Future of NATO


After World War II, When NATO’s founding members signed the North Atlantic Treaty to formulate a military alliance, they declared themselves “resolved to unite their efforts for collective defense and the preservation of peace and security.” The greatest threat to these objectives was a military attack by a hostile power—a prospect that led to the treaty’s most famous provision, Article V, which states, “The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. ” Notwithstanding the historical objectives, the threats facing by the members have changed considerably. An attack in North America or Europe by the regular army of an outside state is highly unlikely. Although NATO is one of the world’s largest military defense alliances and it has provided imputes to persuade influence, deter, and safeguard the interests of collaboration states jointly. However, in recent times deep concerns have entangled regarding the future of NATO as a unit alliance. One of the core issues is the role of financial sponsorships to NATO. The US currently contributing 70% while the rest of the member states only 30 % to the defense budget .it has led the US to revamp its role and position in NATO. The US President Donald Trump in his tenure had deep concerns regarding the role of NATO allies’ states in financial budget affairs. Trump’s idea of revamping the NATO alliance to commercial enterprise created apprehensions among the alliance of European states and the US. Appraisal suggests that ally states are contributing less to the budget but they have suffered in the NATO-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The option of separate defense allies unit like NATO for Europe seems ambiguous due to the internal complexities. In retrospect, the isolationist rhetoric of trump entangled NATO allies. Trump’s consideration of reducing military and declaring NATO as an obsolete unit has set forth the future precedent of a military alliance. It is difficult to handle global security and peace with such minimum financial contributions by NATO ally states. However, the fragmentation of NATO seems vague because it is difficult for the US and allies to survive on isolation policy.
US is contributing 3.6% percent of GDP to the NATO budget and it has increased states’ defense budget by 10% during the Trump era. Nevertheless, it urged the EU member states to increase the contribution to 2%. Strategically, Baltic States enhanced their budget states due to threats of Russian attacks. Likewise, other member states are also enhancing their budget capacities. NATO remained a platform of strong ties between Europe and the US. Furthermore, NATO has been successful to pull out Russia in the region and it maintained peace among European states to go into war. Strategically, if NATO integrates Europe will be entangled in a war zone and bloodshed. The US tends to pressurize the member states because it has wasted a trillion of dollars in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Economically the US is not in a position to set forth the majority of financial budgets. The question arises that was America not safeguarding those objectives previously. Europe is now setting into face social, political, economic crises amid the pandemic outbreak. The EU model could not even eliminate the disparities in the economy of states such Baltic region and powerful states of Europe. The annexation of the UK set a norm of the disintegration of the EU model .that made the United States proactive to take primitive steps to marginalize from upcoming affairs of European states.
Russian Ukraine conflict triggered the idea that there possible chances that Moscow can strive further to the Baltic states or non-NATO member states of Europe .that is why weak states are trying to meet the 2% shared of GDP in defense to ensure their security under the surveillance of united states. However, the powerful states are Europe take this notion as an edge to remain moderate in their position of financial aid.
Consequently, the US and European member states can’t afford the integration of NATO. It will remain a haven of the Baltic states and a shield cover to preserve the interest of the US whole across the globe .to To keep Russia Out NATO is a prime instrument for the united states and it will be executed effectively in the future as well.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to Newsletter