NATO and EU: Towards a Global Partnership

1997

NATO's expansion east has been debated since 1991. Proponents of enlargement have argued that the Alliance would be a role-model for prospective members, offering both a paradigm of stability and of democracy. Opponents point to divisions that would be drawn across Europe as NATO admits new members, jeopardizing the West's relationship with Russia, a risk that would affect the security of the entire continent. The commitment to expand the Atlantic Alliance was formalized with the publication of the NATO Enlargement Study in 1995. Expansion was made dependent upon individual countries' readiness to join, as expressed by their advance towards democracy, development of a market economy, and military reform.' As enlargement advances, progress towards democracy should also be assessed. Do governments represent their publics' interests when they advocate membership? Do they have a popular mandate to seek integration into Atlantic security structures? Survey research in Eastern Europe shows that publics are ambivalent about membership and oppose fulfilling the costly requirements for integration. At the same time, political and military elites offer what appears to be unequivocal support for NATO expansion. In the circumstances, it seems fair to question Eastern European governments' readiness to be NATO members. Who supports NATO integration? How are popular concerns about membership addressed by political elites? What are the implications of pursuing policies not well understood or supported by publics for a region of fragile democratic institutions and practices? This article first reconstructs the Eastern European diplomacy that encouraged NATO enlargement, with specific attention to the reasons for seeking admission by each individual country. Second, public support for NATO membership and its associated costs is presented. The data show a substantial gap between public and elite views on regional security. Third, elite responsiveness to public concerns about membership is discussed. Tentative conclusions are drawn about the consequences of integrating countries with an inconsistent commitment to democratic practices into the Atlantic Alliance.

2023

Alliances are well-known in world history. In the framework of international relations, several theoretical explanations are applied to answer the questions of why and how states enter into alliances. The traditional approach explains the alliance through the assumptions of the theory of balance of power. Game theory is also a theoretical approach to analyze the behavior of states used in academic and strategic analysis. In this paper, the basic assumption about the behavior of the states of the collective West is the theory of balance of threat. In the geographical sense, the subject of analysis is Eastern and South-Eastern Europe as a response to the behavior of the states. When faced with a significant external threat, states can balance or join. Balancing is defined as an alliance with other states against a current threat; the association is brought to the association with the source of danger. This theory is presented through an analysis of state decisions on critical issues in international security depending on whether states balance or join by Stephen Walt, systematically exposed in the capital work "The Origin of Alliances“. In this paper, the subject of analysis is the expansion of the NATO pact after the end of the Cold War, trying to give possible answers to the question of why the countries of Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe "joined" this military alliance after the fall of the "Iron Curtain".

International Affairs, 2002

THE MEMBERSHIP TO NATO: ON THE FRONTLINE?, 2020

and policy-oriented production on NATO membership (as well as on the Alliance as such) in Macedonia too had been rather one-dimensional: emphasizing merely the positive sides of the membership status and uncritical view of the Alliance as something good per se, without into account the dialectics of the international, regional and internal currents.

Countries presents a series of political benefits quite significant that will manifest in increased power and prestige of the World Union and in international negotiations. In political terms, it is of great interest to the Central European and Eastern countries are part of the organization that makes decisions affecting key parties Central, Eastern and Western Europe and the continent that has the economic and political weight to get into international negotiations... The arrival of new members, with its rich cultural heritage, will increase the diversity of the European Union. Therefore, the question to be answered is whether the extension of central and eastern countries in the European Union and in international organizations such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization promotes greater cooperation between member states and consequently greater European integration that will create a world peace.

2020

Biljana VANKOVSKA _________________________________________________________________________ and policy-oriented production on NATO membership (as well as on the Alliance as such) in Macedonia too had been rather one-dimensional: emphasizing merely the positive sides of the membership status and uncritical view of the Alliance as something good per se, without into account the dialectics of the international, regional and internal currents. Vankovska's findings are consistent and logical. She rightly notes that accessing NATO is not an end but a beginning of a new chapter for the country. In that context, she points out that NATO membership per se does not bring absolute security but also imposes new types of responsibilities and dealing with new insecurities. Despite the NATO membership, the country's internal weaknesses are deep, while the regional turbulences affect them in addition. Unfortunately, NATO is not the organization that is able to provide medicines for most of these flaws, while its inherent internal divisions add to the already existing problems. This publication is indeed something novel and thought-provoking precisely because the author avoids predictable academic reporting. She does not shy away from identifying NATO's major current challenges, and the ways in which the Alliance is trying to avoid 'brain death' through the newly presented report on NATO 2030. The whole manuscript is a forwardthinking and very up-to-date analysis of development that are ongoing (and thus academically challenging for analysis) rather than reproducing and recycling what has already been known about NATO and its enlargement. It is particularly enlightening that the text deals with the concept of security in a holistic way, thus avoiding the trap of the dominant narrative of providing military, political and economic security by default, especially having in mind the challenges posed by the covid-19 pandemic. Unlike most manuscripts, which take longer time to materialise and are often outdated when they are published, this one is remarkably up-to-date. It is also an effective antidote to the dominant literature that presents NATO as the 'mightiest and the most efficient alliance in human history'. NATO exists and strives to preserve its attractiveness even beyond its area, while facing internal division and decline and this book goes a long way in answering why the difficulties exist. This monograph is not just another in the range of theoretical elaborations of NATO enlargement and its effect on the new member-state. Its ambitions are higher as it introduces a novel analytical approach that intends to widen research horizons but also to develop debates both in the academic and policy-oriented circles. It is a very readable and comprehensive The NATO Membership: On the Frontline? ___________________________________________________ text that will meet the interest and expectations of the general readership. I believe that the literature like this may help students of security and peace studies as well as of international relations get a better overview of the dynamic international constellations and the position and challenges that Macedonia is likely to meet in the future.

Enlargements of the European Union (EU) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) present major puzzles. While many post-communist countries, such as Poland, the Czech Republic, Romania, Bulgaria, Bosnia, Albania, and the Baltic States, were granted a membership or a prospect of membership in these organizations, a number of post-communist countries located in Europe, such as Russia, Belarus, Moldova, and Azerbaijan, were not offered prospects of membership even when they would satisfy official criteria for joining the EU and NATO. Some countries, such as Ukraine and Georgia, were officially recognized as potential members of NATO but not the European Union. The question is which factors account for such significant variation in the accession to the EU and NATO among European post-communist countries. Previous studies explained the exclusion of certain post-communist countries by their failure to meet such formal and informal EU membership criteria as liberal democracy, European location and identity, Western Christian religious tradition, high level of economic development, relatively small population size, and popular and government support in prospective members and most influential existing members. Similarly, NATO accession studies emphasized such criteria as democracy, peaceful resolution of internal ethnic conflicts or territorial disputes, and ability to meet NATO military standards. This paper uses comparative and multiple regression analysis to determine which factors affect the European Union and NATO membership of 25 European post-communist countries. The EU accession index and the NATO accession index are derived from the status of each country as a member, as a candidate, as a potential candidate, and as a non-member/not a potential candidate. Such factors, as the level of democracy, the economic level of development, religion, post-Soviet region, population size, violent conflicts, and public support for EU or NATO membership, are analyzed. The study shows that the level of democracy and the economic development level have positive effects on the EU accession, while being a post-Soviet country has a negative effect. Similarly, the level of democracy positively affects the NATO accession, while post-Soviet states have negative likelihood of admission into NATO when all other factors are held constant.

2008

Nutzungsbedingungen: Dieser Text wird unter einer Deposit-Lizenz (Keine Weiterverbreitung-keine Bearbeitung) zur Verfügung gestellt. Gewährt wird ein nicht exklusives, nicht übertragbares, persönliches und beschränktes Recht auf Nutzung dieses Dokuments. Dieses Dokument ist ausschließlich für den persönlichen, nicht-kommerziellen Gebrauch bestimmt. Auf sämtlichen Kopien dieses Dokuments müssen alle Urheberrechtshinweise und sonstigen Hinweise auf gesetzlichen Schutz beibehalten werden. Sie dürfen dieses Dokument nicht in irgendeiner Weise abändern, noch dürfen Sie dieses Dokument für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, aufführen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Mit der Verwendung dieses Dokuments erkennen Sie die Nutzungsbedingungen an. Terms of use: This document is made available under Deposit Licence (No Redistribution-no modifications). We grant a non-exclusive, nontransferable, individual and limited right to using this document. This document is solely intended for your personal, noncommercial use. All of the copies of this documents must retain all copyright information and other information regarding legal protection. You are not allowed to alter this document in any way, to copy it for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the document in public, to perform, distribute or otherwise use the document in public. By using this particular document, you accept the above-stated conditions of use.

The External Relations of the European Union Edited by Pascaline Winand, Andrea Benvenuti, Max Guderzo © 2015 Presses Interuniveritaires Européennes–Peter Lang An Ever Closer Alliance?: Transforming the EU-NATO Partnership Remy Davison Jean Monnet Chair in Politics and Economics Department of Politics & International Relations School of Social Sciences Monash University Rémy Davison completes this framework of analysis centred on the United States and its relations with Western Europe by proposing a well-structured approach in eight steps to the gradual transformation of the EU-NATO partnership since the end of the Cold War. The chapter looks at the way in which NATO belied most predictions and academic analy- ses in the 1990s by successfully setting in motion its own transformation from its previous role as a deterrent force to an “out-of-area” offensive military force. The author rightly identifies the first Gulf War as the start- ing point of this metamorphosis and the intervention in the Bosnian war as its full demonstration, through air strikes on Serbian forces and the subsequent peace-keeping role played by the alliance. Emphasizing the logical connection between those developments and the development of the Military Concept introduced at the 2002 Prague Summit, the chapter also explores the 9/11 terrorist attack on the United States and its impli- cations for EU-NATO relations. Substantial sections of the essay are devoted to the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, the Partnership Action Plans on Terrorism and the major challenges identified (and faced) by NATO in the period under review. The author also analyses the main ele- ments of collaboration and competition in the EU-NATO relationship, and interprets the roots of transatlantic divergence on specific issues. In this context, Davison not only mentions the American tolerance towards EU attempts to define its own security and defence policies, but also refers to Washington’s fundamental scepticism about the EU’s real readiness to offer front-line contributions in an independent or joint capacity. These remarks, which may go a long way to explaining why the US has been building ad hoc constellations of power within and without NATO for the last two decades, once again remind us of the complex dynamics of transatlantic relations, as well as of the EU’s tardiness in taking responsible roles in international affairs.