# data[].attributes.body
1949

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Welcome to NATO on the Map. Explore this interactive map to learn more about NATO, how the Alliance works and how it responds to today's security challenges.

Click anywhere to continue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Welcome to NATO on the Map. Explore this interactive map to learn more about NATO, how the Alliance works and how it responds to today's security challenges. Click anywhere to continue.

# data[].attributes.body
1949

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NATO is a military alliance of twenty-eight European and two North American countries that constitutes a system of collective defense. The process of joining the alliance is governed by Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which allows for the invitation of "other European States" only, and by subsequent agreements. Countries wishing to join must meet certain requirements and complete a multi-step process involving political dialogue and military integration. The accession process is overseen by the North Atlantic Council, NATO's governing body.

After its formation in 1949 with twelve founding members, NATO grew rapidly by including Greece and Turkey in 1952 and West Germany in 1955. The addition of West Germany into NATO prompted the Soviet Union to adopt their own collective security alliance, informally called the Warsaw Pact later that same year. The next country to join NATO was Spain in 1982. In 1990 the Soviet Union and NATO reached an agreement that a reunified Germany would join NATO under West Germany's pre-existing membership, although restrictions were agreed to on the deployment of NATO troops on former East German territory. The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 led to a number of former Warsaw Pact and post-Soviet states requesting to join NATO. This prompted objection from Russia as it viewed these states as falling within its sphere of influence. In 1996, US President Bill Clinton called for former Warsaw Pact countries and post-Soviet republics to join NATO, and made NATO enlargement a crucial part of his foreign-policy.

Three years later, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined NATO, amid much debate within NATO itself and fierce Russian opposition. Another expansion came with the accession of seven Central and Eastern European countries: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. These nations were invited to begin membership talks during the 2002 Prague summit, and joined NATO shortly before the 2004 Istanbul summit. Albania and Croatia joined on 1 April 2009, prior to the 2009 Strasbourg-Kehl summit. The most recent member states to be added to NATO are Montenegro on 5 June 2017 and North Macedonia on 27 March 2020.

As of 2022, NATO officially recognizes three states which have formally expressed their membership aspirations: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Ukraine. Joining NATO is a topic of debate in several other countries outside the alliance, including Finland, Ireland, Moldova, Serbia and Sweden. In countries like Ukraine, support or opposition to membership is tied to ethnic and nationalist ideologies. The incorporation of former Eastern Bloc and post-Soviet states in the alliance has been a cause of increased tension between NATO and Russia. NATO expansion eastward was one factor given by Russian President Vladimir Putin to justify the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Past enlargements

NATO has added new members eight times since its founding in 1949 to include thirty members. Twelve countries were part of the founding of NATO: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The early years of the Cold War saw a stark divide between Capitalist states of Europe, backed by United States, and the Communist states, backed by the Soviet Union. This divide eased inclusion of Portugal under Antonio Salazar in NATO and encouraged the anti-Communist governments of Greece and Turkey to join NATO in 1952. Greece would suspend its membership in 1974, over the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, but rejoined in 1980 with Turkey's cooperation.

The Bonn-Paris conventions ended the allies' occupation of West Germany, and were ratified in part on the condition that West Germany join NATO, which it did in 1955. Though initially isolationist, Spain under Francisco Franco was staunchly anti-Communist, and bound by regular defence agreements with NATO countries. After its transition to democracy, Spain came under pressure to normalize its European relations, including joining NATO, which it did in 1982. A referendum in 1986 confirmed popular support for this.

German reunification

The first post-Cold War expansion of NATO came with German reunification on 3 October 1990, when the former East Germany became part of the Federal Republic of Germany and the alliance. This had been agreed in the Two Plus Four Treaty earlier in the year. To secure Soviet approval of a united Germany remaining in NATO, it was agreed that foreign troops and nuclear weapons would not be stationed in the former East Germany. Though the topic may have been raised during the treaty's negotiations, there is no mention of NATO enlargement in the September-October 1990 agreements on German reunification. Whether or not Hans-Dietrich Genscher and James Baker, as representatives from NATO member states, informally committed to not enlarge NATO east of East Germany during these and contemporary negotiations with Soviet counterparts has long been a matter of dispute among historians and international relations scholars, however the topic was addresed in previous negotiations. A declassified U.S. memorandum and documents from the Soviets reflect how then Secretary of State of the United States, James Baker, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and his Minister of foreign affairs Eduard Shevardnadze discussed on NATO's expansion in a meeting in Moscow in February 9, 1990, in negotiations prior to the German reunification. Baker delivered to Gorbachev the famous line 'If we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO's jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east'.

Russian reactions to possible NATO expansion during the 1990s were however mixed. During an August 1993 visit to Poland, Russian President Boris Yeltsin told Polish President Lech Wałęsa that "Russia does not oppose Poland's membership in NATO and does not perceive its membership in NATO as a threat to Russia." Under pressure from opposition within Russia, this informal declaration was retracted the following month, and Yeltsin wrote that October that expansion violated the spirit of the 1990 agreement, marking the beginning of this grievance among Russian elites. Similarly, in May 1997, Yeltsin signed an agreement with NATO that included text referring to new membership, but then described NATO expansion as a threat in his "National Security Blueprint" that December. In a 2007 speech, Russian President Vladimir Putin cited a 1990 quote from Manfred Wörner to further imply that guarantees about enlargement were made, and this impression was later used by him as a potential justification for Russia's 2014 actions in Ukraine and the 2021-2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis.

Debate within the American government as to whether enlargement of NATO was feasible or desirable began during the George H.W. Bush administration. By mid-1992, a consensus emerged within the administration that NATO enlargement was a wise realpolitik measure to strengthen American hegemony. In the absence of NATO enlargement, Bush administration officials worried that the European Union might fill the security vacuum in Central Europe, and thus challenge American post-Cold War influence. There was further debate within the Clinton administration between a rapid offer of full membership to several select countries versus a slower, more limited membership to a wide range of states over a longer time span. Victory by the Republican Party, who advocated for aggressive expansion, in the 1994 US congressional election helped sway US policy in favor of wider full-membership enlargement.

Visegrád Group

In February 1991, Poland, Hungary, and Czechoslovakia formed the Visegrád Group to push for European integration under the European Union and NATO, as well as to conduct military reforms in line with NATO standards. Internal NATO reaction to these former Warsaw Pact countries was initially negative, but by the 1991 Rome summit in November, members agreed to a series of goals that could lead to accession, such as market and democratic liberalization, and that NATO should be a partner in these efforts. In subsequent years, wider forums for regional cooperation between NATO and its eastern neighbors were set up, including the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (later the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council) and the Partnership for Peace.

Russian military actions, including the First Chechen War, Transnistria War, and War in Abkhazia, were among the factors driving Central and Eastern European countries, particularly those with memories of similar Soviet offensives, to push for NATO application and ensure their long-term security. Political parties reluctant to move on NATO membership were voted out of office, including the Bulgarian Socialist Party in 1996 and Slovak HZDS in 1998. Hungary's interest in joining was confirmed by a November 1997 referendum that returned 85.3% in favor of membership.

While the other Visegrád members were invited to join NATO at its 1997 Madrid summit, Slovakia was excluded based on what several members considered undemocratic actions by nationalist Prime Minister Vladimír Mečiar. Romania and Slovenia were both considered for invitation in 1997, and each had the backing of a prominent NATO member, France and Italy respectively, but support for this enlargement was not unanimous, particularly in the US Congress. In an open letter to US President Bill Clinton, more than forty foreign policy experts including Bill Bradley, Sam Nunn, Gary Hart, Paul Nitze, and Robert McNamara expressed their concerns about NATO expansion as both expensive and unnecessary given the lack of an external threat from Russia at that time.

Vilnius Group

At the 1999 Washington summit, where Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic officially joined, NATO also issued new guidelines for membership with individualized " Membership Action Plans" for Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, North Macedonia, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. In May 2000, these countries joined with Croatia to form the Vilnius Group in order to cooperate and lobby for common NATO membership, and by the 2002 Prague summit seven were invited for membership, which took place at the 2004 Istanbul summit. Slovenia had held a referendum on NATO the previous year, with 66% approving of membership.

Russia was particularly upset with the addition of the three Baltic states, the first countries that were part of the Soviet Union to join NATO. Russian troops had been stationed in Baltic states as late as 1995, but the goals of European integration and NATO membership were very attractive for the Baltic states. Rapid investments in their own militaries showed a seriousness in their desire for membership, and participation in NATO-led post-9/11 operations, particularly by Estonia in Afghanistan, won the three countries key support from individuals like US Senator John McCain, French President Jacques Chirac, and German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder. A 2006 study in the journal Security Studies argued that the NATO enlargements in 1999 and 2004 contributed to democratic consolidation in Central and Eastern Europe.

Adriatic Charter

Croatia also started a Membership Action Plan at the 2002 summit, but was not included in the 2004 enlargement. In May 2003, it joined with Albania and Macedonia to form the Adriatic Charter. Croatia's prospect of membership sparked a national debate on whether a referendum on NATO membership needed to be held prior to joining the organization. Croatian Prime Minister Ivo Sanader ultimately agreed in January 2008, as part of forming a coalition government with the HSS and HSLS parties, not to officially propose one. Albania and Croatia were invited to join NATO at the 2008 Bucharest summit that April, though Slovenia threatened to hold up Croatian membership over their border dispute in the Bay of Piran. Slovenia did ratify Croatia's accession protocol in February 2009, before Croatia and Albania both officially joined NATO just prior to the 2009 Strasbourg-Kehl summit, with little opposition from Russia.

Montenegro declared independence on 3 June 2006; the new country subsequently joined the Partnership for Peace programme at the 2006 Riga summit and then applied for a Membership Action Plan on 5 November 2008, which was granted in December 2009. Montenegro also began full membership with the Adriatic Charter of NATO aspirants in May 2009. NATO formally invited Montenegro to join the alliance on 2 December 2015, with negotiations concluding in May 2016; Montenegro joined NATO on 5 June 2017.

North Macedonia joined the Partnership for Peace in 1995, and commenced its Membership Action Plan in 1999, at the same time as Albania. At the 2008 Bucharest summit, Greece blocked a proposed invitation because it believed that its neighbor's constitutional name implies territorial aspirations toward its own region of Greek Macedonia. NATO nations agreed that the country would receive an invitation upon resolution of the Macedonia naming dispute. Macedonia sued Greece at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) over their veto of Macedonia's NATO membership. Macedonia was part of the Vilnius Group, and had formed the Adriatic Charter with Croatia and Albania in 2003 to better coordinate NATO accession.

In June 2017, Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev signaled he would consider alternatives names for the country in order to strike a compromise with Greece, settle the naming dispute and lift Greek objections to Macedonia joining the alliance. The naming dispute was resolved with the Prespa Agreement in June 2018 under which the country adopted the name North Macedonia, which was supported by a referendum in September 2018. NATO invited North Macedonia to begin membership talks on 11 July 2018; formal accession talks began on 18 October 2018. NATO's members signed North Macedonia's accession protocol on 6 February 2019. Most countries ratified the accession treaty in 2019, with Spain ratifying its accession protocol in March 2020. The Sobranie also ratified the treaty unanimously on 11 February 2020, before North Macedonia became a NATO member state on 27 March 2020.

Criteria and process

The North Atlantic Treaty is the basis of the organization, and, as such, any changes including new membership requires ratification by all current signers of the treaty. The treaty's Article 10 describes how non-member states may join NATO:

The Parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European State in a position to further the principles of this Treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this Treaty. Any State so invited may become a Party to the Treaty by depositing its instrument of accession with the Government of the United States of America. The Government of the United States of America will inform each of the Parties of the deposit of each such instrument of accession.

Article 10 poses two general limits to non-member states. First, only European states are eligible for new membership, and second, these states not only need the approval of all the existing member states, but every member state can put some criteria forward that have to be attained. In practice, NATO formulates a common set of criteria, but for instance Greece blocked the Republic of Macedonia's accession to NATO for many years due to the disagreement over the use of the name Macedonia. Turkey similarly opposes the participation of the Republic of Cyprus with NATO institutions as long as the Cyprus dispute is not resolved.

Since the 1991 Rome summit, when the delegations of its member states officially offered cooperation with Europe's newly democratic states, NATO has addressed and further defined the expectations and procedure for adding new members. The 1994 Brussels Declaration reaffirmed the principles in Article 10 and led to the "Study on NATO Enlargement". Published in September 1995, the study outlined the "how and why" of possible enlargement in Europe, highlighting three principles from the 1949 treaty for members to have: "democracy, individual liberty, and rule of law".

As NATO Secretary General Willy Claes noted, the 1995 study did not specify the "who or when," though it discussed how the then newly formed Partnership for Peace and North Atlantic Cooperation Council could assist in the enlargement process, and noted that on-going territorial disputes could be an issue for whether a country was invited.

At the 1997 Madrid summit, the heads of state of NATO issued the "Madrid Declaration on Euro-Atlantic Security and Cooperation" which invited three Central European countries to join the alliance, out of the twelve that had at that point requested to join, laying out a path for others to follow.

The text of Article 10 was the origin for NATO's April 1999 statement of an "open door policy".

Membership Action Plan

The biggest step in the formalization of the process for inviting new members came at the 1999 Washington summit when the Membership Action Plan (MAP) mechanism was approved as a stage for the current members to regularly review the formal applications of aspiring members. A country's participation in MAP entails the annual presentation of reports concerning its progress on five different measures:

Willingness to settle international, ethnic or external territorial disputes by peaceful means, commitment to the rule of law and human rights, and democratic control of armed forces

Ability to contribute to the organization's defence and missions

Devotion of sufficient resources to armed forces to be able to meet the commitments of membership

Security of sensitive information, and safeguards ensuring it

Compatibility of domestic legislation with NATO cooperation

NATO provides feedback as well as technical advice to each country and evaluates its progress on an individual basis. Once members agree that a country meets the requirements, NATO can issue that country an invitation to begin accession talks. The final accession process, once invited, involves five steps leading up to the signing of the accession protocols and the acceptance and ratification of those protocols by the governments of the current NATO members.

In November 2002, NATO invited seven countries to join it via the MAP: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. All seven invitees joined in March 2004, which was observed at a flag-raising ceremony on 2 April. After that date, NATO numbered 26 allies. Other former MAP participants were Albania and Croatia between May 2002 and April 2009, Montenegro between December 2009 and June 2017 and North Macedonia between April 1999 and March 2020, when they joined NATO. As of February 2019, one country was participating in the MAP: Bosnia and Herzegovina. As of 2022, Georgia and Ukraine also want to join the alliance.

Intensified Dialogue

Intensified Dialogue was first introduced in April 2005 at an informal meeting of foreign ministers in Vilnius, Lithuania, as a response to Ukrainian aspirations for NATO membership and related reforms taking place under President Viktor Yushchenko, and which followed the 2002 signing of the NATO-Ukraine Action Plan under his predecessor, Leonid Kuchma. This formula, which includes discussion of a "full range of political, military, financial and security issues relating to possible NATO membership ... had its roots in the 1997 Madrid summit", where the participants had agreed "to continue the Alliance's intensified dialogues with those nations that aspire to NATO membership or that otherwise wish to pursue a dialogue with NATO on membership questions".

In September 2006, Georgia became the second to be offered the Intensified Dialogue status, following a rapid change in foreign policy under President Mikhail Saakashvili, and what they perceived as a demonstration of military readiness during the 2006 Kodori crisis. Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia similarly received offers at the April 2008 Bucharest summit. While their neighbors both requested and accepted the dialogue programme, Serbia's offer was presented to guarantee the possibility of future ties with the alliance.

Current status

Bosnia and Herzegovina is the only country with a Membership Action Plan, which together with Georgia, were named NATO "aspirant countries" at the North Atlantic Council meeting on 7 December 2011. Ukraine was recognized as an aspirant country after the 2014 Ukrainian revolution.

Originally invited to join the MAP in April 2010 under the condition that no Annual National Programme would be launched until one of the conditions for the ^ OHR closure - the transfer of control of immovable defence property to the central Bosnian authorities from the two regional political entities - was fulfilled. Condition waived in 2018.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

The 1995 NATO bombing of Bosnia and Herzegovina targeted the Bosnian Serb Army and together with international pressure led to the resolution of the Bosnian War and the signing of the Dayton Agreement in 1995. Since then, NATO has led the Implementation Force and Stabilization Force, and other peacekeeping efforts in the country. Bosnia and Herzegovina joined the Partnership for Peace in 2006, and signed an agreement on security cooperation in March 2007.

Bosnia and Herzegovina began further cooperation with NATO within their Individual Partnership Action Plan in January 2008. The country then started the process of Intensified Dialogue at the 2008 Bucharest summit. The country was invited to join the Adriatic Charter of NATO aspirants in September 2008.

The Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina within Bosnia and Herzegovina has expressed willingness to join NATO, however, it faces consistent political pressure from Republika Srpska, the other political entity in the country, alongside its partners in Russia. On 2 October 2009, Haris Silajdžić, the Bosniak Member of the Presidency, announced official application for Membership Action Plan. On 22 April 2010, NATO agreed to launch the Membership Action Plan for Bosnia and Herzegovina, but with certain conditions attached. Turkey is thought to be the biggest supporter of Bosnian membership, and heavily influenced the decision.

The conditions of the MAP, however, stipulated that no Annual National Programme[clarification needed ] could be launched until 63 military facilities are transferred from Bosnia's political divisions to the central government, which is one of the conditions for the OHR closure. The leadership of the Republika Srpska has opposed this transfer as a loss of autonomy. All movable property, including all weapons and other army equipment, is fully registered as the property of the country starting 1 January 2006. A ruling of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina on 6 August 2017 decided that a disputed military facility in Han Pijesak is to be registered as property of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Despite the fact that all immovable property is not fully registered, NATO approved the activation of the Membership Action Plan for Bosnia and Herzegovina, and called on Bosnia to submit an Annual National Program on 5 December 2018.

An August 2010 poll showed that 70 percent of the country supports NATO membership, but results were very different in the two constituent entities. While 90 percent of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina supported NATO membership, only 40 percent in Republika Srpska did.

Bosnian chances of joining NATO may depend on Serbia's attitude towards the alliance, since the leadership of Republika Srpska might be reluctant to go against Serbian interests. In October 2017, the National Assembly of the Republika Srpska passed a nonbinding resolution opposing NATO membership for Bosnia and Herzegovina. On 2 March 2022, Vjosa Osmani, the President of Kosovo, called on NATO to speed up the membership process for Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Osmani also criticized Aleksandar Vucic, the President of Serbia, accusing him of using Milorad Dodik to "destroy the unity of Bosnia and Herzegovina".

Georgia moved quickly following the Rose Revolution in 2003 to seek closer ties with NATO. Georgia's northern neighbor, Russia, opposed the closer ties, including those expressed at the 2008 Bucharest summit where NATO members promised that Georgia would eventually join the organization.

Complications in the relationship between NATO and Georgia includes the presence of Russian military forces in internationally recognized Georgian territory as a result of multiple recent conflicts, like the 2008 Russo-Georgian War over the territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, both of which are home to a large number of citizens of the Russian Federation. On 21 November 2011, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev while addressing soldiers in Vladikavkaz near the Georgian border stated that Russia's 2008 invasion had prevented any further NATO enlargement into the former Soviet sphere.

A nonbinding referendum in 2008 resulted in 77 percent of voters supporting NATO accession. In May 2013, Georgian Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili stated that his goal was to get a Membership Action Plan (MAP) for his country from NATO in 2014. In June 2014, diplomats from NATO suggested that while a MAP was unlikely, a package of "reinforced cooperation" agreements was a possible compromise. Anders Fogh Rasmussen confirmed that this could include the building of military capabilities and armed forces training.

In September 2019, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that "NATO approaching our borders is a threat to Russia." He was quoted as saying that if NATO accepts Georgian membership with the article on collective defense covering only Tbilisi-administered territory (i.e., excluding the Georgian territories of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, both of which are currently an unrecognized breakaway republics supported by Russia), "we will not start a war, but such conduct will undermine our relations with NATO and with countries who are eager to enter the alliance."

On 29 September 2020, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg called on Georgia to use every opportunity to move closer to the Alliance and speed up preparations for membership. Stoltenberg stressed that earlier this year, the Allies agreed to further strengthen the NATO-Georgia partnership. According to him, NATO welcomes the progress made by Georgia in carrying out reforms, modernizing its armed forces and strengthening democracy. It is worth noting that so far Georgia's calls for membership in such formulations have not appeared in the rhetoric of the Secretary General of the Alliance. At the same time, NATO recognizes Georgia's aspirations for membership in the Alliance, as in the case of Ukraine.

Ukraine's present and future relationship with NATO has been politically divisive, and is part of a larger debate between Ukraine's political and cultural ties to both the European Union and Russia. It established ties to the alliance with a NATO-Ukraine Action Plan on 22 November 2002, and joined NATO's Partnership for Peace initiative in February 2005. Then in April 2005, Ukraine entered into the Intensified Dialogue programme with NATO.

In March 2008, under Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko and Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, Ukraine sent an official letter of application for a Membership Action Plan (MAP), the first step in joining NATO. These leaders however guaranteed their opposition that membership in any military alliance would not pass without public approval in a referendum. This idea had gained support from a number of NATO leaders, particularly those in Central and Eastern Europe. Russian leaders like Prime Minister and President-Elect Dmitry Medvedev made clear their opposition to Ukraine membership, and leading up to the April 2008 Bucharest summit their emissary actively lobbied against a Ukrainian MAP. After some debate among members at the summit, NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer declared in a press conference that Ukraine, together with Georgia, would someday join NATO, but neither would begin Membership Action Plans. At this summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin, in his last international speech before switching jobs with Medvedev, listed his grievances with NATO, and called Ukrainian membership "a direct threat" to his country.

The 2010 election returned Viktor Yanukovych to the presidency and marked a turnaround in Ukraine's relations with NATO. In February 2010, he stated that Ukraine's relations with NATO were currently "well-defined", and that there was "no question of Ukraine joining NATO". He said the issue of Ukrainian membership of NATO might "emerge at some point, but we will not see it in the immediate future". While visiting Brussels in March 2010, he further stated that there would be no change to Ukraine's status as a member of the alliance's outreach programme. He later reiterated during a trip to Moscow that Ukraine would remain a "European, non-aligned state". Then, on 3 June 2010 the Ukrainian parliament voted to exclude the goal of "integration into Euro-Atlantic security and NATO membership" from the country's national security strategy in a bill drafted by Yanukovych himself. The bill forbade Ukraine's membership in any military bloc, but allowed for co-operation with alliances such as NATO.

Following months of Euromaidan street protests that began because of his refusal to sign an Association Agreement with the European Union in favor of deals from Russia, President Yanukovych fled Kyiv in February 2014, ultimately to Russia, and parliament voted to remove him from his post. This brought another change in direction of Ukraine's association with Europe and by extension NATO. In 2014, pro-Russian unrest occurred in eastern Ukraine and Crimea was annexed by the Russian Federation in March. As part of an effort to assuage concerned groups, newly installed Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk addressed the topic in a speech on 18 March 2014, emphasizing that Ukraine was not seeking NATO membership. US President Barack Obama echoed this position the following week, while calling for greater NATO presence in Central Europe.

However, in response to the Russian military intervention in Ukraine, Yatsenyuk announced his intentions to resume the bid for NATO integration on 29 August 2014, and in December 2014, Ukraine's parliament voted to drop the non-aligned status that it adopted in 2010. NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has stated that NATO membership is still an option for Ukraine, and support for NATO membership has risen to 64 percent in government-controlled Ukraine according to a July 2015 poll. Previous polls had shown that the decline in opposition to membership was linked to the ongoing Russian intervention.

On 8 June 2017, Ukraine's Verkhovna Rada passed a law making integration with NATO a foreign policy priority, and Poroshenko announced the next month that he would seek the opening of negotiations on a Membership Action Plan with NATO, which recognized Ukraine as an aspirant country by March 2018. On 20 September 2018, the Ukrainian parliament approved amendments to the constitution that would make the accession of the country to NATO and the EU a central goal and the main foreign policy objective.

On 8 October 2020, during a meeting with Prime Minister Boris Johnson in London, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy stated that Ukraine needs a NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP), as NATO membership will contribute to Ukraine's security and defense. In April 2021, following a Russian troop buildup near the Ukraine border, Zelenskyy repeated this request in a call with NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, saying that "NATO is the only way to end the war in Donbas" and that entry into the MAP "will be a real signal for Russia."

Membership debates

Finland participates in nearly all sub-areas of the Partnership for Peace programme, and has provided peacekeeping forces to both the Afghanistan and Kosovo missions. Since the 1990s and across multiple governments, the Finnish position has been that joining NATO has not been necessary and it has been preferable to retain an independent defence policy, but, if conditions change, the country may still exercise the option to join NATO. The possibility of Finland's membership in NATO was one of the most important issues debated in relation to the Finnish presidential election of 2006, and continues to be a significant issue in Finnish politics. In 2007, Finland made various technical preparations for membership, with the then Defence Minister Jyri Häkämies eager to pursue NATO membership. Public interest in the issue decreased in subsequent years. In April 2014, while Carl Haglund was Defence Minister, the government announced that they would sign a memorandum of understanding with NATO on Finland's readiness to receive military assistance and to aid NATO in equipment maintenance. However, Haglund emphasized that this memorandum would not be a step towards membership.

Of the major Finnish political parties, the National Coalition Party and Swedish People's Party of Finland support NATO membership. In 2016, the party conference of the National Coalition Party agreed that Finland should apply for membership "in the next few years". In the vision of the Swedish People's Party of Finland set out in the same year, Finland will be a NATO member in 2025. Many individual politicians have advocated for NATO as well, including the current President Sauli Niinistö and former Prime Minister Alexander Stubb, as well as former President Martti Ahtisaari, who has argued that Finland should join all the organizations supported by other Western democracies in order "to shrug off once and for all the burden of Finlandization." Two other former presidents from the Social Democratic Party, Tarja Halonen and Mauno Koivisto, have publicly opposed the idea, arguing that NATO membership would deteriorate Finland's relations with Russia. The Left Alliance has been the party most opposed to joining NATO; when they entered into coalition with the SDP in 2019, they made clear that any movement towards entering a military alliance would lead to the Left Alliance leaving the cabinet. However, the party's position changed following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, with chair Li Andersson calling for a thoughtful, society-wide discussion and evaluation of the possibility of applying to join NATO, and stating that such a decision would no longer necessarily result in the party resigning from the government.

Finland has received some very critical feedback from Russia for even considering the possibility of joining NATO, with a 2009 study suggesting this could have repercussions for Russia's relations with the EU and NATO as a whole. Following the 2008 Russo-Georgian War, Finnish Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen reiterated that Finland had no plans to join NATO, and stated that the main lesson of the war was the need for closer ties to Russia. In a June 2014 interview in the Finnish newspaper Hufvudstadsbladet, Vladimir Putin's personal envoy Sergey Alexandrovich Markov accused Finland of extreme "Russophobia" and suggested that Finland joining NATO could start World War III. In July 2016, Putin stated on a visit to Finland that Russia would increase the number of troops on the Finnish border if Finland were to join NATO. He also warned that NATO would "fight to the last Finn against Russia".

A survey conducted for Finnish think tank EVA in January 2015 found that 43 percent of Finns polled opposed NATO membership, while 26 percent supported and 32 percent were undecided. EVA has noted a downward trend in the percent opposed that started in 1998, including a steep decline after the 2012 presidential election. In March 2014, during Russia's annexation of Crimea, one survey showed only 22 percent supported membership, though a second showed that 53 percent would support membership if Finnish leadership recommended it. Support for a military alliance with neighbor Sweden was also high, at 54 percent, and Finland could possibly seek an enlarged role for NORDEFCO. Finnish Minister of Defence Carl Haglund suggested that a referendum on NATO membership could be held sometime after the 2015 parliamentary election. A poll from October 2017 showed that support for membership remained at 22%, while rising to 33% in the suggested scenario in which Sweden would join. Another poll from December 2019 showed support decreasing further to 20%, while 56% opposed joining the alliance and 24% were unsure.

In January 2022, Prime Minister Sanna Marin said that there is a real possibility that Finland will join NATO. On 24 February 2022, in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, she reiterated that while Finland was "not currently facing an immediate military threat," joining NATO was still a possibility, noting that "the debate on NATO membership in Finland will change." On 25 February, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson threatened Finland and Sweden with "military and political consequences" if they attempted to join NATO. Both countries had attended the emergency NATO summit as members of NATO's Partnership for Peace and both had condemned the invasion and had provided assistance to Ukraine. Following the invasion, a poll conducted in February 2022 showed support for joining NATO at 53%, opposition at 28%, and 19% were unsure. If Sweden were also to join NATO, the figure goes up to 66% in favor and the opposition drops to 20%. On 27 February 2022, a citizens' initiative asking for a referendum on NATO membership got the required 50,000 signatures, meaning the Parliament of Finland has an obligation to consider the matter. Three days later a second citizens' initiative, this time asking for Finland to apply for membership instead of holding a referendum on the matter, also passed the 50,000 signatures threshold. Following a meeting on 1 March 2022 to discuss whether to apply to become full members of NATO, Prime Minister Sanna Marin stated that no decision had been made on the issue yet, saying that "such an important question needs to be dealt with thoroughly". A survey conducted from 9 to 11 March found that support for joining the alliance had risen to 62%, that opposition had decreased to 16%, and that 21% were left unsure. President Niinistö characterised the polling as demonstrating sufficent popular support for an application. The pro-NATO National Coalition Party called for a joint Finnish-Swedish application before July, and Prime Minister Marin suggested that the decision process must be concluded in the spring.

Ireland has been a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme and Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) since 1999, but has a traditional policy of military neutrality. Ireland participates in the alliance's PfP Planning and Review Process (PARP), which aims to increase the interoperability of the Irish military, the Defence Forces, with NATO member states and bring them into line with accepted international standards so as to successfully deploy with other professional military forces on peacekeeping operations overseas. Ireland supplied a small number of troops to the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan (2001-2014) and supports the ongoing NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR).

Currently no major political party in Ireland fully supports accession to NATO, a reflection on public and media opinion in the country. A poll in March 2022 found 37% in favour of joining NATO and 52% opposed. There are a number of politicians who do support Ireland joining NATO, mainly within the centre-right Fine Gael party, but the majority of politicians still do not. The republican party Sinn Féin proposed a constitutional amendment to prohibit the country from joining a military alliance like NATO, but the legislation failed to pass the Dáil Éireann in April 2019. It is widely understood that a referendum would have to be held before any changes could be made to neutrality or to joining NATO. Former Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen said during a visit to the country in 2013 that the "door is open" for Ireland to join NATO at any time.

According to Minister of Foreign Affairs Enver Hoxhaj, integration with NATO is a priority for Kosovo, which declared independence from Serbia in 2008. Hoxhaj stated in 2014 that the country's goal is to be a NATO member by 2022. However, four NATO member states- Greece, Romania, Spain, and Slovakia-do not recognize Kosovo's independence. United Nations membership, which Kosovo does not have, is considered to be necessary for NATO membership. In December 2018, Kosovar Prime Minister Ramush Haradinaj stated that Kosovo will apply for NATO membership after the formation of the Kosovo Armed Forces. In February 2022, during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Minister of Defense Armend Mehaj requested a permanent US military base in the country and an accelerated accession process to the organization, citing an "immediate need to guarantee peace, security and stability in the Western Balkans". On 3 March 2022 a resolution was passed by Kosovo's Parliament requesting that the government "take all necessary steps to join NATO, European Union, Council of Europe and other international organizations".

Moldova's constitution forbids the country from joining a military alliance, but some politicians, such as former Moldovan Minister of Defence Vitalie Marinuța, have suggested joining NATO as part of a larger European integration. Moldova joined NATO's Partnership for Peace in 1994, and initiated an Individual Partnership Action Plan in 2010. Following the 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia, NATO officials warned that Russia might seek to annex Transnistria, a breakaway Moldovan region. This separatist issue could preclude Moldova from joining NATO.

The NATO intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1992 and the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 resulted in strained relations between Serbia and NATO. Relations were further strained following Kosovo's declaration of independence in 2008 while it was a protectorate of the United Nations with security support from NATO. However, Serbia was invited to and joined the Partnership for Peace programme during the 2006 Riga summit and in 2008, was invited to enter the intensified dialogue programme whenever the country is ready.

Serbia's Parliament passed a resolution in 2007 which declared their military neutrality until such time as a referendum was held on the issue. On 1 October 2008, Serbian Defence Minister Dragan Šutanovac signed the Information Exchange Agreement with NATO, one of the prerequisites for fuller membership in the Partnership for Peace programme. In April 2011 Serbia's request for an IPAP was approved by NATO, and Serbia submitted a draft IPAP in May 2013. The agreement was finalized on 15 January 2015.

A CeSID poll in June 2015 conducted with the support of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) indicated that only 12 percent of those polled supported NATO membership, down from 25 percent in 2012, and 73 percent were opposed. The minor Liberal Democratic Party and Serbian Renewal Movement remain the most vocal political parties in favor of NATO membership. Although Serbia aspires to join the European Union, Serbia may seek to maintain military neutrality, joining neither NATO nor the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

In 1949, Sweden chose not to join NATO and declared a security policy aiming for non-alignment in peace and neutrality in war. A modified version now qualifies non-alignment in peace for possible neutrality in war.[clarification needed ] This position was maintained without much discussion during the Cold War. Since the 1990s, however, there has been an active debate in Sweden on the question of NATO membership in the post-Cold War world. These ideological divides were visible in November 2006 when Sweden could either buy two new transport planes or join NATO's plane pool, and in December 2006, when Sweden was invited to join the NATO Response Force. Sweden has been an active participant in NATO-led missions in Bosnia ( IFOR and SFOR), Kosovo ( KFOR), Afghanistan ( ISAF), and Libya ( Operation Unified Protector).

The ruling Swedish Social Democratic Party have remained in favour of neutrality and non-alignment. This preference is shared by their partners, the Green Party, as well as the Left Party. The centre-right Moderate Party is the largest party by current parliamentary representation in favor of NATO membership, even making it their top election pledge in 2022, and like the Liberal Party have generally supported NATO membership since the end of the Cold War. The Centre Party was opposed to NATO membership until September 2015, when party leadership under Annie Lööf announced that they would motion to change the party policy in order to push for Sweden to join NATO at their next party conference. The Christian Democrats, also previously opposed, likewise voted to support NATO membership at their October 2015 party meeting. When the nationalist Sweden Democrats adjusted their stance in December 2020 to allow for NATO membership if coordinated with neighboring Finland and ratified in a referendum, a majority of the members of the Swedish Riksdag for the first time belonged to parties that were open to NATO membership, and a motion to allow for future NATO membership passed the parliament that month by 204 votes to 145.

Ipsos has conducted regular polling, and they have documented a decline in the opposition to membership from 56% in April 2015 to 35% in December 2020, when their poll showed a three-way split among Swedes, with 33% supporting NATO membership and 32% undecided on the issue. The decline largely corresponds to an increase in undecideds, as the percent of Swedes who support NATO membership has stayed mostly steady since 2014. Support for NATO membership previously rose between 2012 and 2015, when the SOM Institute showed it growing from 17% to 31%. Events like the annexation of Crimea and reports of Russian submarine activity in 2014, as well as a 2013 report that Sweden could hold out for only a week if attacked were credited with that rise in support. A May 2017 poll by Pew also showed that 48% supported membership, and in November 2020, they showed that 65% of Swedes viewed NATO positively, the highest percent of any non-NATO member polled.

On 25 February 2022, following the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, a Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson threatened Finland and Sweden with "military and political consequences" if they attempted to join NATO. Both countries had attended the emergency NATO summit as members of NATO's Partnership for Peace and both had condemned the invasion and had provided assistance to Ukraine. A Novus poll conducted 24-25 February 2022 found 41% in favour of NATO membership and 35% opposed. On 4 March 2022, a poll was released that showed 51% support NATO membership, this is the first time a poll has shown a majority supporting this position. The sudden shift in public opinion also affected the otherwise euroskeptic nationalist party Sweden Democrats to open up for a reevaluation of their current reservations against a possible Swedish NATO membership.

Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson declared on 10 March 2022 that it seeks to increase military spending up to the NATO guideline of 2% of GDP, up from 1.26% of Sweden's GDP in 2021. The change was said to be a response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine as a threat to European security, and to be "implemented as soon as possible" with the addition that "it takes many, many years" to build up the military to be able to realize the 2% goal.

Other countries

Austria and Switzerland are both members of the Partnership for Peace, and border NATO member states. Malta is also a member of the Partnership for Peace and the European Union. However, each country has a long-standing policy of neutrality. Cyprus is the only member state of the European Union that is not a member of the Partnership for Peace, with any treaty blocked by Turkey's concerns regarding the Cyprus dispute.

Russia, Armenia, Belarus, and Kazakhstan are all members of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), an alternative military alliance. In 2009, Russian envoy Dmitry Rogozin did not rule out joining NATO at some point, but stated that Russia was currently more interested in leading a coalition as a great power. Azerbaijan has committed to a policy of neutrality, but has not ruled out eventually joining NATO.

Some individuals have proposed expanding NATO outside of Europe and North America, although doing so would require amending Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treaty. Christopher Sands of the Hudson Institute proposed Mexican membership of NATO in order to enhance NATO cooperation with Mexico and develop a "North American pillar" for regional security. In June 2013, Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos stated his hope that Colombia's cooperation with NATO could result in NATO membership, though his Foreign Minister, Juan Carlos Pinzon, quickly clarified that Colombia is not actively seeking NATO membership. Ivo Daalder and James Goldgeier proposed a "global NATO" that would incorporate democratic states from around the world, including Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Brazil, South Africa, and India, while Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani suggested expanding NATO to include Singapore, Israel, Australia, India, and Japan.

On 20 March 2019, US president, Donald Trump said he would make Brazil a major non-NATO ally at a meeting with Brazilian President, Jair Bolsonaro at the White House. During a joint press conference, President Trump expressed support for the eventual ascension of Brazil into NATO. France however has rejected the proposal claiming Article 10 of the treaty limits geography of membership to European countries. On 9 January 2020, Donald Trump mentioned that the alliance should expand into the Middle East to countries like Israel, Jordan, Egypt, and Kuwait among others.

Internal enlargement is the process of new member states arising from the break-up of or secession from an existing member state. There have been and are a number of active separatist movements within member states. The Scottish National Party agreed at its conference in 2012 that it wished for Scotland to retain its NATO membership were it to become independent from the United Kingdom.

References

1. ^ Itzkowitz Shifrinson, Joshua R. (2016). "Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion". International Security. doi:10.1162/ISEC_a_00236.

2. ^ Trachtenberg, Marc (2021). "The United States and the NATO Non-extension Assurances of 1990: New Light on an Old Problem?" (PDF). International Security. 45 (3): 162-203. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00395. S2CID 231694116.

3. ^ Kramer, Mark; Shifrinson, Joshua R. Itzkowitz (1 July 2017). "Correspondence: NATO Enlargement-Was There a Promise?". International Security. 42 (1): 186-192. doi:10.1162/isec_c_00287. ISSN 0162-2889. S2CID 57571871.

4. ^ Mehrotra, O.N. (1998). "NATO Eastward Expansion and Russian Security". Strategic Analysis. 22 (8): 1225-1235. doi:10.1080/09700169808458876.

5. ^ Kupiecki, Robert; Menkiszak, Marek (2020). Documents Talk: NATO-Russia Relations After the Cold War. p. 375. ISBN 978-83-66091-60-3.

6. ^ Clark, Christopher; Spohr, Kristina (24 May 2015). "Moscow's account of Nato expansion is a case of false memory syndrome". The Guardian.

7. ^ Shifrinson, Joshua R. (2020). "NATO enlargement and US foreign policy: the origins, durability, and impact of an idea". International Politics. 57 (3): 342-370. doi:10.1057/s41311-020-00224-w. hdl:. ISSN 1740-3898. S2CID 216168498.

8. ^ Shifrinson, Joshua R. Itzkowitz (1 April 2020). "Eastbound and down:The United States, NATO enlargement, and suppressing the Soviet and Western European alternatives, 1990-1992". Journal of Strategic Studies. 43 (6-7): 816-846. doi:10.1080/01402390.2020.1737931. ISSN 0140-2390. S2CID 216409925.

9. ^ Sarotte, M.E. (1 July 2019). "How to Enlarge NATO: The Debate inside the Clinton Administration, 1993-95". International Security. 44 (1): 7-41. doi:10.1162/isec_a_00353. ISSN 0162-2889. S2CID 198952372.

10. ^ Umland, Andreas (2016). "Intermarium: The Case for Security Pact of the Countries between the Baltic and Black Seas". IndraStra Global. 2 (4): 2.

11. ^ Epstein, Rachel (2006). "Nato Enlargement and the Spread of Democracy: Evidence and Expectations". Security Studies. 14: 63-105. doi:10.1080/09636410591002509. S2CID 143878355.

12. Trifunovska 2010, pp. 36-37

13. "Bosnia's NATO hopes 'depend on Serbia'". The Journal of Turkish Weekly. 27 March 2014. Archived from the original on 28 March 2014.

14. ^ "Ukraine drops Nato membership pursuit". The Daily Telegraph. UK. 28 May 2010. Archived from the original on 12 January 2022.

15. ^ Ukraine's parliament votes to abandon Nato ambitions, BBC News (3 June 2010)

16. ^ "Putin admits Russian forces were deployed to Crimea", Reuters, 17 April 2014, We had to take unavoidable steps so that events did not develop as they are currently developing in southeast Ukraine. ... Of course our troops stood behind Crimea's self-defence forces.

17. ^ "Waking the Neighbour: Finland, NATO and Russia: Keir Giles and Susanna Eskola, UK Defence Academy, November 2009" (PDF).

18. ^ Deeper Russia Ties Is Georgia War Lesson, Finnish Premier Says Bloomberg Retrieved on 9 October 2009

19. ^ "Putin has toughened up his rhetoric, views expert". Helsinki Times. 5 July 2016. Retrieved on 22 July 2016.

20. ^ "Challenges and opportunities abroad: White paper on foreign policy" (PDF). Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ireland.

21. ^ "NATO's relations with Serbia". NATO. 16 January 2015. Archived from the original on 12 November 2013.

22. ^ "Serbia and NATO, are we at a turning point?". Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Serbia. 25 July 2013. Archived from the original on 12 November 2013.

23. ^ "Remarks by President Trump on Proposed National Environmental Policy Act Regulations". whitehouse.gov. 9 January 2020 - via National Archives.

Bibliography

Ambrosio, Thomas (2013). Authoritarian Backlash: Russian Resistance to Democratization in the Former Soviet Union. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. ISBN 978-1-4094-9889-6.

Goldgeier, James. "NATO Enlargement and the Problem of Value Complexity." Journal of Cold War Studies (2020) 22#4 pp 146-174

Grenfell, Julian; Jopling, Thomas Michael (2008). FRONTEX: the EU external borders agency, 9th report of session 2007-08. House of Lords Stationery Office. ISBN 978-0-10-401232-1.

Itzkowitz Shifrinson, Joshua R. (2016). "Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion". International Security. doi:10.1162/ISEC_a_00236.

Spohr, Kristina. "Precluded or precedent-setting? The 'NATO enlargement question' in the triangular Bonn-Washington-Moscow diplomacy of 1990-1991." Journal of Cold War Studies 14.4 (2012): 4-54. online

Trachtenberg, Marc. "The United States and the NATO Non-extension Assurances of 1990: New Light on an Old Problem?" International Security 45:3 (2021): 162-203. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00395 and online commentary on H-DIPLO 2021

Yekelchyk, Serhy (2007). Ukraine: Birth of a Modern Nation. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-530546-3.

Further reading

External links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NATO is a military alliance of twenty-eight European and two North American countries that constitutes a system of collective defense. The process of joining the alliance is governed by Article 10 of the North Atlantic Treaty, which allows for the invitation of "other European States" only, and by subsequent agreements.

# data[].attributes.body
1949

# data[].attributes.body
1949

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What motivated the United States to participate in the creation of a transatlantic alliance in 1949? Who were some of the Americans who had an impact on NATO during the Cold War? Find out what an American Nobel Prize winner, a historian and Orson Welles had to do with NATO.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was created in 1949 by the United States, Canada, and several Western European nations to provide collective security against the Soviet Union.

Signing of the NATO Treaty

NATO was the first peacetime military alliance the United States entered into outside of the Western Hemisphere. After the destruction of the Second World War, the nations of Europe struggled to rebuild their economies and ensure their security. The former required a massive influx of aid to help the war-torn landscapes re-establish industries and produce food, and the latter required assurances against a resurgent Germany or incursions from the Soviet Union. The United States viewed an economically strong, rearmed, and integrated Europe as vital to the prevention of communist expansion across the continent. As a result, Secretary of State George Marshall proposed a program of large-scale economic aid to Europe. The resulting European Recovery Program, or Marshall Plan, not only facilitated European economic integration but promoted the idea of shared interests and cooperation between the United States and Europe. Soviet refusal either to participate in the Marshall Plan or to allow its satellite states in Eastern Europe to accept the economic assistance helped to reinforce the growing division between east and west in Europe.

In 1947-1948, a series of events caused the nations of Western Europe to become concerned about their physical and political security and the United States to become more closely involved with European affairs. The ongoing civil war in Greece, along with tensions in Turkey, led President Harry S. Truman to assert that the United States would provide economic and military aid to both countries, as well as to any other nation struggling against an attempt at subjugation. A Soviet-sponsored coup in Czechoslovakia resulted in a communist government coming to power on the borders of Germany. Attention also focused on elections in Italy as the communist party had made significant gains among Italian voters. Furthermore, events in Germany also caused concern. The occupation and governance of Germany after the war had long been disputed, and in mid-1948, Soviet premier Joseph Stalin chose to test Western resolve by implementing a blockade against West Berlin, which was then under joint U.S., British, and French control but surrounded by Soviet-controlled East Germany. This Berlin Crisis brought the United States and the Soviet Union to the brink of conflict, although a massive airlift to resupply the city for the duration of the blockade helped to prevent an outright confrontation. These events caused U.S. officials to grow increasingly wary of the possibility that the countries of Western Europe might deal with their security concerns by negotiating with the Soviets. To counter this possible turn of events, the Truman Administration considered the possibility of forming a European-American alliance that would commit the United States to bolstering the security of Western Europe.

Signing of the Brussels Treaty

The Western European countries were willing to consider a collective security solution. In response to increasing tensions and security concerns, representatives of several countries of Western Europe gathered together to create a military alliance. Great Britain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg signed the Brussels Treaty in March, 1948. Their treaty provided collective defense; if any one of these nations was attacked, the others were bound to help defend it. At the same time, the Truman Administration instituted a peacetime draft, increased military spending, and called upon the historically isolationist Republican Congress to consider a military alliance with Europe. In May of 1948, Republican Senator Arthur H. Vandenburg proposed a resolution suggesting that the President seek a security treaty with Western Europe that would adhere to the United Nations charter but exist outside of the Security Council where the Soviet Union held veto power. The Vandenburg Resolution passed, and negotiations began for the North Atlantic Treaty.

In spite of general agreement on the concept behind the treaty, it took several months to work out the exact terms. The U.S. Congress had embraced the pursuit of the international alliance, but it remained concerned about the wording of the treaty. The nations of Western Europe wanted assurances that the United States would intervene automatically in the event of an attack, but under the U.S. Constitution the power to declare war rested with Congress. Negotiations worked toward finding language that would reassure the European states but not obligate the United States to act in a way that violated its own laws. Additionally, European contributions to collective security would require large-scale military assistance from the United States to help rebuild Western Europe's defense capabilities. While the European nations argued for individual grants and aid, the United States wanted to make aid conditional on regional coordination. A third issue was the question of scope. The Brussels Treaty signatories preferred that membership in the alliance be restricted to the members of that treaty plus the United States. The U.S. negotiators felt there was more to be gained from enlarging the new treaty to include the countries of the North Atlantic, including Canada, Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Ireland, and Portugal. Together, these countries held territory that formed a bridge between the opposite shores of the Atlantic Ocean, which would facilitate military action if it became necessary.

The result of these extensive negotiations was the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949. In this agreement, the United States, Canada, Belgium, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, and the United Kingdom agreed to consider attack against one an attack against all, along with consultations about threats and defense matters. This collective defense arrangement only formally applied to attacks against the signatories that occurred in Europe or North America; it did not include conflicts in colonial territories. After the treaty was signed, a number of the signatories made requests to the United States for military aid. Later in 1949, President Truman proposed a military assistance program, and the Mutual Defense Assistance Program passed the U.S. Congress in October, appropriating some $1.4 billion dollars for the purpose of building Western European defenses.

Soon after the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the outbreak of the Korean War led the members to move quickly to integrate and coordinate their defense forces through a centralized headquarters. The North Korean attack on South Korea was widely viewed at the time to be an example of communist aggression directed by Moscow, so the United States bolstered its troop commitments to Europe to provide assurances against Soviet aggression on the European continent. In 1952, the members agreed to admit Greece and Turkey to NATO and added the Federal Republic of Germany in 1955. West German entry led the Soviet Union to retaliate with its own regional alliance, which took the form of the Warsaw Treaty Organization and included the Soviet satellite states of Eastern Europe as members.

The collective defense arrangements in NATO served to place the whole of Western Europe under the American "nuclear umbrella." In the 1950s, one of the first military doctrines of NATO emerged in the form of "massive retaliation," or the idea that if any member was attacked, the United States would respond with a large-scale nuclear attack. The threat of this form of response was meant to serve as a deterrent against Soviet aggression on the continent. Although formed in response to the exigencies of the developing Cold War, NATO has lasted beyond the end of that conflict, with membership even expanding to include some former Soviet states. It remains the largest peacetime military alliance in the world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Milestones: 1945-1952 - Office of the Historian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Harry Truman
"If there is anything certain today,
if there is anything inevitable in the future,
it is the will of the people of the world,
for freedom and for peace."
1949 Signing of the North Atlantic Treaty
1950 Korean War
1952 Greece and Turkey join NATO
1954 Germany is invited to join NATO
1955 Germany joins NATO
1955 Warsaw Pact established
1956 The North Atlantic Council approves the report of the "Three Wise Men"
Halvard Lange
Gaetano Martino
Lester B. Pearson
1956 Suez Canal crisis
1956 Hungarian revolution
1961 Berlin Wall built
1962 Cuban missile crisis
1966 France withdraws from NATO's integrated military command
1967 NATO opens its new headquarters in Brussels
Paul Vanden Boeynants
1968 Soviet-led invasion of Czechoslovakia by five Warsaw Pact countries
1969 Apollo 11 lands; first man sets foot on the moon
1970s-1980s NATO prepares and exercises to deter potential aggression throughout the Cold War
1980 Start of Iran-Iraq War
1982 Spain joins NATO
1989 Soviet Union withdraws from Afghanistan
1989 Revolutions spread across Central and Eastern Europe: Berlin Wall falls
1990 Germany reunified
1991 Soviet Union dissolves: Warsaw Pact disbanded
1993 NATO launches no fly zone over Bosnia and Herzegovina
1994 NATO establishes Partnership for Peace programme
1995 Allies and partners send peacekeeping forces to Bosnia and Herzegovina
1995 Bosnia Accords signed in Dayton, Ohio
1997 Founding Act between NATO and Russia is signed
1999 Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland join NATO
1999 NATO launches Operation Allied Force to halt the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Kosovo
2000 First formal meetings between the North Atlantic Council and the European Union's interim Political and Security Committee
2001 Terrorist attacks in the United States
Lord Robertson
2001 Article 5 invoked for the first time in NATO's history after the attacks of September 11
2001 NATO deploys AWACS to mainland US
2001 NATO launches Article 5 Operation Active Endeavour in support of the United States
2002 NATO-Russia Council created
2003 NATO takes command of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan
2003 Start of Iraq War
2003 Terrorist attacks in Istanbul
2004 ...and in Madrid
2004 Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia join NATO
2004 NATO-led mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina completed
2004 Start of NATO Training Mission in Iraq
2005 Terrorist attacks in London
2008 Georgia-Russia conflict
2009 Counter-piracy Operation Ocean Shield begins off the Horn of Africa and in the Gulf of Aden
2009 France returns to NATO's integrated military command at the Strasbourg-Kehl Summit
2009 Albania and Croatia join NATO
2010 NATO adopts a new Strategic Concept
2010 Signing of the Declaration on Enduring Partnership by the President of Afghanistan and the NATO Secretary General
2011 Afghan forces start taking charge of their country's security
2011 Arab Spring
2011 NATO launches and completes Operation Unified Protector for Libya
2012 Deployment of Patriot batteries to augment Turkey's air defences as violence continues in Syria
2012 World continues to grapple with fiscal austerity
2012 Signing of the Joint Political Declaration between Australia and NATO
2013 NATO continues to enhance capabilities to face emerging security challenges
2013 NATO enhances global partnerships
2013 President Karzai announces Afghan security forces will take security lead nationwide
Anders Fogh Rasmussen
This video contains ITN Source copyrighted library material licensed by NATO. This video's ITN Source copyrighted library material licensed by NATO cannot be used as part of a new production without consent of the copyright holder.
www.nato.int

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The history of NATO - Video timeline transcript

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Harry Truman "If there is anything certain today, if there is anything inevitable in the future, it is the will of the people of the world, for freedom and for peace."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Meanwhile, NATO continued to accept new members and to build new partnerships. The NATO-Russia Council was established in 2002 so that individual NATO member states and Russia could work as equal partners on security issues of common interest. In 2004, the Alliance launched the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative as a way of offering practical bilateral security cooperation to countries of the broader Middle East region. Finally, subsequent rounds of enlargement brought more Allies into the fold - Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Slovenia, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania in 2004, Croatia and Albania in 2009, Montenegro in 2017, and North Macedonia in 2020.

A new approach for a new century

In Afghanistan, as in Bosnia and Kosovo, Allies have seen that military power is not enough to ensure peace and stability. Peacekeeping has become at least as difficult as peacemaking. During the Cold War years, Allied security had entailed the defence of the North Atlantic Allies; now the definition of "security" has radically expanded to include the individual's freedom from the violent extremism bred by instability and nation-state failure. For instance, much of the world's attention in 2011 was focused on the crisis in Libya where NATO played a crucial role in helping to protect civilians under attack from their own government, as mandated by the United Nations. The level of violence used by the Libyan security forces against pro-democracy protestors was such that the international community agreed to take collective action. Indifference was simply not an option.

Successful peacekeeping has come to entail not merely providing a baseline of security, but assisting in the construction of modernity itself. This task is beyond NATO, and the Allies know it. The Alliance is not and cannot be a civilian reconstruction agency, but NATO can make a significant contribution provided that it is part of a coherent international response. In the new Strategic Concept agreed in 2010, the Alliance committed itself to dealing with "all stages of a crisis - before, during and after" - an all-embracing principle that implies a greater role for cooperative security. This idea is at the heart of the "comprehensive approach".

Geopolitical instability demands complex remedies that combine military might, diplomacy, and post-conflict stabilisation. Only the widest possible coalition of international actors can provide elements of all three. Accordingly, the Alliance is not only developing security partnerships with countries across the Mediterranean, the Gulf region, and even the Pacific area, but it is also reaching out to other fellow international organisations and non-governmental organisations that have mandates in such areas as institution-building, governance, development, and judiciary reform. Whether helping to build lasting peace in Pristina, securing the Mediterranean Sea or providing assistance to the African Union, NATO has been increasing cooperation with other international organisations that can bring their superior reconstruction and civil-society building capabilities to bear.

The 21st century will not be all about peacebuilding, however. Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 and its unjustified and unprovoked attack on Ukraine are a sobering reminder of the importance of NATO's core task: collective defence. This, coupled with the Syrian conflict, the rise of ISIL and terrorism (and often homebred terrorism), has become a brutal reality across many continents. Meanwhile, tensions rise as migrants seek refuge from conflict in countries that are struggling with the weight of ethnic and religious strife, demographic pressures and economic underperformance. Cyberattacks are becoming ever more frequent and ever more destructive. And through social media and other means, the opponents of liberal open societies are spreading disinformation and propaganda that seek to undermine the values that NATO has always sought to protect and promote. Altogether, the complexity of the current security environment is such that NATO's flexibility is yet again put to the test.

Since its founding in 1949, the transatlantic Alliance's flexibility, embedded in its original Treaty, has allowed it to suit the different requirements of different times. In the 1950s, the Alliance was a purely defensive organisation. In the 1960s, NATO became a political instrument for détente. In the 1990s, the Alliance was a tool for the stabilisation of Eastern Europe and Central Asia through the incorporation of new partners and Allies. In the first half of the 21st century, NATO faces an ever-growing number of new threats. As the foundation stone of transatlantic peace and freedom, NATO must be ready to meet these challenges.

Discover more: 9/11 and beyond

A picture tells a thousand stories. Discover " NATO: A history in snapshots ", a unique collection of photos from every year of NATO's existence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Meanwhile, NATO continued to accept new members and to build new partnerships. The NATO-Russia Council was established in 2002 so that individual NATO member states and Russia could work as equal partners on security issues of common interest.