Expansion of NATO

Those who argue in favor of the expansion of NATO tend to emphasize certain non-military uses of the organization, in addition to their military arguments. According to their opponents, this undermines the expansionist position since, as they very justly point out, NATO is a military alliance first and foremost. But, those opposed to the enlargement of the alliance do not make a convincing military case against expansion. Instead, the strongest arguments against expansion are based on possible Russian reactions to the proposed change. Various points about Russian opposition are considered by both sides of the debate, but the chief effect of these arguments is to depict Russia as a nation capable of taking the kinds of action that justify expansion of NATO.

Talbott, stating the Clinton administration's objectives in calling for NATO expansion, gives three basic reasons for the move: expansion of the military alliance into central Europe; giving prospective members a strong added incentive to strengthen democracy in their governments and liberalization of their economies; and to foster the peaceful resolution of disputes in and among these nations. The administration's position does not limit the expansion to the Visegard nations (Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia), and Talbott's language repeatedly cites the nations of central Europe and the former USSR.

But, opponents of the administration's position hold that there is a division between those who w

Related Essays

Nato-Russia relations since 1991 .... Assessing the Pros and Cons of NATO's Eastward Expansion NATO is a politically-oriented international regime that is based on power (Nelson 32-36). .... (2077 8 )

The United States and Nato: An Overview .... states to playa leading role in the creation of NATO have substantially diminished for the foreseeable future; (2) the current expansion of NATO into Eastern .... (3161 13 )

The Dissolution of the Soviet Union .... One response to the new situation has been suggestions for the expansion of NATO, including finding a responsible role for the newly constituted Russia. .... (808 3 )

UNITED STATES AND NATO This research paper exam .... States to play a leading role in the creation of NATO have substantially diminished for the foreseeable future; (2) the current expansion of NATO into Eastern .... (2564 10 )

Status and Role of NATO .... nations that occur in Europe. Expansion of NATO to Include Former Warsaw Pact Nations? The most controversial issue surrounding .... (2760 11 )

sed on the former USSR by the West, viewing it much as Germany viewed the Versailles treaty. All the other changes in post-Cold War Europe have had Russian approval, Mandelbaum says, and NATO expansion should not be any different. Hitler, of course, eventually had his say in many post-World War I security arrangements. But, just as "appeasement" is the wrong term to apply to Mandelbaum's arguments, so is he wrong to view NATO expansion in terms of a "dictated peace." The present weakness of the Russian nation is Mandelbaum's main concern. On the one hand, he argues, Russia is so weak, at present, that expanding NATO may serve to undermine the future of Russian democracy. On the other, this weakness means that there is no pressing need to expand the alliance because Russia is too weak to cause problems, at the moment. Horelick reiterates Mandelbaum's general argument. He does not, however, entirely exclude the possibility that expansion may be the best option. There is, he says, no balanced solution that will satisfy all the parties completely. The costs and benefits of expansion and non-expansion have to be weighed carefully. Horelick's main problem with the proposal is that it constitutes a misguided attempt to use N

Category: Economics - E