The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, when a simple protective empire, now faces a crisis.
Nowadays, NATO is a huge global alliance of 32 countries, much larger and covering significantly more territory than the initial gathering of 12 countries. In raw numbers, it has a potential military force of 3.5 million people and covers 25.07 million square kilometers ( 15.58 million square miles ) of territory.
Although that would seem like a lot, NATO’s strength and capability depend on the United States for a variety of factors. This was true from the start, and it remains so now. First an American-led anti-Communist protective empire, NATO has morphed into a US-led power union that is forcefully expanding.
Despite the statements in the NATO Treaty, the empire no more coordinates with the UN ( at least consistently ).
Despite attempts to strengthen its presence in Poland, Romania and Estonia, the alliance faces important issues:
- a crucial lack of weapons,
- armed troops that are unknown and understaffed,
- a US existence that is still largely military.
Ukraine
The chances of Ukraine surviving Russian problems seem slim despite NATO’s expansion and ongoing arms distribution.
Russia has also discovered a lot about using its weather defenses and electrical jamming capabilities to combat NATO weapons. There is no reason to believe that NATO could do any better in Ukraine than the Russians because the shelves in the United States are considerably clear as a result of the issue.
NATO is also vehement about Ukraine and its attitude toward Russia. Some non-factors such as the European Union are even worse arguments. However, the new NATO is dealing with a grim state in Ukraine and the possibility of a wider German conflict. Does NATO cross the Rubicon of fight, or get some hotel with its sworn army, Russia?
The danger
It is no small problem that the empire is no longer focused on socialism as a risk but, instead, on Russia as a menace to Europe ( and, by expansion, to the United States ). Washington is in a hard operational and military location because of its commitment to Europe in order to combat China’s much bigger threat.
However, it appears that US politicians favor dealing with the Russian danger, perhaps because it guarantees US supremacy in European politics and advances American interests.
If Russia were a real threat, and if the Europeans were truly committed to their own defence, then Europe was easily assemble a force that was at least as large as something Russia could summon.
Europe has a community of more than 700 million. By comparison, Russia has a much smaller population ( 144.2 million ), a much smaller economy and an army of around 470, 000 soldiers. ( The US Army numbers around 452, 000 active-duty personnel ).
The unique risk
In 1949, Washington adopted the NATO Treaty. The Russians had generally completed their work of establishing Communist governments in Eastern Europe, the Berlin Airlift was still in progress, and Europe was under assault from soaring home communism.
The Soviet Union detonated its first atomic bomb ( Joe-1-Joe Stalin ), ending the US atomic monopoly four months after the Treaty was signed.
The original members did not contain Germany, Turkey, Greece or Spain. Greece and Turkey would join in 1952, Spain only in 1982, well after dictator ( Caudillo ) Francisco Franco’s death in 1975.
Germany was divided and occupied. The Federal Republic of Germany ( FRG ) under allied occupation ( US, UK, and France ) was declared in May 1949, but it remained an occupied area until 1955. In May of that year, the FRG joined NATO. In reply, Russian-occupied East Germany became a status on October 7, 1949.
It may meet the Warsaw Pact, or Warsaw Treaty Organization, Russia’s response to NATO founded on May 14, 1955. The Cold War was characterized by the Warsaw Pact and NATO until 1991, when the USSR was overthrown.
NATO was a significant component of a successful initiative the US launched.
- Following World War II, restore Europe.
- end the domestic Communist threat in some European countries ( Greece, Italy ),
- protect the divided town of Berlin and its allies.
- produce strong defenses in Europe against any danger from the Soviets.
In consequence, the US established a continuous military presence in Europe, including significant bases in Italy, the UK, and Germany.
The NATO order, which was led by General Dwight D Eisenhower from April 1951 to May 1952, was based in Belgium.
Post 5
The NATO Treaty defines the alliance as defensive. The key provision, Post 5, 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 and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense recognized by Post 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.
Post 5 was only used once, on September 12, 2001, a day after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States. A decision was reached, after some controversy, by the North Atlantic Council, the political decision-making part of NATO. NATO carried out a program called Eagle Assist, sending NATO AWACS aircraft to patrol US skies. Although a symbol of support, NATO’s intervention was militarily largely meaningless. What NATO AWACS planes could do in US airspace was never explained.
NATO itself, but, has been involved in a number of activities that used military power – in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Bosnia, and Libya. NATO even is directly involved in Ukraine, though not with earth forces.
The growing Soviet risk
After its foundation, NATO concentrated on preventing a Russian invasion of Western Europe, primarily focused on West Germany. American strategists identified the” Fulda Gap,” a coastal hall running south from the German state of Thuringia to Frankfurt am Main, as a potential way for a Russian invasion of the British occupation area from the eastern sector occupied by the Soviet Union, as a result of the efforts of NATO strategists and outside martial experts.
Western strategists were concerned that the US and its NATO allies lacked the armor and artillery needed to stop a Russian attack as the USSR strengthened its forces in the 1970s and 1980s.
Two novels reflect some of this emphasis on the Russian threat. One, written by Sir James Hacket, was” The Untold Story: The Third World War” ( 1978 ). The other was Tom Clancy and Larry Bond ‘s ,” Red Storm Rising , ( 1986 ).
In 1981, KGB chairman Yuri Andropov, in a then-secret speech, said it was critical that Russia” not miss the military preparations of the enemy, its preparations for a nuclear strike, and not miss the real risk of the outbreak of war.”
Andropov claimed that NATO was preparing a first strike on the Soviet Union under the guise of two NATO exercises, Autumn Forge 83 and Able Archer 83.
Defense Minister Dimitry Ustinov stated to the Politburo that the NATO exercises were “increasingly difficult to distinguish from a real deployment of armed forces for aggression.”
Russia appears to have had a preemptive attack on the USSR that was focused on nuclear weapons, just as the US and NATO were concerned about a Russian attack. While Russia and the United States would engage in proxy conflicts over the Cold War Years ( Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, the Middle East ), general war in Europe did not happen.
Collapse of the USSR
In October 1985, Gorbachev, on a visit to Paris, met with Francoise Mitterrand, the French president. He claimed that Russia was a Third World nation with nuclear weapons. In 1991, his insight was demonstrated. The USSR ceased to exist on December 26 by the Soviet of the Republics of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union, according to Declaration No 142-.
With the collapse of the USSR, Russian power was radically downsized. The infamous Soviet military construction from the 1980s, which had ruined the Russian economy, was now rusting away.
Nuclear submarines slowly sank in their berths in the port as they were abandoned. Production in defensible factories stopped, and workers were not compensated. For the next 15 years, Russia would be on its heels, struggling to reinvent itself. The Warsaw Pact disappeared.
Russia is now a dysfunctional state with nuclear weapons. The Russian army itself was disintegrating. Russian military equipment was available for purchase in Eastern European flea markets to make a profit.
The West was concerned about former Soviet scientists leaving their jobs as rogue states, worried about rotting nuclear submarines and unsafe nuclear power plants, and unsure about who held the office, and overall whether Russia was a stable nation.
Meanwhile, what remained in Russia was mired in corruption. Even as Russia slowly regained its footing, corruption throughout the country continued, including in the military.
As the Russian military is conducting anti-corruption investigations, arrests, and firings as the country’s leadership tries to improve the military’s leadership and the release of military-grade weapons and supplies, according to the writing of this article.
Post-Soviet NATO expansion
When the Soviet Union collapsed, NATO still regarded Russia as an existential challenge.
That challenge, in the NATO view, took on added gravitas after Russia sent troops into Georgia ( 2008 ) and Ukraine ( 2014 and 2022 ). It is easy to overlook the fact that NATO was actively supporting NATO in both Georgia and Ukraine, including trying to oust the Russians out.
Today, all NATO military exercises, troop deployments, and operations are geared toward halting a Russian attack. NATO has reinforced its troop deployments and bases to protect the Baltic states (especially Estonia, which NATO sees as vulnerable ), Poland and Romania.
While the USSR was dissolving, NATO started an unprecedented round of expansion. The newly independent states needed defense assistance while there was little to worry about in 1991 and the following years.
Most had been utterly dependent on Russian weapons, and these would no longer be forthcoming. Moreover, they wanted to be protected. While the Russians from time to time complained, and on occasion were given assurances that proved false, NATO expanded.
Georgia and Ukraine will be able to join NATO in the future, NATO has also started programs. The offer came with NATO advisors and specialists, weapons and intelligence support.
Russian leaders saw the attempts as threats, especially when it came to Ukraine. Along with the EU, NATO has pressed on Ukraine to ally itself with Russia and join Europe. Russia, for its part, saw the Ukrainian NATO as a serious threat to Russian security.
Beyond its defensive mandate, the alliance took an aggressive stance in addition to the expansion of NATO. That includes operations in Afghanistan’s International Security Assistance Force ( ISAF ), the Bosnia and Herzegovina Implementation Force ( IFOR ), Kosovo Force ( KFOR ) and, in Libya, Operation Unified Protector.
The US tried to get NATO to support the Iraq war ( 2003 ) but could not, with Turkey strongly opposed. Instead, the US created a” Coalition of the Willing” ( Multinational Force, Iraq ) with troops from the US, Australia, UK and Poland. In order to support stabilization efforts, other countries would send contingents to Iraq.
Ukraine again
NATO’s future is inextricably linked to Ukraine. The defense minister of Ukraine is working hard to persuade Washington to give Ukraine long-range weapons to attack Russian territory, particularly Moscow and St. Petersburg, as the conflict nears an end point with the potential that Kiev will be forced to deal with Moscow.
The Ukrainians are well aware that the Ukraine war will result in even more bloody Russian attacks if Washington fully cooperates. They are hoping that this will entice NATO and allow them to take over the front line from Ukraine.
The war would quickly spread to Europe if NATO actually sent troops or used NATO air force to support Russian operations in Ukraine.
This vital resource for Ukraine would put NATO in the path of a storm, to which it has already contributed in numerous ways. Could NATO be entangled in a conflict that will threaten European cities, military installations, and infrastructure?
The Russians have not taken the bait other than continuing to put pressure on Ukraine’s army ( AFU) despite the Ukrainian push into the Kursk region of Russia and extensive drone attacks on Russia including the shelling of civilians in Belgorod. Most reports are that Ukraine’s army is overstretched, short on manpower and starting to crack.
What comes next, then?
Stephen Bryen served as the deputy undersecretary of defense for policy and the staff director of a subcommittee of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  ,
This , article originally appeared in InFocus Magazine, published by the Jewish Policy Center in Washington, DC. It is republished with permission.