Misplaced Pages

NATO: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:31, 30 November 2008 view source88.210.227.37 (talk) →Individual Partnership Action Plans← Previous edit Revision as of 03:09, 1 December 2008 view source 98.212.166.5 (talk) ←Replaced content with 'hi'Next edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
hi
{{Cleanup|date=September 2008}}
{{otheruses1|the military alliance}}
{{coord|50|52|34.16|N|4|25|19.24|E|type:landmark|display=title}}
{{Infobox Organization
| name = North Atlantic Treaty Organization<br/><small>Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord</small>
| image = Flag of NATO.svg
| caption = ].<ref>{{cite web | url= http://www.nato.int/multi/natologo.htm|title= The official Emblem of NATO|accessdate=2008-02-20 |publisher= NATO}}</ref>
| map = Location NATO.svg
| mcaption = NATO countries shown in green.
| type = ]
| headquarters = ], ]
| membership_type = Member states
| membership = {{Collapsible list |title=26 Nations|{{flagicon|Belgium|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Bulgaria|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Canada|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Czech Republic|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Denmark|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Estonia|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|France|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Germany|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Greece|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Hungary|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Iceland|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Italy|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Latvia|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Lithuania|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Luxembourg|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Netherlands|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Norway|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Poland|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Portugal|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Romania|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Slovakia|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Slovenia|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Spain|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|Turkey|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|United Kingdom|size=15px}} ] |{{flagicon|United States|size=15px}} ]}}
| language = ]<br>]<ref>"English and French shall be the official languages for the entire North Atlantic Treaty Organization.", . "(..)the English and French texts are equally authentic(...)"</ref>
| leader_title = ]
| leader_name = ]
| leader_title2 = ]
| leader_name2 = ]
| formation = April 4, 1949
| website = <div class="plainlinksneverexpand">http://www.nato.int/</div>
}}
{{portalpar|NATO}}
].]]
<!-- As per NATO official usage, this page used OXFORD SPELLING 'organization' rather than anything else. This is incorrect; different NATO agencies use -ise and -ize -->
The '''North Atlantic Treaty Organization''' ('''NATO''') {{lang-fr|'''Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord''' ('''OTAN''')}}, also called the ''(North) Atlantic Alliance'', is a ] established by the signing of the ] on 4 April 1949. The NATO headquarters are in ], ],<ref>Boulevard Leopold III-laan, B-1110 BRUSSELS, which is in Haren, part of the ]. {{citeweb|url=http://www.nato.int/|title=NATO homepage|accessdate=2006-03-07}}</ref> and the organization constitutes a system of ] whereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party.

For its first few years, NATO was not much more than a political association. However, the ] galvanized the member states, and an integrated military structure was built up under the direction of two U.S. supreme commanders. The first NATO ] ] famously stated the organization's goal was "to keep the ]ns out, the ] in, and the ] down".<ref>cited in Reynolds, ''The origins of the Cold War in Europe. International perspectives'', p 13</ref> Throughout the ] doubts over the strength of the relationship between the European states and the United States ebbed and flowed, along with doubts over the credibility of the NATO defence against a prospective Soviet invasion - doubts that led to the development of the ] and the withdrawal of the French from NATO's military structure from 1966.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the organization became drawn into the ] while building better links with former potential enemies to the east, which culminated with several former ] states joining the alliance in 1999 and 2004. Since the ], NATO has attempted to refocus itself to new challenges and has deployed troops to ] and ] to ].

The ] is a comprehensive package of agreements made between NATO and the ] on 16 December 2002. With this agreement the ] is given the possibility to use NATO assets in case it wanted to act independently in an international crisis, on the condition that NATO does not want to act itself – the so-called "right of first refusal".<ref>Bram Boxhoorn, ''Broad Support for NATO in the Netherlands'', 21-09-2005, </ref> Only if NATO refuses to act, the EU may act if it wants to do so. The combined military spending of all NATO members constitutes over 70% of ], with the United States alone accounting for about half the total military spending of the world.

==History==
===Beginnings===
The ], signed on 17 March 1948 by ], the ], ], ] and the ] is considered the precursor to the NATO agreement. The treaty and the Soviet ] led to the creation of the ]'s Defense Organization in September 1948.<ref>David C. Isby & Charles Kamps Jr, Armies of NATO's Central Front, Jane's Publishing Company Ltd 1985, p.13</ref> However, participation of the ] was thought necessary in order to counter the military power of the ], and therefore talks for a new military alliance began almost immediately.

These talks resulted in the ], which was signed in ] on 4 April 1949. It included the five Treaty of Brussels states, as well as the ], ], ], ], ], ] and ]. Support for the Treaty was not unanimous; Iceland suffered an ] in March 1949. Three years later, on 18 February 1952, ] and ] also joined.

{{cquote|The Parties of NATO agreed that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all. Consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defense will assist the Party or Parties being attacked, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.}}

Such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force does not necessarily mean that other member states will respond with military action against the aggressor(s). Rather they are obliged to respond, but maintain the freedom to choose how they will respond. This differs from Article IV of the Treaty of Brussels (which founded the Western European Union) which clearly states that the response however often assumed that NATO members will aid the attacked member militarily. Further, the article limits the organization's scope to Europe and North America, which explains why the ] did not result in NATO involvement.
]; 12 of 26 divisions in 1985.]]
The outbreak of the ] in 1950 was crucial for NATO as it raised the apparent threat level greatly (all Communist countries were suspected of working together) and forced the alliance to develop concrete military plans.<ref>David C. Isby & Charles Kamps Jr, Armies of NATO's Central Front, Jane's Publishing Company Ltd 1985, p.13-14</ref> The 1952 Lisbon conference, seeking to provide the forces necessary for NATO's Long-Term Defence Plan, called for an expansion to 96 ]s. However this requirement was dropped the following year to roughly 35 divisions with heavier use to be made of nuclear weapons. At this time, NATO could call on about fifteen ready divisions in ], and another ten in Italy and Scandinavia.<ref>Robert E. Osgood, 'NATO: The Entangling Alliance,' University Press, Chicago, 1962, p.76, in William Park 'Defending the West,' Wheatsheaf Books, 1986, p.28</ref> Also at Lisbon, the post of ] as the organization's chief civilian was also created, and Baron ] eventually appointed to the post.<ref>], , March 24, 1952</ref> Later, in September 1952, the first major NATO maritime exercises began; ] brought together 200 ships and over 50,000 personnel to practice the defence of Denmark and Norway.

] and ] joined the alliance the same year, forcing a series of controversial negotiations, in which the United States and Britain were the primary disputants, over how to bring the two countries into the military command structure.<ref>Sean M. Maloney, 'To Secure Command of the Sea: NATO Command Organization and Naval Planning for the Cold War at Sea, 1945-54,' MA thesis, University of New Brunswick, 1991, p.270-291</ref> Meanwhile, while this overt military preparation was going on, covert stay-behind arrangements to continue resistance after a successful Soviet invasion (']'), initially made by the ], were being transferred to NATO control. Ultimately unofficial bonds began to grow between NATO's armed forces, such as the ] and competitions such as the ] for tank gunnery.

In 1954, the Soviet Union suggested that it should join NATO to preserve peace in Europe.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/nato/ |title=Fast facts |publisher=Canadian Broadcasting Corporation}}</ref> The NATO countries, fearing that the Soviet Union's motive was to weaken the alliance, ultimately rejected this proposal.

The incorporation of ] into the organization on 9 May 1955 was described as "a decisive turning point in the history of our continent" by ], Foreign Minister of Norway at the time.<ref>BBC On This Day "" bbc.co.uk </ref> A major reason for Germany's entry into the alliance was that without German manpower, it would have been impossible to field enough conventional forces to resist a Soviet invasion.<ref>David C. Isby & Charles Kamps Jr, Armies of NATO's Central Front, Jane's Publishing Company Ltd 1985, p.15</ref> Indeed, one of its immediate results was the creation of the ], signed on 14 May 1955 by the Soviet Union, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania, and East Germany, as a formal response to this event, thereby delineating the two opposing sides of the ].

The unity of NATO was breached early on in its history, with a crisis occurring during ]'s presidency of France from 1958 onward. De Gaulle protested the United States' strong role in the organization and what he perceived as a ] between the United States and the United Kingdom. In a memorandum sent to President ] and ] ] on 17 September 1958, he argued for the creation of a tripartite directorate that would put France on an equal footing with the ] and the ], and also for the expansion of NATO's coverage to include geographical areas of interest to France, most notably ], where ] was waging a counter-insurgency and sought NATO assistance.

]'s 1966 withdrawal from NATO military integrated command.]]
Considering the response given to be unsatisfactory, and in order to give ], in the event of a East German incursion into West Germany, the option of coming to a separate peace with the Eastern bloc instead of being drawn into a NATO-Warsaw Pact global war, de Gaulle began to build an independent defence for his country. On 11 March 1959, ] withdrew its ] ] from NATO command; three months later, in June 1959, de Gaulle banned the stationing of foreign ]s on French soil. This caused the United States to transfer two hundred military aircraft out of France and return control of the ] that had operated in ] since 1950 to the French by 1967.

Though France showed solidarity with the rest of NATO during the ] in 1962, de Gaulle continued his pursuit of an independent defence by removing France's ] and ] fleets from NATO command. In 1966, all French armed forces were removed from NATO's integrated military command, and all non-French NATO troops were asked to leave France. This withdrawal forced the relocation of the ] (SHAPE) from ] near ] to ], north of ], Belgium, by 16 October 1967. France remained a member of the alliance, and committed to the defence of Europe from possible Communist attack with its own forces stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany throughout the ].

The creation of NATO brought about some ] of allied ], procedures, and technology, which in many cases meant European countries adopting U.S. practices. The roughly 1300 Standardization Agreements (]s) codifies the standardisation that NATO has achieved. Hence, the ] rifle cartridge was introduced in the 1950s as a standard firearm cartridge among many NATO countries. ]'s ] became the most popular 7.62 NATO rifle in Europe and served into the early 1990s. Also, ] were standardized, so that any NATO aircraft could land at any NATO base. Other standards such as the ] have made their way beyond NATO into civilian use.

===Détente===
{{main|Détente}}
During most of the duration of the Cold War, NATO maintained a holding pattern with no actual military engagement as an organization. On 1 July 1968, the ] opened for signature: NATO argued that its ] arrangements did not breach the treaty as U.S. forces controlled the weapons until a decision was made to go to war, at which point the treaty would no longer be controlling. Few states knew of the NATO nuclear sharing arrangements at that time, and they were not challenged.

On 30 May 1978, NATO countries officially defined two complementary aims of the Alliance, to maintain security and pursue détente. This was supposed to mean matching defences at the level rendered necessary by the Warsaw Pact's offensive capabilities without spurring a further ].

On 12 December 1979, in light of a build-up of Warsaw Pact nuclear capabilities in Europe, ministers approved the deployment of U.S. ] ]s and ] theatre nuclear weapons in Europe. The new warheads were also meant to strengthen the western negotiating position in regard to nuclear disarmament. This policy was called the ] policy. Similarly, in 1983–84, responding to the stationing of Warsaw Pact ] medium-range missiles in Europe, NATO deployed modern Pershing II missiles tasked to hit military targets such as tank formations in the event of war. This action led to ] protests throughout Western Europe.

===Escalation===
With the background of the build-up of tension between the Soviet Union and the United States, NATO decided, under the impetus of the Reagan presidency, to deploy Pershing II and cruise missiles in Western Europe, primarily West Germany. These missiles were theatre nuclear weapons intended to strike targets on the battlefield if the Soviets invaded West Germany. Yet support for the deployment was wavering and many doubted whether the push for deployment could be sustained. But on Sept. 1, 1983, the Soviet Union shot down a ], loaded with passengers, when it crossed into Soviet airspace - an act which Reagan characterized as a "massacre". The barbarity of this act, as the U.S. and indeed the world understood it, galvanized support for the deployment - which stood in place until the later accords between Reagan and Mikhael Gorbachev.

The membership of the organization in this time period likewise remained largely static. In 1974, as a consequence of the ], Greece withdrew its forces from NATO's military command structure, but, with Turkish cooperation, were readmitted in 1980. On 30 May 1982, NATO gained a new member when, following a ], the newly democratic ] joined the alliance.

In November 1984, NATO manoeuvres simulating a nuclear launch caused panic in the Kremlin. The Soviet leadership, led by ailing General Secretary ], became concerned that the manoeuvres, codenamed ], were the beginnings of a genuine ]. In response, Soviet nuclear forces were readied and air units in ] and ] were placed on alert. Though at the time written off by U.S. intelligence as a propaganda effort, many historians now believe that the Soviet fear of a NATO first strike was genuine.{{Fact|date=June 2008}}

===Post Cold War===
] Summit.]]
The end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the ] in 1991 removed the ''de facto'' main adversary of NATO. This caused a strategic re-evaluation of NATO's purpose, nature and tasks. In practice this ended up entailing a gradual (and still ongoing) expansion of NATO to Eastern Europe, as well as the extension of its activities to areas that had not formerly been NATO concerns.
The first post-Cold War expansion of NATO came with the ] on 3 October 1990, when the former ] became part of the ] and the alliance. This had been agreed in the ] 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 east.

The scholar ] argued in 2005 that a commitment was given that NATO would never expand further east,<ref>Gorbachev's Lost Legacy by Stephen F. Cohen ], 24 February 2005</ref> but according to ], then a ] official involved in the Two Plus Four negotiating process, this appears to be a misperception; no formal commitment of the sort was made.<ref>Robert B. Zoellick, , ], September 22, 2000</ref> On May 7, 2008, ] held an interview with Gorbachev in which he repeated his view that such a commitment had been made. Gorbachev said "the Americans promised that NATO wouldn't move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War but now half of central and eastern Europe are members, so what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted."<ref name="me"> ] Retrieved on May 22, 2008</ref>

As part of post-Cold War restructuring, NATO's military structure was cut back and reorganized, with new forces such as the ] established. The
] agreed between NATO and the Warsaw Pact and signed in Paris in 1990, mandated specific reductions. The changes brought about by the collapse of the Soviet Union on the military balance in Europe were recognized in the ], signed some years later. France rejoined NATO's Military Committee in 1995, and since that time has intensified working relations with the military structure. France did not, however, rejoin the integrated military command and no non-French NATO troops are allowed to be based on its soil. The policies of current French President ] have resulted in a major reform of France's military position, culminating in a pledge in June 2008 to rejoin the military command of NATO while maintaining an independent nuclear deterrent.<ref>Stratton, Allegra. "". ''The Guardian'', 17 June 2008</ref>

The first NATO military operation caused by the conflict in the former Yugoslavia was ], which ran from June 1993–October 1996. It provided maritime enforcement of the ] and ] against the ]. On 28 February 1994, NATO took its first military action, shooting down four Bosnian Serb aircraft violating a U.N.-mandated ] over central ]. ], the no-fly-zone enforcement mission, had begun a year before, on 12 April 1993, and was to continue until 20 December 1995. NATO air strikes that year helped bring the ] to an end, resulting in the ], which in turn meant that NATO deployed a peacekeeping force, under ], first named ] and then ], which ran from December 1996 to December 2004. Following the lead of its member nations, NATO began to award a service medal, the ], for these operations.

Between 1994 and 1997, wider forums for regional cooperation between NATO and its neighbours were set up, like the ], the ] initiative and the ]. On 8 July 1997, three former communist countries, ], the ], and ], were invited to join NATO, which finally happened in 1999. In 1998, the ] was established.

A NATO bombing campaign, ], began in August, 1995, against the ], after the ]. On 24 March 1999, NATO saw its first broad-scale military engagement in the ], where it waged an 11-week bombing campaign, which NATO called ], against what was then the ], in an effort to stop Serbian-led crackdown on Albanian civilians in Kosovo. A formal declaration of war never took place (in common with all wars since World War II). The conflict ended on 11 June 1999, when Yugoslavian leader ] agreed to NATO’s demands by accepting ]. During the crisis, NATO also deployed one of its international reaction forces, the ], to ] as the Albania Force (AFOR), to deliver humanitarian aid to refugees from ].<ref></ref> NATO then helped establish the ], a NATO-led force under a ] mandate that operated the military mission in Kosovo. In August–September 2001, the alliance also mounted ], a mission disarming ethnic Albanian militias in the ] (FYROM).<ref>NATO's role in </ref>

The United States, the United Kingdom, and most other NATO countries opposed efforts to require the U.N. Security Council to approve NATO military strikes, such as the action against Serbia in 1999, while France and some others claimed that the alliance needed U.N. approval. The U.S./U.K. side claimed that this would undermine the authority of the alliance, and they noted that ] and ] would have exercised their Security Council vetoes to block the strike on ], and could do the same in future conflicts where NATO intervention was required, thus nullifying the entire potency and purpose of the organization.

===After the September 11 attacks===

The ] caused NATO to invoke Article 5 of the NATO Charter for the first time in its history. The Article says that an attack on any member shall be considered to be an attack on all. The invocation was confirmed on October 4, 2001 when NATO determined that the attacks were indeed eligible under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty.<ref></ref> The eight official actions taken by NATO in response to the attacks included : ] and ].
Operation Active Endeavour is a naval operation in the Mediterranean Sea and is designed to prevent the movement of terrorists or weapons of mass destruction as well as to enhance the security of shipping in general. It began on October 4, 2001.

Despite this early show of solidarity, NATO faced a crisis little more than a year later, when on February 10, 2003, France and Belgium vetoed the procedure of silent approval concerning the timing of protective measures for Turkey in case of a possible war with ]. Germany did not use its right to break the procedure but said it supported the veto.

On the issue of ] on the other hand, the alliance showed greater unity: On April 16, 2003 NATO agreed to take command of the ] (ISAF) in Afghanistan. The decision came at the request of Germany and the Netherlands, the two nations leading ISAF at the time of the agreement, and all nineteen NATO ambassadors approved it unanimously. The handover of control to NATO took place on August 11, and marked the first time in NATO’s history that it took charge of a mission outside the north Atlantic area. ] had originally been slated to take over ISAF by itself on that date.

In January 2004, NATO appointed Minister ], of Turkey, as the Senior Civilian Representative (SCR) in Afghanistan. Minister Cetin is primarily responsible for advancing the political-military aspects of the Alliance in Afghanistan. In August 2004, following U.S. pressure, NATO formed the ], a training mission to assist the Iraqi security forces in conjunction with the U.S. led ].<ref>], , September 17, 2007</ref>

On July 31, 2006, a NATO-led force, made up mostly of troops from Canada, the United Kingdom, Turkey and the Netherlands, took over ] from a U.S.-led anti-terrorism coalition.

===Expansion and restructuring===
{{main|Enlargement of NATO}}
]
New NATO structures were also formed while old ones were abolished: The ] (NRF) was launched at the ] on November 21. On June 19, 2003, a major restructuring of the NATO military commands began as the Headquarters of the Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic were abolished and a new command, ] (ACT), was established in ], ], and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) became the Headquarters of ] (ACO). ACT is responsible for driving transformation (future capabilities) in NATO, whilst ACO is responsible for current operations.

Membership went on expanding with the accession of seven more Northern European and Eastern European countries to NATO: ], ] and ] and also ], ], ], and ]. They were first invited to start talks of membership during the 2002 Prague Summit, and joined NATO on March 29, 2004, shortly before the ].
The same month, NATO's ] began, which supported the sovereignty of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia by providing fighters to react to any unwanted aerial intrusions. Four fighters are based in Lithuania, provided in rotation by virtually all the NATO states. ''Operation Peaceful Summit'' temporarily enhanced this patrolling during the ].<ref>L. Neidinger "NATO team ensures safe sky during Riga Summit", December 8, 2006, </ref>

The ] was held in ], ], which had joined the Atlantic Alliance two years earlier. It is the first ] to be held in a country that was part of the ], and the second one in a former ] country (after the ]). Energy Security was one of the main themes of the Riga Summit.<ref>{{cite paper | author=Nazemroaya, Mahdi Darius | title=The Globalization of Military Power: NATO Expansion | publisher=Centre for Research on Globalization |date=17 May 2007 | url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20070517&articleId=5677}}</ref>

At the April 2008 summit in ], ], NATO agreed to the accession of ] and ] and invited them to join. ] and ] were also told that they will eventually become members (see ]).<ref></ref>

===International Security Assistance Force===
{{main|International Security Assistance Force}}
In August 2003, NATO commenced its first mission ever outside Europe when it assumed control over ] (ISAF) in ]. However, some critics feel that ] or other restrictions undermine the efficiency of ISAF. For instance, political scientist ] stated in a 2006 article that "many NATO countries with troops in Afghanistan have 'national caveats' that restrict how their troops may be used. While the Riga summit relaxed some of these caveats to allow assistance to allies in dire circumstances, Britain, Canada, the Netherlands, and the U.S. are doing most of the fighting in southern Afghanistan, while French, German, and Italian troops are deployed in the quieter north. Due to the intensity of the fighting in the south, France has recently allowed a squadron of ] fighter/attack aircraft to be moved into the area, to ], in order to reinforce the alliance's efforts.<ref></ref> It is difficult to see how NATO can succeed in stabilizing Afghanistan unless it is willing to commit more troops and give commanders more flexibility."<ref> J. Nye, "NATO after Riga", 14 December 2006, http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/nye40</ref> If these caveats were to be eliminated, it is argued that this could help NATO to succeed. NATO is also training the ANA (]) to be better equipped in forcing out the Taliban.

===NATO missile defense===
For some years, the United States negotiated with ] and the ] for the deployment of interceptor missiles and a radar tracking system in the two countries. Both countries' governments indicated that they would allow the deployment. In August 2008, Poland and the United States signed a preliminary deal to place part of the missile defense shield in Poland that would be linked to air-defense radar in the Czech Republic.<ref></ref> The proposed American missile defense site in Central Europe is expected to be fully operational by 2015 and would be capable of covering most of Europe except parts of Romania plus Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey.<ref name=xinhuanet20070419></ref>

In April 2007, NATO's European allies called for a NATO missile defense system which would complement the American ] system to protect Europe from missile attacks and NATO's decision-making North Atlantic Council held consultations on missile defense in the first meeting on the topic at such a senior level.<ref name=xinhuanet20070419/>

In response, the then Russian president ] claimed that such a deployment could lead to a new arms race and could enhance the likelihood of mutual destruction. He also suggested that his country would freeze its compliance with the 1990 ] (CFE)—which limits military deployments across the continent—until all NATO countries had ratified the ].<ref></ref>

Secretary General ] claimed the system would not affect strategic balance or threaten Russia, as the plan is to base only 10 interceptor missiles in ] with an associated radar in the Czech Republic.<ref></ref>

On July 14, 2007, Russia gave notice of its intention to suspend the CFE treaty, effective 150 days later.<ref> BBC NEWS, , 14 July 2007</ref><ref name=TIME>Y. Zarakhovich, in ''Time'', July 14, 2007</ref> On 14 August 2008, the United States and Poland came to an agreement to place 10 missile interceptor bases with ] defense systems in Poland. This came at a time when tension was high between Russia and most of NATO and resulted in a nuclear threat on Poland by Russia if the building of the missile defenses went ahead. On August 20, 2008 the United States and Poland signed the agreement, with a statement from Russia saying their response "Will Go Beyond Diplomacy" and is a "extremely dangerous bundle" of military projects." Also, on August 20, 2008, Russia sent word to Norway that it was suspending ].<ref>MSNBC http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315674/</ref>

==Membership==
{{main|List of members of NATO}}
]
NATO has added new members six times since first forming in 1949. NATO comprises twenty-six members: ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], the ], and the ].

At the NATO summit in ] (April 2008) ] and ] were officially invited to start accession talks with the alliance, and signed the accession protocols on July 9, 2008.
===Future enlargement===
]
{{main|Enlargement of NATO}}
<!-- All commentary on potential future members belongs at Enlargement of NATO; only single sentence summaries should be added here -->
An invitation to the ] was blocked by ] at the same summit in Bucharest, pending resolution of the ].<ref>In NATO official statements, the country is always referred to as the FYROM, with a footnote stating that "Turkey recognises the Republic of Macedonia under its constitutional name".</ref><ref name="balkaninsight">{{cite news|title=Croatia & Albania Invited Into NATO |url=http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/9102/|publisher=BalkanInsight |date=2008-04-03 |accessdate=2008-04-03}}</ref> The country will likely enter the alliance at some point, with ] commenting after the summit that a resolution of the naming issue that is holding up entry is "likely by the end of this year and no later than the 2009 summit".<ref>Jim Dorschner & Radu Tudor, 'Questions remain after NATO summit, JDW 16 April 2008, p.18</ref> At the same 2008 summit in Bucharest, the communiqué explicitly said that ] and ] will become members of NATO.

Other potential candidate countries include ] and ].{{Fact|date=September 2008}} Other possible, long neutral countries that might become members are ] and ].{{Fact|date=September 2008}} Russia, as referred to above, continues to oppose further expansion, seeing it as inconsistent with understandings between Soviet leader ] and U.S. President ] that allowed for a peaceful ]. NATO's expansion policy is seen by Moscow as a continuation of a Cold War attempt to surround and isolate Russia.<ref>NATO Seeking to Weaken CIS by Expansion — Russian General MosNews 01.12.2005 and Ukraine moves closer to NATO membership By Taras Kuzio, and ] wants ] to acknowledge United States's interests on post-Soviet space], ] 04.05.2006</ref>

==Cooperation with non-member states==
[[Image:NATO Partners.png|250px|thumb|
{{legend|#181884|NATO member states}}
{{legend|#8c9618|Partnership for Peace countries}}
{{legend|#944918|Mediterranean Dialogue countries}}]]

===Euro-Atlantic Partnership===
{{main|Partnership for Peace|Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council}}

A double framework has been established to help further co-operation between the 26 NATO members and 24 "partner countries".
* The '''Partnership for Peace (PfP)''' programme was established in 1994 and is based on individual bilateral relations between each partner country and NATO: each country may choose the extent of its participation. The PfP programme is considered the operational wing of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership.<ref>http://www.nato.int/issues/pfp/index.html http://www.nato.int/pfp/sig-date.html</ref>
* The '''Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC)''' was first established on 29 May 1997, and is a forum for regular coordination, consultation and dialogue between all 49 participants.<ref></ref>

The 24 partner countries are the following:

{|
|- valign=top
|
* ]:
:# {{flag|Armenia}}
:# {{flag|Azerbaijan}}
:# {{flag|Belarus}}
:# {{flag|Kazakhstan}}
:# {{flag|Kyrgyzstan}}
:# {{flag|Moldova}}
:# {{flag|Russia}}
:# {{flag|Tajikistan}}
:# {{flag|Turkmenistan}}
:# {{flag|Uzbekistan}}

* ] :
:# {{flag|Austria}}
:# {{flag|Finland}}
:# {{flag|Republic of Ireland}}
:# {{flag|Malta}}
:# {{flag|Sweden}}
:# {{flag|Switzerland}}

* ]:
:# {{flag|Albania}}
:# {{flag|Bosnia and Herzegovina}} (as part of Yugoslavia)
:# {{flag|Croatia}} (as part of Yugoslavia)
:# {{flag|Montenegro}} (as part of Yugoslavia)
:# {{flag|Serbia}} (as part of Yugoslavia)
:# {{flag|Slovenia}} (as part of Yugoslavia)
:# {{flag|MKD|name=FYRO Macedonia}} (as part of Yugoslavia)
:# {{flag|Ukraine}} (as part of the Soviet Union) May join membership action plan in December 2008
:# {{flag|Georgia}} (as part of the Soviet Union) May join membership action plan in December 2008

===Individual Partnership Action Plans===
Launched at the November 2002 Prague Summit, ]s (IPAPs) are open to countries that have the political will and ability to deepen their relationship with NATO.<ref></ref>

Currently '''IPAPs''' are in implementation with the following countries:

* {{flag|Georgia}} (29 October 2004) May join Membership Action Plan in December 2008
* {{flag|Azerbaijan}} (27 May 2005)
* {{flag|Armenia}} (16 December 2005)
* {{flag|Ukraine}} (9 July 1997) May join Membership Action Plan in December 2008
* {{flag|Moldova}} (19 May 2006)
* {{flag|Bosnia and Herzegovina}} (10 January 2008)
* {{flag|Montenegro}} (June 2008)

===Contact Countries===
Since 1990-91, the Alliance has gradually increased its contact with countries that do not form part of any of the above cooperative groupings. Political dialogue with ] began in 1990, and a range of non-NATO countries have contributed to peacekeeping operations in the former Yugoslavia.

The Allies established a set of general guidelines on relations with other countries, beyond the above groupings in 1998.<ref>NATO, , accessed 18 June 2008</ref> The guidelines do not allow for a formal institutionalisation of relations, but reflect the Allies’ desire to increase cooperation. Following extensive debate, the term Contact Countries was agreed by the Allies in 2004. Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan currently have this status.

==Structures==
]
] ] meeting ] on .]]
The NATO website divides the internal NATO organization into political structures, military structures, and agencies & organizations immediately subordinate to NATO headquarters. The main headquarters of NATO is located on Boulevard Léopold III, B-1110 Brussels, which is in ], part of the ] municipality.<ref> {{cite web|url=http://www.nato.int/|title=NATO homepage|accessdate=2006-03-12}}</ref> A new headquarters building is currently in construction nearby, due for completion in 2012. It was designed by Larry Oltmanns who was a Design Partner with SOM at the time.

===Political structure===
Like any alliance, NATO is ultimately governed by its 26 member states. However, the , and other agreements, outline how decisions are to be made within NATO. Each of the 26 members sends a delegation or mission to NATO’s headquarters in ], ].<ref>{{cite web | title = National delegations to NATO What is their role? | publisher = NATO | date = ] | url = http://www.nato.int/issues/national_delegations/tasks.html | accessdate = 2007-07-15 }}</ref> The senior permanent member of each delegation is known as the Permanent Representative and is generally a senior ] or an experienced ] (and holding that diplomatic rank).

Together the Permanent Members form the ] (NAC), a body which meets together at least once a week and has effective political authority and powers of decision in NATO.
From time to time the Council also meets at higher levels involving ]s, ]s or Heads of State or Government (HOSG) and it is at these meetings that major decisions regarding NATO’s policies are generally taken. However, it is worth noting that the Council has the same authority and powers of decision-making, and its decisions have the same status and validity, at whatever level it meets. ]s also form a further venue for decisions on complex issues, such as enlargement.

The meetings of the North Atlantic Council are chaired by the ] and, when decisions have to be made, action is agreed upon on the basis of unanimity and common accord. There is no voting or decision by majority. Each nation represented at the Council table or on any of its subordinate committees retains complete sovereignty and responsibility for its own decisions.

====NATO Military Committee====
The second pivotal member of each country's delegation is the Military Representative, a senior officer from each country's armed forces. Together the Military Representatives form the Military Committee (MC), a body responsible for recommending to NATO’s political authorities those measures considered necessary for the common defence of the NATO area. Its principal role is to provide direction and advice on military policy and strategy. It provides guidance on military matters to the NATO Strategic Commanders, whose representatives attend its meetings, and is responsible for the overall conduct of the military affairs of the Alliance under the authority of the Council.
Like the council, from time to time the Military Committee also meets at a higher level, namely at the level of Chiefs of defence, the most senior military officer in each nation's armed forces. The Defence Planning Committee excludes France, due to that country's 1966 decision to remove itself from NATO's integrated military structure.<ref>{{cite web | first = Eide | last = Espen Barth | coauthors = Frédéric Bozo | title = Should NATO play a more political role? | work = Nato Review| publisher = NATO | date = Spring 2005 | url = http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2005/issue1/english/debate.html | accessdate = 2007-07-15 }}</ref> On a practical level, this means that issues that are acceptable to most NATO members but unacceptable to France may be directed to the Defence Planning Committee for more expedient resolution. Such was the case in the lead up to ].<ref>{{cite web | first = Thomas | last = Fuller | title = Reaching accord, EU warns Saddam of his 'last chance' | work = International Herald Tribune | date = ] | url = http://www.iht.com/articles/2003/02/18/eu_ed3__1.php | accessdate = 2007-07-15 }}</ref>

The current ] is ] of ] (since 2008).

====NATO Parliamentary Assembly====
The ], presided by ], is made up of legislators from the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance as well as thirteen associate members.<ref></ref> It is however officially a different structure from NATO, and has as aim to join together deputies of NATO countries in order to discuss security policies.

Subordinate to the political structure are the International Staff and International Military Staff, which administer NATO programmes and carry out high-level political, military, and also civil emergency planning.<ref>] Handbook 2001, </ref>

Over the years, non-governmental citizens' groups have grown up in support of NATO, broadly under the banner of the ]/] movement.

==List of officials==
{| class="wikitable"
|+ ''']'''<ref name = "secgen"/>
|-
| 1
| ] ]
| {{flagcountry|United Kingdom}}
| 4 April 1952–16 May 1957
|-
| 2
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Belgium}}
| 16 May 1957–21 April 1961
|-
| 3
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Netherlands}}
| 21 April 1961–1 August 1964
|-
| 4
| ]<ref>http://www.nato.int/cv/secgen/brosio.htm</ref>
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
| 1 August 1964–1 October 1971
|-
| 5
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Netherlands}}
| 1 October 1971–25 June 1984
|-
| 6
| ]
| {{flagcountry|United Kingdom}}
| 25 June 1984–1 July 1988
|-
| 7
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Germany}}
| 1 July 1988–13 August 1994
|-
| 8
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
| 13 August 1994–17 October 1994''
|-
| 9
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Belgium}}
| 17 October 1994–20 October 1995
|-
| 10
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
| 20 October 1995–5 December 1995''
|-
| 11
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Spain}}
| 5 December 1995–6 October 1999
|-
| 12
| ]
| {{flagcountry|United Kingdom}}
| 14 October 1999–1 January 2004
|-
| 13
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Netherlands}}
| 1 January 2004–present
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ '''Deputy Secretary General of NATO'''<ref name="secgen"></ref>
|-
! #
! Name
! Country
! Duration
|-
| 1
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
| 1994–2001
|-
| 2
| ]
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
| 2001–present
|}

==Military structure==
{{Seealso|Category:Military units and formations of NATO}}
] flying with ] ] in a NATO exercise.]]

NATO's military operations are directed by the ], and split into two Strategic Commands both commanded by a senior US officer assisted by a staff drawn from across NATO. The Strategic Commanders are responsible to the ] for the overall direction and conduct of all Alliance military matters within their areas of command.

Before 2003 the Strategic Commanders were the ] (SACEUR) and the ] (SACLANT) but the current arrangement is to separate ] between ] (ACT), responsible for transformation and training of NATO forces, and ], responsible for NATO operations world wide.

The commander of Allied Command Operations retained the title "Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR)", and is based in the ] (SHAPE) located at ], north of the ] city of ]. This is about 80 km (50 miles) south of NATO’s political headquarters in Brussels. ACO is headed by ], a US four star general with the dual-hatted role of heading ], which is headquartered in ], Germany. SHAPE was in Paris until 1966, when French president ] withdrew French forces from the Atlantic Alliance. NATO's headquarters were then forced to move to Belgium, while many military units had to move.

ACO includes ] in the Netherlands, ] in Italy, and ], all multinational headquarters with many nations represented. JFC Brunssum has its land component, ] at ], ], its air component at ] in Germany, and its naval component at the ] in the northwest suburbs of ]. JFC Naples has its land component in Madrid, air component at Izmir, Turkey, and naval component in Naples, Italy. It also directs ] in Kosovo. JC Lisbon is a smaller HQ with no subordinate commands. ], in the Portuguese Azores, is an important transatlantic staging post. Directly responsible to SACEUR is the NATO Airborne Early Warning Force at ] in Germany where a jointly funded fleet of ] ] airborne radar aircraft is located. The ]s of the ], to be made operational in the next few years, will be based at ] airfield in ], and probably come under SACEUR's control.

] (ACT) is based in the former Allied Command Atlantic headquarters in ], ]. Allied Command Atlantic, usually known as ] (Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic), after its commander, became ACT in 2003. It is headed by the Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT), a US four-star general or admiral with the dual-hatted role as commander ] (COMUSJFCOM). There is also an ACT command element located at SHAPE in Mons, Belgium.

Subordinate ACT organizations include the ] (JWC) located in Stavanger, Norway (in the same site as the ]); the ] (JFTC) in ], ]; the ] (JALLC) in Monsanto, Portugal; and the ] (NURC),<ref></ref> La Spezia, Italy.

==Organizations and Agencies==
The NATO website lists forty-three different agencies and organizations and five project committees/offices as of 15 May 2008.<ref>NATO, , accessed May 2008</ref> They include:
*nine logistics bodies (including five pipeline and one medical), which include the:
**]
**Central European Pipeline System
**NATO Pipeline System
*five production logistics bodies, including the:
**]
*four standardisation bodies, including the NATO Standardization Agency
*three civil emergency planning bodies
*five Air Defence & Air Traffic Control bodies, including the:
**] (NACMA), based in Brussels, manages around a hundred persons in charge of the ] (ACCS) due for 2009.
**]
*one AEW body, the NATO Airborne Early Warning & Control Programme Management Organization
*eight communications & information systems bodies, including the:
**] (NC3A),<ref></ref> reporting to the NATO Consultation, Command and Control Organization (NC3O). The ] (STC) in ] (Netherlands) merged in 1996 with the NATO Communications and Information Systems Operating and Support Agency (NACOSA) based in Brussels (Belgium), forming the ] (NC3A). The agency comprises around 650 staff, of which around 400 are located in The Hague and 250 in Brussels. It reports to the ] (NC3B).
**] (NCSA),<ref></ref> based in ] (BEL), was established in August 2004 from the former NATO Communications and Information Systems Operating and Support Agency (NACOSA).
*one ] agency
*one meteorological body, the Military Committee Meteorological Group (MCMG)
*one oceanography body, the Military Oceanography (MILOC) Group
*the ] (RTA),<ref></ref> reporting to the ] (RTO);
*four education & training bodies, including the NATO School and ]
*five project committees and offices:
**Alliance Ground Surveillance Capability Provisional Project Office (AGS/PPO)
**Battlefield Information Collection and Exploitation System (BICES)
**NATO Continuous Acquisition and Life Cycle Support Office (CALS)
**NATO FORACS Office
**Munitions Safety Information Analysis Center (MSIAC)

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==References and Further reading==
<div class="references-small">
*David C. Isby & Charles Kamps Jr, Armies of NATO's Central Front, Jane's Publishing Company Ltd 1985
''Further Reading - Early period''
*Eisenhower, Dwight D. ''The Papers of Dwight David Eisenhower. Vols. 12 and 13: NATO and the Campaign of 1952'' : Louis Galambos et al., ed. Johns Hopkins U. Press, 1989. 1707 pp. in 2 vol.
*Gearson, John and Schake, Kori, ed. ''The Berlin Wall Crisis: Perspectives on Cold War Alliances'' Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. 209 pp.
*John C. Milloy. ''North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, 1948–1957: Community or Alliance?'' (2006), focus on non-military issues
*Smith, Joseph, ed. ''The Origins of NATO'' Exeter, UK U. of Exeter Press, 1990. 173 pp.
''Further Reading- Late Cold War period''
*], and Canby, Steven L.''The Evolution of NATO with Four Plausible Threat Scenarios''. Canada Department of Defense: Ottawa, 1987. 117 pp.
''Further Reading - Post Cold War period''
*Asmus, Ronald D. ''Opening NATO's Door: How the Alliance Remade Itself for a New Era'' Columbia U. Press, 2002. 372 pp.
*Bacevich, Andrew J. and Cohen, Eliot A. ''War over Kosovo: Politics and Strategy in a Global Age.'' Columbia U. Press, 2002. 223 pp.
*Daclon, Corrado Maria ''Security through Science: Interview with Jean Fournet, Assistant Secretary General of NATO'', Analisi Difesa, 2004. no. 42
*Gheciu, Alexandra. ''NATO in the 'New Europe''' Stanford University Press, 2005. 345 pp.
*Hendrickson, Ryan C. ''Diplomacy and War at NATO: The Secretary General and Military Action After the Cold War'' Univ. of Missouri Press, 2006. 175 pp.
*Lambeth, Benjamin S. ''NATO's Air War in Kosovo: A Strategic and Operational Assessment'' Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND, 2001. 250 pp.
''Further Reading - General histories''
*Kaplan, Lawrence S. ''The Long Entanglement: NATO's First Fifty Years.'' Praeger, 1999. 262 pp.
*Kaplan, Lawrence S. ''NATO Divided, NATO United: The Evolution of an Alliance.'' Praeger, 2004. 165 pp.
*Létourneau, Paul. ''Le Canada et l'OTAN après 40 ans, 1949–1989'' Quebec: Cen. Québécois de Relations Int., 1992. 217 pp.
*Paquette, Laure. ''NATO and Eastern Europe After 2000'' (New York: Nova Science, 2001).
*Powaski, Ronald E. ''The Entangling Alliance: The United States and European Security, 1950–1993.'' Greenwood, 1994. 261 pp.
*Telo, António José. ''Portugal e a NATO: O Reencontro da Tradiçoa Atlântica '' Lisbon: Cosmos, 1996. 374 pp.
*Sandler, Todd and Hartley, Keith. ''The Political Economy of NATO: Past, Present, and into the 21st Century.'' Cambridge U. Press, 1999. 292 pp.
*Zorgbibe, Charles. ''Histoire de l'OTAN'' Brussels: Complexe, 2002. 283 pp.
''Further Reading - Other Issues''
*Kaplan, Lawrence S., ed. ''American Historians and the Atlantic Alliance.'' Kent State U. Press, 1991. 192 pp.
</div>

==External links==
{{commons|Category:North Atlantic Treaty Organization}}
{{wikinewscat|NATO}}
* including
*
*
* ] Report, March 1999
*
*
*
*
*—UK Government site
* ''(CRG)''
* An analysis of the effects of the ] led occupation on the political and social climate of ].

{{NATO}}
{{NATO summits}}
{{Cold War}}
{{War on Terrorism}}

]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

{{Link FA|bar}}

{{Link FA|be-x-old}}

]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]

Revision as of 03:09, 1 December 2008

hi