NATO's Strategic Culture: Static to Dynamic

Introduction: The Genesis

This chapter primarily underscores the historical perspectives that led to the focus on the surfacing of new strategic concepts and to critically analyze them. Secondly to examine the current reforms and its relevancy on logical basis the chapter will probe into new strategic reforms with a critical approach. The chapter will hence not singularly aim to contextualize the transformations in strategic concepts but also probe for critical analysis and its congruence and aptness to the contemporary world. The Chapter is divided into two parts: The first part will introduce the formation of NATO its origin and roots. The establishment of the strategic concept in NATO during Cold War and post Cold War and its implications on the concerned regions and on the organization itself. The second part will discuss its contemporary strategic policies, its implications and challenges with critical analysis and conclusion.

It is a common belief in the international realm that North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was founded to counter the expansion of Soviet Union; however broader objectives like ceasing the resurgence of nationalist militarism and promotion of European political integration also contributed in formation of this alliance. Post World War II Europe was ruined and decimated; Europe being the epicenter of the World War II saw much of devastation with approximately 36.5 million European people dying out of which 19 million were civilians. Europe completely crippled, was required to be rebuilt not only on economic and humanitarian grounds but also on security concerns. With the emerging security concerns arriving from Soviet Union the formation of this security alliance became an imperative requisite post World War II (Walter, 2016). From the time of its inception NATO was founded on the values of collective security and alliance objectives.

NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty which is also known as the Washington Treaty signed in Washington D.C. on 4 April 1949, was born as an embankment to prevent the penetration of Soviet Union and later the Warsaw Pact Alliances into the Western Europe post-World War II. The absolute truth about formation of any alliance system is the existence of a potential threat, according to the 5^th Century Thucydides; he postulates that the states enter alliances in order to win honor, fear and gains. History consists of more such examples wherein alliance systems are formed to keep the threats remote.

The initial years of bricklaying resulted in a strong deterrence against the potential East European threat. The fall of Soviet Union and the expansion of NATO from a static portfolio of collective defense alliance grew to collective security over the years, reshaping NATO with dynamicity for global security challenges. NATO which was a group of 12 countries cozy club in the initial years allowed a liberal growth of 30 nations finally with the latest addition of North Macedonia in March 2020, perhaps this liberal inclusion of countries in NATO may be a hindrance in the decision making process of NATO in the later stage. The strategic concept with which NATO was operational from its inception was democracy, liberty, free international institutes, and rule of law, which were actually the tenets of the Washington treaty signed in 1949 in order to guide the functions of NATO.

The strategic concept of NATO restored their conviction in the aspirations and conventions of the Charter of the United Nations and the fulfillment towards their ambition to live in a secured, stable and peaceful world with all the member states collaborating together. The scope of the strategic concept was to protect the freedom, heritage and the civilization which were believe to be fundamental beliefs in bringing out the principles of democracy, liberty and rules of law on functional basis. A significant aspect of the strategic concept adopted in this treaty was that the treaty did not show any geographical interest either for threat perception or otherwise. The Article 4 of the treaty defines the same geographical landscape of objectivity. Which explains territorial rectitude, political freedom or if a state’s security is threatened all the member states would take council together. Article 6 however explains the global perspective and provides impartiality to the subject.