NATO

Dan Lavigne

March 14, 2018

American Foreign Policy

Political Science

What is NATO's purpose in the 21st century?

The Second World War brought destruction to large swaths of Europe. In the wake of the rebuilding process there was a need for a collective security regime facilitated by the United States. The goal of the organization of NATO was to act as bloc against the increasing power of the Soviet Union, as they were a creeping influence in many European states mainly in Eastern and Central Europe. Additionally it was designed to stop other harmful ideologies such as fascism. The framework of NATO also provided a zero-starter for the Soviet Union especially under article V of the treaty, where an attack on one is an attack on all. Additional military forces were able to be used in a coordinated effort, through the integration process under Article III.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union there was a question of what the role of NATO should be. The organization has seen rapid expansion admitting countries in the former Eastern Bloc such as Poland, Czech Republic, and  Hungary in 1999; Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia, Estonia,and Lithuania in 2004; and Croatia and Albania in 2009. Additionally the organization has several partnership for peace agreements, such as with Armenia and Georgia.

The role of NATO should continue to be used as a security apparatus in world affairs. It was used during the Yugoslav Wars, as well as for operations in Afghanistan. The role of this organization should be for peacekeeping missions around the world, specifically in Africa. It already has the institutional memory and is fully equipped so disbanding it would not be ideal, as it is easier to reform and adapt rather than recreate the mechanisms at later times. Additionally, this can and has been used to implement United Nations operations around the world, including the fight against global terrorism.

NATO assignment

Rachel Sousa

NATO snow day assignment

1)

            The original purpose of NATO was to form an alliance between The United States and Europe in response to the possible spread of the Soviet Union. Since this disbandment of the Soviet Union, the original purpose of the alliance has changed.

            In the 21^st century, NATO has expanded its partnerships with countries outside of Europe. Some of those new countries include: Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Latvia, etc. The focus of NATO has shifted to peace keeping. The more countries that join NATO and the more conflicts that are diffused by the organization, the less of a chance that Putin’s Russia can spread to weaker countries. On the same token, NATO has counterterrorism efforts. This was first demonstrated in Afghanistan.

            Even though the purpose of NATO has shifted, it still holds weight today. Regardless of the Soviet Union’s disbandment, partnerships have still expanded over the world. Originally, the organization was created in reaction to a powerful and influential regime, but now the organization has recognized that the more countries that join NATO, the less of a chance that powerful regimes like the Soviet Union can be born again.

Ally Cannon NATO

Allison Cannon

AFP

Professor Shirk

3/13/18

How Important is NATO for AFP?

            The North Atlantic Treaty Organization still has strategic value to the United States even though the world wars and the Cold War are over. Considering one of NATO's primary goals during its inception was to counter Soviet aggression, it seems fit that the United States should remain invested in this organization as tensions with Russia escalate.

             Some United States government officials say that we pay far too much compared to other nations, but spending in more than any other country gives us more power to shape the attitude and the interests of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Without American funds, NATO would be at a distinct disadvantage, and the organization cannot afford to lose those funds.

             Not only should the United States remain invested in NATO for its bargaining rights and rising Russian tensions, but it seems that tensions are rising nearly everywhere around the globe. Terrorism is on the rise, and North Korea is testing nuclear weapons. Not to mention the non-conflict related issues such as combating global warming. Now more than ever diplomacy can be a country's most significant weapon. To give ourselves a louder voice in the global sphere it helps to have others standing behind you and backing your positions. Treaties, in general, are fundamental to America's influence over the world. By spreading our influence onto our allies, they then spread our influence onto their allies and so on. If America's goal is indeed "America First," then it is essential for the United States to spread its influence and democracy around the world. The United States does not have to do so in the destructive ways we once did. Diplomacy and alliances are the new gateways to spread western influence.

Memorandum: Changing Strategy in Afghanistan

To: President Barack Obama

CC: Vice President Joe Biden

From: Rachel Sousa, Secretary of State

Date: November 30, 2009

Subject: Changing Strategy in Afghanistan

Context:

            Since September 1, 2001, The United States has been battling Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan for such a traumatic attack on our own soil. Since then, we have roughly 36,000 troops in Afghanistan. In 2008 we witnessed the most violent year in extremist attacks since 2001. As of October 2009, 58 American soldiers have been killed in battle; making it the most violent month since the start of this war.

Task:

            Due to the lack of progression in Afghanistan, the U.S. should not continue with the same method. It is evident that increasing military presence has not improved our chances to end the reign of Al-Qaeda. Sending troops into Afghanistan have increased over the past eight years and yet the United States has not improved its situation. What is essential is to change the strategy to keep the Taliban from gaining more momentum. Currently there is no sign of the Taliban reversing the Afghanistan government but the U.S. needs to take action now so the chances of this are even lower. If an increase of troops in Afghanistan occurs, it could increase dependency of Afghanistan on the United States. The U.S. does not want to occupy Afghanistan.

Solution:

            American forces are needed in Afghanistan but not in the same manner as previously. The Taliban is unlikely to overthrow the Afghanistan government soon and that may be due to the presence of American military force, however, increasing military presence is increasing the death toll of American soldiers. It is crucial that America shifts its focus to the borders of Afghanistan since safe-havens are used Al-Qaeda in these regions. The United States should work with the soldiers already in Afghanistan as they are the most familiar with the country and America should avoid sending more troops into a blood-bath. In addition, Pakistan is outside of Afghan borders and is likely to be infiltrated by Al-Qaeda and that would be extremely detrimental. The suggestion is to relocate troops to the borders but keeping a military presence within the Afghanistan government so their government remains secure and safe from corruption.

Evidence:

            There is evidence of Al-Qaeda safe-houses along the Afghan border. By distributing troops along the outskirts of Afghanistan, it is more likely that the U.S. can permeate the terrorist group. Having a presence along the border not only would protect Pakistan from possible Al-Qaeda influences, but also could strengthen a relationship with that country to encourage communication over terrorist activity.

Failed Solutions:

            During the Vietnam War, the United States witnessed failed attempts at implementing liberty and only causing  civilian hatred in South Vietnam. What needs to be avoided is the hatred by the Afghan people just as the country saw in Vietnam. If military presence is increased by hundreds of thousands, the country would be feeding into aura of violence. Obviously, the U.S. is beyond avoiding violence but increasing it would be a huge mistake. Violence could encourage more Afghan civilians to sympathize with Al-Qaeda. American troops look like the enemy because they are invading their land.

Implementation:

            American troops should be averted from central bases to the borders and in governmental buildings. The chance of locating Al-Qaeda safe-havens are more likely if soldiers are on the borders. It is also important that America keeps a temporary watchful eye on Afghan activity in governmental facilities so the idea of corruption is less likely.

Summary:

            After nearly eight years of violent battles in Afghanistan and continuous implementation of American soldiers, little to no progress has been made in destroying Al-Qaeda. It is necessary now to change the focus from increasing military violence, to changing of strategy. The United States should work with current American soldiers in Afghanistan and avert their duties to new tasks. Increasing military occupancy in Afghanistan would only increase the death toll. By changing the strategy, the U.S. may avoid repeating history in Vietnam, may improve a relationship with Pakistan, and ending American presence in Afghanistan once and for all.

Works Cited:

“Obama Afghanistan Strategy: More Troops in Quickly, Drawdown in 2011.” CNN, Cable News 

     Network, 1 Dec. 2009, www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/01/obama.afghanistan/index.html.

CBS/AP. “The War in Afghanistan: A Timeline.” CBS News, CBS Interactive, 1 Dec. 2009, 

     www.cbsnews.com/news/the-war-in-afghanistan-a-timeline/.

VOA. “Afghan War Draws Comparisons to Vietnam War.” VOA, VOA, 2 Nov. 2009, 

     www.voanews.com/a/a-13-2009-09-09-voa53-68709837/409488.html.

Memorandum on United States Leadership in the Post-Soviet Era

Memorandum on United States Leadership in the Post-Soviet Era

To: President William J. Clinton

CC: Albert A. Gore

From: Daniel J. Lavigne, Secretary of State

Date: February 11, 1993

Subject: The Strength of U.S. Engagement in Post-Soviet Era Europe

Context

In the past seven years the world has changed drastically. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 Communism in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia has retreated, and newly independent states are welcoming a new sense of freedom. With Russia a shell of its former glory, it no longer has superpower status on the world stage. This leaves the United States as the world’s last remaining superpower. This is dawn of unipolar world led by the U.S. This puts us in a unique position to spread liberal values and economic prosperity to the far reaches of the globe, while shaping our national interest.

Task

Given the United States has a great responsibility to reform the world in our interest we must work to engage with the global community and not to retreat, despite the fear of the United States declining stance in the world and talk of reducing the military budget by as much as fifty percent. The goal is to seek out institutions in which the U.S. and states in the post-Soviet world can mutually benefit from. This includes Russia, our former adversary.

Solution

The recommendation is that this Administration continue the same level of engagement as the before keeping up the momentum to reflect the change that we are seeing in the world. The New World Order consist of the United States engaging in limited warfare, a vast departure from the use of proxies throughout much of the Cold War. Expanding NATO will bring a wider sense of peace to Europe. Additionally, the use of soft power diplomacy is of high priority. Countries in Eastern Europe are still in economic transition. This provides an opportunity of the United States to extend a hand in the form of foreign aid and economic expertise from leading economist, such as Jeffrey Sachs.

Evidence

International institutions such as the United Nations have been used to give the United States permission for intervention. This was seen when the previous Administration invaded Iraq on behalf of Kuwait. Regional security agreements are also making advances, with former post-Soviet countries seeking to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the coming years. Not only is expansion of NATO is required, but also the need to bring Eastern European markets closer to the heart of Europe. Jeffrey Sachs has reformed many economies, not only in Latin America, but has started in Eastern Europe as well. He is currently aiding Russian President Boris Yeltsin bring down inflation and fully restructure the economy by other means as well. It is expected that he will have a similar degree of success like he had in Poland.

Failed Solutions

Two generations ago U.S. President Woodrow Wilson advocated for greater U.S. engagement with the international community in the wake of the First World War. He suggested that the United States join the League of Nations, which would act a forum to address concerns in hopes that would lead to lasting world peace. The failure of the U.S and this organization to coordinate market conditions in the late 1920’s and the decade of the 1930’s led to the German people feeling frustrated and without much hope. Adolf Hitler preyed upon this lack of hope leading to the Nazi party and the Second World War. Additionally, failure for the U.S. to engage may lead to ethnic conflicts in the wake of the collapse of the post-Soviet security and economic framework

Implementation

            The suggestion to reduce military spending should not be up for consideration. Despite this era where immediate threats seem to no longer exist, the United States must remain the dominant player. Old philosophical ideas are shaping foreign policy in the modern age. Democratic Peace theory is to be at the forefront of American political thought, as no two democracies have ever gone to war with each other. By expanding democratic, economic, and security arrangements, this goal will be achieved.

Summary

The United States should continue with the previous Administration’s foreign policy by using international institutions to promote liberal values. In the post-Soviet era the United States is the sole superpower, which means it has vast amounts of responsibility for the international community. Institutions will help bring post-Soviet states “into the fold” so they may enjoy the same benefit to these institutions as well. Economic engineering by leading economist will allow for the integration of markets. The United States will also benefit from their democratic development based on the idea of democratic peace theory. 

Works Cited

Taber, G. M. (1992). Rx for Russia: Shock therapy. Time, 139(4), 37.

US Foreign Policy. (edited by Cox & Stokes) Chapter 5 - "America in the 1990s: searching for purpose."