North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO): An Introduction

We all know today that NATO is a military alliance that is composed of more than
twenty countries and territories across the European Union, although for many, NATO is often
coined as the “European Army.” It is more than just a simple conglomeration of Europe’s tools
of war. In other to better understand the implications of NATO’s status in these contemporary
times, the authors would like present first a historical background on how NATO sprung up from
the ashes of World War II into a formidable institution utilizing both political and military
leverage to gain the upper hand against the Russian Federation, its lifelong nemesis.

NATO in a new millennium: A Commentary

The current situation of NATO is far from its formative and peacetime years. For the
authors, the complacency of NATO and its member countries could undermine the viability of
the European Union as a regional organization. With the advent of the cyberage and the ever-
expanding field of globalization, it remains to be seen how national security will be viewed by
NATO officials, but rest assured that new threats are just around the corner.

Resurgence of the Russian Federation

The disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991 was believed to be the nail in the coffin
for the ambition of a “Tsarist Empire” in the 20 th century. The Soviet Union took control of more
than a half of Europe’s landmass through its own territory and it’s so called “Soviet Satellite
Republics.” Even if the Russian Federation is now only but a mere shadow of its former self, to
tackle it head on is no easy challenge.
The Russian Federation has over 144 million population (insert APA) and a land mass of
over 17,098.242 km2 (insert APA). It also belongs to the Top 10 Nations of the world which
have large quantity of oil reserves. They are primarily located in the Siberia and Artic Regions of
the Federation, with that in mind, any country would want to take precautions. Hence, to counter
such strength, the NATO and European Union used the mechanics of “soft power” to tame the
Russian bear of the East. Soft power, in the international relations, is defined as
_______________ (insert APA). Simply, using economy as a leverage to put pressure on Russia
to follow the rules of “jus cogens” worked well for at first for NATO and its allies, particularly,
the United States of America.
 For instance, the United States Congress adopted the CAATSA Bill of 2017, otherwise
known as countering America’s Adversaries through Sanctions Act. This important piece of
American legislation had serious effects over European countries, which are also members of
NATO. Under the said law, any nation who purchases weapons at war to any of America’s
military industry competitors such as Russia will be dealt accordingly, through the imposition of
economic sanctions and other restrictions in dealing with any violation.
How does this domestic law create or change the political climate among NATO
members? It’s simply that members should not stray from the herd. For many years, this is how
discipline was imposed upon erring members and even potential applicants such as Turkey. But
was it enough to curb the ongoing Russian aggression? For the authors, the answer is in the
negative as we would present two case studies which would pinpoint the failures of NATO to
keep Russia in check.

“The Ukrainian Problem”

Although Ukraine is not considered as a member country of the NATO alliance,
nevertheless, it maintained its status as a partner country by virtue of the program entitled
“Partnership for Peace” or PFP which was created in 1994 shortly, after the fall of the Soviet
Union in 1991. The program was made to address the issue of cooperation among Eastern bloc
countries which are also former Soviet republics.
The factual background behind Ukraine’s civil unrest crisis dates back in 2013. When its
former president protested, Victor Yanukovych rejected a deal from the European Union calling
for a deeper economic, financial and juridical tie with the supranational organization. The deal
also includes a closer cooperation of the Ukrainian Army with the NATO alliance. It was
rejected by Yanukovych himself leading to his ouster on 2014 as he fled to Russia. Replaced
with a more European Union friendly administration, it was able pass a Deep and
Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) which will allow the country to gain access over the
common market of the EU, a pivot against decades of Russian influence on its own domestic
economy.
 
“The Crimean Annexation”
            Ukraine, being a buffer zone or a neutral state as it was supposed to under international
agreement therefore, Russia took advantage at the civil unrest and annexed Crimea, a small
peninsula at the southern region at the country. What is the interest of Russia for annexing by
force such tiny piece of land strip?
            The answer is geographical location. Crimea is the only nearest land port that the Russian
could access in order to sail towards the Black Sea. A Ukrainian government which is friendly to
the NATO alliance could threaten the national border that is shared between Ukraine and Russia.
The conflict escalated into a full armed conflict with rebel groups backed by the Russian military
and started taking over the areas of Donetsk and Luhansk bodies cities which form part of the
Ukrainian republic. This conflict was made known only in the international stage with the
infamous shooting of Malaysian Airline Flight 17 (MH17) which was hit with a surface to air
missile killing all 176 passengers on board.
What is the implication of these events unfolding in Eastern Europe? Why should the
European Union or the NATO in that matter be concerned with what is happening in its eastern
side? The answer is it should be worried, as we have previously discussed, Ukraine’s decision to
move away with Russia’s sphere of influence costed it on an armed conflict. This blatant
disregard of the Doctrine of State Neutrality shall serve as reminder to everyone that it will not
hesitate to break the rules of jus cogens to promote its national interest (U.S. v. Nicaragua) and
that any traditional eastern bloc countries who will dare to switch sides with the European Union
and NATO will suffer the same fate.

“U.S. wavering commitment with NATO”

The election of Donald Trump as the president of the United States of America has
caused major concerns for its long-time partners, especially the top brass of NATO officials. The
constant rhetoric of the president that it would no longer pursue international agreements such as
the environment treaty of Paris accord and the slashing of funding in the NATO research and
development as well as reducing the number of stationed American military personnel
throughout NATO bases in Europe. This is brought by the shift into policy-making of the
Americans reverting to a domestic oriented government adopting a Wilsonian approach into its
international law commitments (insert APA) and this cannot come at such perilous times as
Russian’s ambitions grew larger everyday with the aim of reclaiming its former territories during
the height of the Soviet Union.
The late Secretary Henry Kissinger once quoted that a policy of active containment under
the theory of “Domino Effect” is an effective method to keep Russian aggression at bay (insert
APA) and as previously stated, the American should honor their commitments to the EU and
NATO under established treaty obligations in which it is a signatory (insert APA). There is no
goal that will be achieved if American military planners will consider abandoning their allies in
Europe to play politics at home. It must be reminded that the national security of the American
public is also depended upon a stable political climate in Europe. As with the trend of
globalization, every nation’s affair could have an impact with the rest of the world and a credible
military alliance is a critical component in the law of nations.

“NATO and Terrorism in the 21st century”

(insert terrorist graph)
The recent surge of violent terrorist acts across Europe has seen a constant rise over the
years as evidenced by the graph above (insert APA). How does NATO fit in this situation? As a
military alliance, intelligence gathering is key in identifying potential threats and NATO has
expanded its network.
The attack on the World Trade Center on September 2001 and America’s war on terror
has triggered the invocation. An attack on one is an attack on all (Article 5 of the NATO charter).
And prompted NATO to adopt three (3) principles for its counter-terrorism strategy, namely: (1)
awareness; (2) capabilities; and (3) engagement.
This new complex problem has not been anticipated by the original drafters of the NATO
charter. Nevertheless, a call for flexibility is must as there is a new threat on the entire continent
which is an enemy that do not bear any national flag and is hiding among the local population.
Terrorism has been defined as the use of violence as means of attaining a political
objective (insert APA). Although we often associate terrorism with Islamic extremism, there are
some cases were these acts of violence are caused by homegrown terrorist. These homegrown
terrorists espouse ideas of anti-Semitism and other xenophobic culture. As the migrant crisis
exists, more people are pouring in trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea from America as many
European view that there immigrants are threat from society and terrorist from neighboring
failed states, such as Somalia and Nigeria which use this immigrant corridor to funnel terrorist
into Mainland Europe. This is where intelligence gathering by NATO must come to play and
separate these high-risk individuals from innocent asylum seekers displaced by civil war from
their respective countries.
The development of NATO addressing these multiple areas of concern is an open
invitation for policy and academic scholars to expand the field of research as the supranational
government is now confronted with adversaries.

An Introduction to BREXIT
On 2017, the world was stunned with the declaration that the United Kingdom will
unilaterally withdrawn from the European Union. Many were dismayed with the announcement
since Britain is one of the first members included when EU expanded in 1973.

BREXIT: The Right Decision?

The great French political commentator Alexis Tocqueville, in his book Democracy in
America, warned about the dangers of granting sovereignty over the people as judgment can be
based through misinformation. For the authors, the decision to leave the European Union is both
misplaced and irrational. Considering that a referendum is made, none of the electorate were
fully informed of the consequences of leaving the union.
One of the avid supporters of BREXIT movement is Nigel Farage, a leader of Britain’s
United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) which was at the forefront of the bloody
referendum that divided the UK. During the campaign season of the referendum, immigration is
a hot topic among the electorate. By choosing to remain in the union, visa requirements must be
relaxed in order to allow other European nationals or other nationals of different ethnicity to find
employment in the British economy. It is a policy that the local population considers as a threat
because it would create a competition to the unemployed British citizens.

“Failure of the Common Market”

The foregoing discussions on the creation of the European common market system has
been a success over the past decades as evidenced by the increase of economic exchanges
between members of this supranational institution. Nevertheless, problems in this ambitious
common system may arise in which, for the authors, has prompted the United Kingdom to leave
the European Union.
First, immigration resulted to a more competitive labor market around European
countries and immigrants as well accepted in any industry. This has caused outrage among the
local population because immigrants have occupied favorable positions in the distribution of
public service benefits for the government extends not only working visa but also a pledge that
immigrants can be bestowed full citizenship in the country in which they chose to practice their
profession or open up their own business. Many local political parties, such as UKIP, saw this as
an opportunity to stoke xenophobic views that has paved the way to change public opinion to
vote for leaving the EU.