NEWS – North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) completes 75 years

HIGHLIGHTS

NATO

• Acronym: North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
• What: Political and military alliance of countries.
• Established: April 4, 1949.
• Purpose: Ensure security and defense of member countries through collective defense.
• Founding document: North Atlantic Treaty.
• Headquarters: Brussels, Belgium.
• Military command structure: Responsible for planning and executing military operations. Includes Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) is located in Mons, Belgium, and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Atlantic (SACLANT) in Mons, Belgium

India and NATO

• Not a NATO member, follows a policy of non-alignment for strategic autonomy.
• Non-Aligned Policy: Shaped during Cold War, avoids military blocs like NATO.
• Strategic Autonomy: Emphasizes independence in pursuing national interests.
• Engagements: Partnerships on peacekeeping, counter-terrorism, joint exercises.
• Diversification of Partnerships: Seeks balanced relations across regions and political orientations.
• Changing Dynamics: Potential for shifts in foreign policy stance based on evolving geopolitics or security challenges.

Current NATO Members:

• Original 12: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, United Kingdom, United States.
• Additional members: Greece and Turkey (1952); West Germany (1955; later as Germany); Spain (1982); the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland (1999); Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia (2004); Albania and Croatia (2009); Montenegro (2017); North Macedonia (2020); Finland (2023); Sweden (2024).

Reasons for NATO’s Survival Post-Cold War:

• Continued Security Concerns: NATO remains relevant in securing its members against various external threats, not just from Russia but also from emerging powers like China, given ideological and strategic differences.
• Institutional Adaptation: NATO’s ability to adapt institutionally has helped in containing and controlling conflicts in Central and Eastern Europe, promoting stability within the former Soviet bloc.
• Intra-Alliance Functions: NATO’s historical role in stabilizing Western Europe and fostering cooperation among formerly rival states has contributed significantly to its continued relevance.

What challenges does NATO face today?

• Military Spending Disparities: One of the primary challenges is the disparity in military spending among NATO member countries. Despite the pledge to spend at least 2% of GDP on defense, only a few countries meet this target, leading to tensions and criticisms, especially from leaders like former US President Donald Trump.
• Russian Aggression: Russia’s actions, such as the annexation of Crimea and the invasion of Ukraine, have heightened security concerns among NATO members. This has led to discussions about collective security and the need for a stronger response to Russian aggression.
• Membership Issues: While NATO has an “open door” policy for membership, disagreements and political tensions among member countries can delay or complicate the ratification of new members. Turkey’s objections to Sweden and Finland joining NATO due to past criticisms and disputes over human rights highlight these challenges.
• Intra-Alliance Coordination: Intra-alliance coordination has been a challenge, as seen in President Macron’s comments about a lack of strategic coordination between European allies, the United States, and Turkey. These disagreements can lead to tensions within the alliance.
• Funding for Conflict Areas: The funding and support for conflict areas, such as Ukraine in the face of the Ukraine-Russia war, have also become sources of disagreements among NATO members. Proposals for funding and creating dedicated funds for such conflicts can spark mixed reactions and debates within the alliance.
• Political Dynamics: The political dynamics within NATO member countries, such as changes in leadership (like the potential return of Trump), can impact the alliance’s future. Trump’s previous stance on protection for countries meeting defense spending targets adds uncertainty to NATO’s future under different leadership.