Members
Login
Sign Up!!!
Categories
Arts
Business
Custom Research
Economics
Film
Foreign
Government and Law
History
Literature
Medical
Miscellaneous
People
Personal Essays
Philosophy
Psychology
Science and Technology

Support
FAQ
Customer Service
Site Search

     Home Customer Service Acceptable Use Policy Site Search

     Enter Search Topic:
 

Already a member? Go here to log in and view the entire paper!

Join Now!
by: Credit Card
Join Now!
by: Online Check
Membership Benefits

Historical Perspectives of NATO

This is an excerpt from the paper...

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO, is more in the news in mid-1999 than it has been in many years, perhaps in its history. The 50th anniversary of the organization, expected to be an occasion for celebration, the admission of three new members, and only subdued discussion of the alliance's future, turned out instead to be a strategy session for its first shooting war. The outcome of the Kosovo war will surely, in one way or another, play a central role in shaping the future of NATO, but it is all the more appropriate to consider its first half-century. The following essay explores nine historical perspectives, offered by eight different writers, on the history and development of NATO.

Lawrence Kaplan, in "After forty years: reflections on NATO as a research field," reflects back from the perspective of c. 1990 on the state of scholarly discussion of NATO as it stood in 1974, on the occasion of NATO's 25th anniverary, when the alliance was just half its present age. As the first "entangling alliance" entered into by the United States since its brief 18th century alignment with France, writes Kaplan, "NATO should have been a magnet for American historians. But this was not the case in 1974. The contribution of historians to the enormous body of NATO literature has been minimal" (Kaplan, 1992, p. 15).

This paucity of American historical consideration of NATO, he suggests, reflected an outlook in which NATO was seen as merely an incidental aspect of overall

. . .
rather it is an apologia for French views at the time. But it touches so nearly on historical issues as to be appropriate for consideration in this essay. Beaufre approaches the question of NATO from the perspective of European integration, a persistent theme of postwar French thought and diplomacy. To Beaufre, An Atlantic community with the United States is without question a reasonable and desireable idea, but this community would be very dangerous if it were effected under present conditions, with a divided Europe. In my opinion European union is the prerequisite to a reunion with the United States (Beaufre, 1966, p. 6). Beaufre restates the European origins of NATO (1966, pp. 15-16), and then goes on to present the uneasy European views of developments in American nuclear strategy. In the 1950s, American policy had been based on "massive retaliation," an all-or-nothing response by the US nuclear forces to any serious aggression. Under Kennedy, this policy was shifted to "flexible response," scaled to the level of threat, and including conventional and tactical nuclear options. Beaufre approves of much in Kennedy's strategy, but flexible response was alarming for Europe, holding out the specter of a war fought
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Atlantic Treaty, United Beaufre, Graebner Reflections, American French, Eastern Europe, Lawrence Kaplan, Wall Kaplan, Organization NATO, Western Europe, NATO Russia, north atlantic, atlantic alliance, martin's pp, york st martin's, eds nato, st martin's, york st, st martin's pp, north atlantic treaty, atlantic treaty, jr eds, nato founding, founding atlantic, founding atlantic alliance, nato founding atlantic,
Approximate Word count = 2659
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page)

Membership Benefits
Click here to Join Now!
by: Credit Card
Click here to Join Now!
by: Online Check






to Over 32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
 


All papers are for research and reference purposes only!
Copyright © 2008 LotsOfEssays.com
All rights reserved. Webmasters make $$$