• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
 
Should the United States Remain a Part of NATO?
The Coherence of US Interests and NATO Goals
 
Ian McMurtrieApril 2007
 
1
“Our continued engagement in European security is fundamentallyin the American interest--strategically, politically, militarily, andeconomically-- and it is morally consonant with the deepest values of the United States. In the security realm, we express that interest andthose values through NATO. To be sure, a number of rivals for primacy in European security have emerged in recent years…Butnone rivals NATO in terms of its ability to act; and certainly nonerivals NATO in terms of the ability to commit American power and prestige…We Americans have discovered…that the European-transatlantic security relationship works well when the UnitedStates is prepared to be engaged and when we are prepared to lead. And--at least so far--when we are not prepared to do both, the Alliance has had less than success.”
-
Robert E. Hunter
 Former United StatesAmbassador to NATO
 
2
Introduction
 To question whether the United States should continue to participate in the NorthAtlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is to question NATO’s very existence. WithoutUnited States involvement, NATO would disintegrate as a functioning transatlanticagreement. This paper will present two arguments for why NATO will persist into theforeseeable future with the United States at its helm. The first argument, in short, is suchthat membership in NATO serves United States interests. The second is that NATO islargely directed by the United States, and thus NATO interests are US interests.
1
TheUnited States dominates NATO, and NATO provides value to the United States; neitherwill she leave it, nor could NATO exist without her. This is not to say that the UnitedStates is parasitic upon the alliance; US participation benefits nearly all parties. But asthis paper will show, the balance of advantages is tilted towards America.The first argument will encompass several points as to why NATO serves USinterests. Including, how NATO has stabilized Europe and prevented it from becominga global military rival; a stabilized Europe allows the United States to project its powerglobally; NATO serves United States financial interests; and, as evidenced by theweakening of Article 5, NATO has evolved primarily around internal cohesion andpolitical functionality rather than external threat deterrence. The second argument, thatof US dominance in NATO, is discussed along the following points: the recentenlargement regimen targeting Eastern European is used politically to balance against
1
Although these appear similar, they are distinct points. The first argument could be made about any partyto the NATO alliance. But the second argument is unique to the preponderant position the United Statesmaintains within NATO.
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...