Success and Failure in an Evolving Relationship
NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was established by treaty in 1949 as a joint defense pact among Canada, the US, the UK, France, and several smaller Western European countries. The broad objective was to prevent another general European war; the more specific objective was to forestall any possible aggressive action by the Soviet Union. France, the UK, and the Benelux countries had a year previously signed their own mutual defense pact, the Treaty of Brussels. NATO effectively superceded this arrangement, converting a Western European defense arrangement into a transatlantic one.
It may be noted that whereas the unidentified but probably US-oriented author of the online Wikipedia open-source encyclopedia sees the Treaty of Brussels as the direct predecessor of NATO, a European source speaks of NATO as "ironically" a component in the emergence of European joint defense (Braillard and Schwok 5). The question at issue is not one of facts, but of perspective, as will be seen at some points below.
The following discussion is primarily concerned with the elements of success and failure in the history of NATO. It will consider the role of NATO during the Cold War era, its surprisingly active role since the end of the Cold War, and its future prospects.
NATO was and is first and foremost a military alliance, and the ultimate test of its success or failure is therefore its performance in integrating the armed forces of its member states in a coalition war. More specifically, for most of its history NATO was intended to counter a Soviet (or Warsaw Pact) invasion of Western Europe, or other Soviet military action having the intent of imposing Soviet hegemonic power in Europe.
In this respect, it could be said that NATO as a military alliance was never really tested. NATO forces coordinated, and they trained, but they never fought the war that NATO was inte...