NationStates Jolt Archive

For 50 years, NATO was invaluable in the defence of Europe, and the general defence of the ideals of Democracy and human rights in the world, against the totalitarian threat of the USSR. Yet, times have changed. The USSR is no more, and the USA have now an overwhelming power in the world. A power that many have started to question if is good for all. A power that many consider that is no longer legitimate. Yet, many institutions, such as NATO in particular, which were made for defence, nowadays serve more to cement the power of the USA. Under NATO, the USA has access to information, but more importantly, to strategic logistical bases in Europe, that are no longer used for common defence (the old enemy as faded away, replaced by one that can't be fought using large armies), but to help the USA to exert its military influence throughout the world, even against European views.

Europe as also changed. We have approached, we have merged. It is (and will be) a slow process. It started nearly 50 years ago, and it will take 50 more years so that anyone can truly claim to be "European". In the meantime, the old threats have fallen, but also the old hatreds. Common, natural foes, France and Germany, Austria and Italy, Portugal Enemies, today sit, and work togheter for their common good. This good was centered on the benefits of trade, but slowly this common good is being perceived in defence terms also. The common security policy, the European minister of foreign relations, the European Battle Groups are things that have only been written, but many believe and are fighting for, that it will only be a matter of time until they are reality.

So my question is: Should Europe reduce, or abandon its commitment to NATO in order to make deeper its common defence policies or not?

top

I only posted in this thread because I saw a spelling error from out in the main 'unvaluable' forum.:p

Surely Europeans wouldn't abandon a treaty they ratified now would they? I thought only Americans did that.

Surely Europeans wouldn't abandon a treaty they ratified now would they? I thought only Americans did that.

The term is "denounce the treaty". Article 13 of the treaty.

Still, Americans don't abandon treaties, they just disrespect them.

And ill take your opinion as European countries should maintain the current status quo with nato.

NATO is obsolete. Europe should consider building stronger bridges with Russia instead of wasting money on this. In the long run, Russia should be an integral part of the EU. I believe it is our mutual interest, especially since the inclusion of former USSR states.

I think that the role of NATO should be significantly reviewed. Its reason for existence, as Portu Cale points out, has gone, but this does not mean that what exists in terms or orgasnisation and co-operation should just be thrown away.
I suggest that NATO should become the official, rather than just the de facto, military arm of the UN.
The USA may not like this, as it would mean that they would lose some influence on NATO, but it would justify its continued existence. If this is not possible, then I see no reason for any country to continue to provide support to NATO.