereignty resolution that may take many more years. NATO is also in Afghanistan, where a decade on the fighting has not ended, and consequently there is no end in sight for post-conflict reconstruction efforts there.

NATO has demonstrated the ability to shift its roles over time in response to changes in the external environment. This has made NATO a powerful organization in the world, and suggests that NATO's role will continue to evolve and be redefined over the coming years and decades, all in response to a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape.

Belgium — Founding Member (1949)
Canada — Founding Member (1949)
Denmark — Founding Member (1949)
France — Founding Member (1949)
Iceland — Founding Member (1949)
Italy — Founding Member (1949)
Luxembourg — Founding Member (1949)
Netherlands — Founding Member (1949)
Norway — Founding Member (1949)
Portugal — Founding Member (1949)
United Kingdom — Founding Member (1949)
United States — Founding Member (1949)
Greece — 1952
Turkey — 1952
West Germany (later Germany) — 1955
Spain — 1982
Czech Republic — 1999
Hungary — 1999
Poland — 1999
Bulgaria — 2004
Estonia — 2004
Latvia — 2004
Lithuania — 2004
Romania — 2004
Slovakia — 2004
Slovenia — 2004
Albania — 2009
Croatia — 2009

Clark, W. (1999). The United States and NATO: The way ahead. Parameters, Winter 1999–2000, pp. 2–14.

Dursun-Ozkanca, O. (2009). Rebuilding Kosovo: Cooperation or competition between the EU and NATO? EUSA Eleventh Biennial International Conference.

Gallis, P. & Morelli, V. (2008). NATO in Afghanistan: A test of the transatlantic alliance. CRS Report for Congress.

Haglund, D. (2011). North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). History.com.

Hendrikson, R. (2005). Crossing the rubicon. NATO Review.

Human Rights Watch. (2000). New figures on civilian deaths in the Kosovo War. Human Rights Watch.

NATO. (2011). NATO/ISAF backgrounder: Transition into Afghan lead. NATO/ISAF.

NATO.int. (2011). Various pages. Retrieved from http://www.nato.int/

North Atlantic Treaty, Official Text. Retrieved from http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm

Schulte, G. (1997). Former Yugoslavia and NATO. Survival, 39(1), 19–42.

U.S. Department of Defense. (1999). Kosovo. Defense.gov.