Download Free After 40 Years Does Nato Have To Change Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online After 40 Years Does Nato Have To Change and write the review.

NATO has underwritten an unprecedented period of peace in Europe. Many developments, however, indicate that NATO should have to change to sustain its success. This study seeks to find an answer on the need for change. It explores the kind of possible changes and concentrates on issues like: NATO after the INF-Treaty, East-West relations, Burden-sharing and political and economical developments in Europe. The role of Europe in relation to the interests and the position of the United States is studied in particular. The study also explores the more fundamental question if in the long term NATO itself will survive. The study concludes with a long term outlook on NATO's possible structure and internal relationships.
This book addresses the evolving role of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). It seeks to answer whether NATO is capable of adjusting to changes in the forces that have held it together and have made it the centerpiece of the national security strategies of its members.
A head of title: Council on Foreign Relations, International Institutions and Global Governance Program.
In this new Brookings Marshall Paper, Michael O'Hanlon argues that now is the time for Western nations to negotiate a new security architecture for neutral countries in eastern Europe to stabilize the region and reduce the risks of war with Russia. He believes NATO expansion has gone far enough. The core concept of this new security architecture would be one of permanent neutrality. The countries in question collectively make a broken-up arc, from Europe's far north to its south: Finland and Sweden; Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus; Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan; and finally Cyprus plus Serbia, as well as possibly several other Balkan states. Discussion on the new framework should begin within NATO, followed by deliberation with the neutral countries themselves, and then formal negotiations with Russia. The new security architecture would require that Russia, like NATO, commit to help uphold the security of Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, and other states in the region. Russia would have to withdraw its troops from those countries in a verifiable manner; after that, corresponding sanctions on Russia would be lifted. The neutral countries would retain their rights to participate in multilateral security operations on a scale comparable to what has been the case in the past, including even those operations that might be led by NATO. They could think of and describe themselves as Western states (or anything else, for that matter). If the European Union and they so wished in the future, they could join the EU. They would have complete sovereignty and self-determination in every sense of the word. But NATO would decide not to invite them into the alliance as members. Ideally, these nations would endorse and promote this concept themselves as a more practical way to ensure their security than the current situation or any other plausible alternative.