Difference between revisions of "NATO" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
m (Robot: Remove claimed tag)
 
(151 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
+
{{Images OK}}{{submitted}}{{approved}}{{Copyedited}}
 
 
<!--Note for copy-editors: Spelling is en-GB, -ise, per the official spellings of NATO: please do NOT change "organisation" to "organization". Organisation is the official spelling according to NATO's website.
 
<marquee bgcolor=white><text color=lime> sup  —>
 
{{coor title dms|50|52|34.16|N|4|25|19.24|E|type:landmark}}
 
 
{{Infobox Organization
 
{{Infobox Organization
|name=North Atlantic Treaty Organization<br/>Organisation du traité de l'Atlantique Nord<!--don't change this! it's French! —>
+
|name=North Atlantic Treaty Organization<br/><small>Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord</small>
|image        = Flag of NATO.svg
+
|image        =  
|caption      = [[Flag of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation|Flag of NATO]]
+
|caption      =  
|map          = Map of NATO countries.png
+
|map          = Location NATO.png
|mcaption    = NATO countries shown in blue
+
|mcaption    = NATO countries shown in green
 
|type        = [[Military alliance]]
 
|type        = [[Military alliance]]
 
|headquarters = [[Brussels]], [[Belgium]]  
 
|headquarters = [[Brussels]], [[Belgium]]  
|membership  = 26 member states  
+
|membership  = 32 member states
|language    = [[English language|English]], [[French language|French]]<ref>"English and French shall be the official languages for the entire North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.", [http://www.nato.int/docu/comm/49-95/c490917a.htm Final Communiqué following the meeting of the North Atlantic Council on September 17, 1949]. "(..)the English and French texts [of the Treaty] are equally authentic(...)"[http://www.nato.int/docu/basictxt/treaty.htm#Art14 The North Atlantic Treaty, Article 14]</ref>  
+
|language    = [[English language|English]], [[French language|French]]<ref>"English and French shall be the official languages for the entire North Atlantic Treaty Organization", [http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17117.htm Final Communiqué following the meeting of the North Atlantic Council on September 17, 1949] ''NATO''. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref>  
|leader_title = [[Secretary General of NATO|Secretary General]]
+
|leader_title = [[NATO Secretary General|Secretary General]]
 
|leader_name  = [[Jaap de Hoop Scheffer]]  
 
|leader_name  = [[Jaap de Hoop Scheffer]]  
|formation    = [[4 April]] [[1949]]  
+
|leader_title2 = [[Chairman of the Military Committee]]
 +
|leader_name2 = [[Ray Henault|General Raymond Henault]]
 +
|formation    = April 4, 1949
 
|website      = <div class="plainlinksneverexpand">http://www.nato.int/</div>  
 
|website      = <div class="plainlinksneverexpand">http://www.nato.int/</div>  
 
}}
 
}}
{{portalpar|NATO}}
+
The '''North Atlantic Treaty Organization''' ('''NATO'''); {{lang-fr|'''Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique  Nord''' ('''OTAN''')}}; (also called the ''North Atlantic Alliance'', the ''Atlantic Alliance'', or the ''Western Alliance'') is a [[military alliance]] established by the signing of the [[North Atlantic Treaty]] on April 4, 1949. Headquartered in [[Brussels]], [[Belgium]], the organization constitutes a system of [[collective defense]] in which its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party.
[[Image:NATO-2002-Summit.jpg|240px|thumb|NATO 2002 Summit in [[Prague]].]]
 
  
The '''North Atlantic Treaty Organization''' ('''NATO'''); {{lang-fr|'''Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord''' ('''OTAN''')}}; (also called the ''North Atlantic Alliance'', the ''Atlantic Alliance'', or the ''Western Alliance'') is a [[military alliance]], established by the signing of the [[North Atlantic Treaty]] on [[4 April]] [[1949]]. With headquarters in [[Brussels]], [[Belgium]],<ref>Boulevard Leopold III-laan, B-1110 BRUSSELS, which is in Haren, part of the [[City of Brussels]]. {{citeweb|url=http://www.nato.int/|title=NATO homepage|accessdate=2006-03-07}}</ref> the organization established a system of [[collective defense|collective defence]] whereby its member states agree to mutual defence 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 Korean War galvanized the member states, and an integrated military structure was built up under the direction of two U.S. supreme commanders. The first NATO [[Secretary General of NATO|Secretary General]] [[Lord Ismay]], famously described the organization's goal was "to keep the [[USSR|Russia]]ns out, the [[USA|Americans]] in, and the [[Germany|Germans]] down."<ref>David Reynolds (ed.), ''The Origins of the Cold War in Europe: International Perspectives'' (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1994, ISBN 978-0300105629), 13.</ref> Throughout the Cold War 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 defense against a prospective Soviet invasion&mdash;doubts that led to the development of the [[force de frappe|independent French nuclear deterrent]] and the withdrawal of the French from NATO's military structure from 1966.
 +
{{toc}}
 +
After the fall of the [[Berlin Wall]] in 1989, the organization became drawn into the Balkans while building better links with former potential enemies to the east, which culminated with the former [[Warsaw Pact]] states joining the alliance. Since the [[September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks]], NATO has attempted to refocus itself to new challenges and has deployed troops to [[Afghanistan]] and [[NATO Training Mission - Iraq|trainers]] to [[Iraq]].  
 +
[[Image:NATO-2002-Summit.jpg|400px|thumb|NATO 2002 Summit in [[Prague]].]]
 +
 
 +
==History==
 
===Beginnings===
 
===Beginnings===
The [[Treaty of Brussels]], signed on the [[17 March]] [[1948]] by [[Belgium]], the [[Netherlands]], [[Luxembourg]], [[France]], and the [[United Kingdom]], is considered the precursor to the NATO agreement. This treaty established a military alliance, later to become the [[Western European Union]]. However, [[United States|American]] participation was thought necessary in order to counter the military power of the [[Soviet Union]], and therefore talks for a new military alliance began almost immediately.
+
The [[Treaty of Brussels]], signed on March 17, 1948 by [[Belgium]], the [[Netherlands]], [[Luxembourg]], [[France]] and the [[United Kingdom]] is considered the precursor to the NATO agreement. The treaty and the Soviet [[Berlin Blockade]] led to the creation of the [[Western European Union]]'s Defense Organization in September 1948.<ref name=Isby>David C. Isby and Charles Kamps Jr., ''Armies of NATO's Central Front'' (Jane's Publishing Company Ltd, 1985, ISBN 978-0710603418).</ref> However, participation of the [[United States]] was thought necessary in order to counter the military power of the [[USSR]], and therefore talks for a new military alliance began almost immediately.
  
These talks resulted in the [[North Atlantic Treaty]], which was signed in [[Washington, D.C.]] on [[4 April]] [[1949]]. It included the five Treaty of Brussels states, as well as the United States, [[Canada]], [[Portugal]], [[Italy]], [[Norway]], [[Denmark]] and [[Iceland]]. Three years later, on [[18 February]] [[1952]], [[Greece]] and [[Turkey]] also joined.
+
These talks resulted in the [[North Atlantic Treaty]], which was signed in [[Washington, D.C.]] on April 4, 1949. It included the five Treaty of Brussels states, as well as the [[United States]], [[Canada]], [[Portugal]], [[Italy]], [[Norway]], [[Denmark]] and [[Iceland]]. Support for the Treaty was not unanimous; Iceland suffered an [[1949 anti-NATO riot in Iceland|anti-NATO riot]] in March 1949 which may have been Communist-inspired. Three years later, on February 18, 1952, [[Greece]] and [[Turkey]] 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-defence 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.}}
+
{{quote|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 must include military action. It is however often assumed that NATO members will aid the attacked member militarily. Further, the article limits the organisation's scope to Europe and North America, which explains why the [[Falkland war|invasion of the British Falkland Islands]] did not result in NATO involvement.
+
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 must include military action. It is 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 [[Falkland war|invasion of the British Falkland Islands]] did not result in NATO involvement.
  
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 ultimately rejected this proposal.
+
The outbreak of the [[Korean War]] in 1950 was crucial for NATO as it raised the apparent threat level greatly (all [[Communism|Communist]] countries were suspected of working together) and forced the alliance to develop concrete military plans.<ref name=Isby/> The 1952 Lisbon conference, seeking to provide the forces necessary for NATO's Long-Term Defense Plan, called for an expansion to 96 [[division (military)|division]]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 15 ready divisions in Central Europe, and another ten in Italy and Scandinavia.<ref>Robert E. Osgood, ''NATO: The Entangling Alliance'' (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1999, ISBN 978-0275964191), 76.</ref> Also at Lisbon, the post of [[Secretary General of NATO]] as the organization's chief civilian was also created, and Baron [[Hastings Ismay]] eventually appointed to the post. Later, in September 1952, the first major NATO maritime exercises began; [[Operation Mainbrace]] brought together 200 ships and over 50,000 personnel to practice the defense of Denmark and Norway. Meanwhile, while this overt military preparation was going on, covert stay-behind arrangements to continue resistance after a successful Soviet invasion ('[[Operation Gladio]]'), initially made by the [[Western European Union]], were being transferred to NATO control. Ultimately unofficial bonds began to grow between NATO's armed forces, such as the [[NATO Tiger Association]] and competitions such as the [[Canadian Army Trophy]] for tank gunnery.
  
The incorporation of [[West Germany]] into the organisation on [[9 May]] [[1955]] was described as "a decisive turning point in the history of our continent" by [[Halvard Lange]], Foreign Minister of Norway at the time.<ref>BBC On This Day "[http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/9/newsid_2519000/2519979.stm1955: West Germany accepted into Nato]" bbc.co.uk </ref> Indeed, one of its immediate results was the creation of the [[Warsaw Pact]], signed on [[14 May]] [[1955]] by the Soviet Union and its [[satellite state]]s, as a formal response to this event, thereby delineating the two opposing sides of the [[Cold War]].
+
In 1954, the Soviet Union suggested that it should join NATO to preserve peace in Europe.<ref>Geoffrey Roberts, [https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/molotovs-proposal-the-ussr-join-nato-march-1954 Molotov's Proposal that the USSR Join NATO, March 1954] ''Wilson Center'', November 21, 2011. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> The NATO countries, fearing that the Soviet Union's motive was to weaken the alliance, ultimately rejected this proposal.
{{see|Cold War}}
 
The unity of NATO was breached early on in its history, with a crisis occurring during [[Charles de Gaulle]]'s presidency of France from 1958 onward. De Gaulle protested the United States' hegemonic role in the organisation and what he perceived as a [[special relationship]] between the United States and the United Kingdom. In a memorandum sent to President [[Dwight D. Eisenhower]] and Prime Minister [[Harold Macmillan]] on [[17 September]] [[1958]], he argued for the creation of a tripartite directorate that would put France on an equal footing with the United States and the United Kingdom, and also for the expansion of NATO's coverage to include geographical areas of interest to France, most notably [[Algeria]], where France was waging a counter-insurgency and sought NATO assistance.
 
  
Considering the response given to be unsatisfactory, de Gaulle began to build an independent defence for his country. On [[11 March]] [[1959]], France withdrew its [[Mediterranean Sea|Mediterranean]] [[Naval fleet|fleet]] from NATO command; three months later, in June 1959, de Gaulle banned the stationing of foreign [[nuclear weapon]]s on French soil. This caused the United States to transfer two hundred military aircraft out of France and return control of the [[United States Air Force in France|ten major air force bases]] it had operated in France since 1950 to the French by 1967. The last of these was the [[Toul-Rosières Air Base]], home of the [[26th Tactical Reconnaissance Wing]], which was relocated to [[Ramstein Air Base]] in West Germany.
+
The incorporation of [[West Germany]] into the organization on May 9, 1955 was described as "a decisive turning point in the history of our continent" by [[Halvard Lange]], Foreign Minister of Norway at the time.<ref>Christopher Cox, [https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/2007/spch042607cc.htm Address to the American Academy in Berlin and the American Chamber of Commerce in Germany] U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, April 26, 2007. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</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 to resist a Soviet invasion.<ref name=Isby/> Indeed, one of its immediate results was the creation of the [[Warsaw Pact]], signed on May 14, 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 [[Cold War]].
  
In the meantime, France had initiated an [[Nuclear weapons and France|independent nuclear]] [[Mutually assured destruction|deterrence]] programme, spearheaded by the ''"[[Force de frappe]]"'' ("Striking force"). France tested its first nuclear weapon, ''[[Gerboise Bleue]]'', on [[13 February]] [[1960]].
+
The unity of NATO was breached early on in its history, with a crisis occurring during [[Charles de Gaulle]]'s presidency of France from 1958 onward. De Gaulle protested the United States' strong role in the organization and what he perceived as a [[Special Relationship (US-UK)|special relationship]] between the United States and the United Kingdom. In a memorandum sent to President [[Dwight D. Eisenhower]] and Prime Minister [[Harold Macmillan]] on September 17, 1958, he argued for the creation of a tripartite directorate that would put France on an equal footing with the United States and the United Kingdom, and also for the expansion of NATO's coverage to include geographical areas of interest to France, most notably [[Algeria]], where France was waging a counter-insurgency and sought NATO assistance.  
  
Though France showed solidarity with the rest of NATO during the [[Cuban missile crisis]] in 1962, de Gaulle continued his pursuit of an independent defence by removing France's [[Atlantic Ocean|Atlantic]] and [[English Channel|Channel]] 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 precipitated the relocation of the [[Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe]] (SHAPE) from [[Paris]] to [[Casteau]], north of [[Mons]], Belgium, by [[16 October]] [[1967]]. France remained a member of the alliance throughout this period and subsequently rejoined NATO's Military Committee in 1995, and intensified working relations with the military structure. However, France has not yet rejoined the integrated military command and no non-French NATO troops are allowed to be based on its land. However, the policies of [[Nicolas Sarkozy]] appear to be aimed at eventual re-integration.
+
Considering the response given to be unsatisfactory, and in order to give France, 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 defense for his country. On 11 March 1959, France withdrew its [[Mediterranean Sea|Mediterranean]] [[Naval fleet|fleet]] from NATO command; three months later, in June 1959, de Gaulle banned the stationing of foreign [[nuclear weapon]]s on French soil. This caused the United States to transfer two hundred military aircraft out of France and return control of the [[United States Air Force in France|ten major air force bases]] that had operated in France since 1950 to the French by 1967.  
  
The creation of NATO necessitated the [[standardisation]] of [[military technology]] and unified [[strategy]], through [[Command, Control and Communications]] centres (aka C4ISTAR). The [[STANAG]] (Standardisation Agreement) insured such coherence. Hence, the [[7.62×51 NATO]] rifle cartridge was introduced in the 1950s as a standard firearm cartridge among many NATO countries. [[Fabrique Nationale]]'s [[FN FAL|FAL]] became the most popular 7.62 NATO rifle in Europe and served into the early 1990s. Also, aircraft marshalling signals were standardised, so that any NATO aircraft could land at any NATO base.
+
In the meantime, France had initiated an [[Nuclear weapons and France|independent nuclear]] [[Mutually assured destruction|deterrence]] program, spearheaded by the ''"[[Force de frappe]]"'' ("Striking force"). France tested its first nuclear weapon, ''[[Gerboise Bleue]]'', on February 13, 1960, in (what was then) [[French Algeria]].
 +
 
 +
Though France showed solidarity with the rest of NATO during the [[Cuban missile crisis]] in 1962, de Gaulle continued his pursuit of an independent defense by removing France's [[Atlantic Ocean|Atlantic]] and [[English Channel|Channel]] 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 [[Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe]] (SHAPE) from [[Paris]] to [[Casteau]], north of [[Mons]], Belgium, by October 16, 1967. France remained a member of the alliance, and committed to the defense of Europe from possible Communist attack with its own forces stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany throughout this period. France rejoined NATO's Military Committee in 1995, and has since intensified working relations with the military structure. France has not, however, rejoined the integrated military command and no non-French NATO troops are allowed to be based on its soil. The policies of current French President [[Nicolas Sarkozy]] appear to be aimed at eventual re-integration.
 +
 
 +
The creation of NATO brought about some [[standardization]] of allied [[military terminology]], procedures, and technology, which in many cases meant European countries adopting U.S. practices. The roughly 1,300 Standardization Agreements ([[STANAG]]s) codifies the standardization that NATO has achieved. Hence, the [[7.62_51 NATO]] rifle cartridge was introduced in the 1950s as a standard firearm cartridge among many NATO countries. [[Fabrique Nationale]]'s [[FN FAL|FAL]] became the most popular 7.62 NATO rifle in Europe and served into the early 1990s. Also, [[Aircraft marshalling|aircraft marshalling signals]] were standardized, so that any NATO aircraft could land at any NATO base. Other standards such as the [[NATO phonetic alphabet]] have made their way beyond NATO into civilian use.
  
 
===Détente===
 
===Détente===
 
{{main|Détente}}
 
{{main|Détente}}
During most of the duration of the Cold War, NATO maintained a holding pattern with no actual military engagement as an organisation. On [[1 July]] [[1968]], the [[Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]] opened for signature: NATO argued that its [[nuclear weapons sharing]] 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.
+
During most of the duration of the Cold War, NATO maintained a holding pattern with no actual military engagement as an organization. On July 1, 1968, the [[Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]] opened for signature: NATO argued that its [[nuclear weapons sharing]] arrangements did not breach the treaty as United States 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 [[arms race]].
+
On May 30, 1978, NATO countries officially defined two complementary aims of the Alliance, to maintain security and pursue détente. This was supposed to mean matching defenses at the level rendered necessary by the Warsaw Pact's offensive capabilities without spurring a further [[arms race]].
  
However, on [[12 December]] [[1979]], in light of a build-up of Warsaw Pact nuclear capabilities in Europe, ministers approved the deployment of U.S. [[Cruise missile|Cruise]] and [[Pershing II]] 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 [[Dual-Track Decision|Dual Track]] policy. Similarly, in 1983&ndash;84, responding to the stationing of Warsaw Pact [[SS-20]] medium-range missiles in Europe, NATO deployed modern Pershing II missiles able to reach Moscow within minutes. This action led to [[peace movement]] protests throughout Western Europe.
+
On December 12, 1979, in light of a build-up of Warsaw Pact nuclear capabilities in Europe, ministers approved the deployment of U.S. [[GLCM]] [[cruise missile]]s and [[Pershing II]] theater 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 [[Dual-Track Decision|Dual Track]] policy. Similarly, in 1983–1984, responding to the stationing of Warsaw Pact [[SS-20]] 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 [[peace movement]] protests throughout Western Europe.
  
The membership of the organisation in this time period likewise remained largely static. In 1974, as a consequence of the [[Turkish invasion of Cyprus]], 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 [[referendum]], the newly democratic Spain joined the alliance.  
+
===KAL 007 and NATO deployment of missiles in W. Europe===
 +
With the background of the build-up of tension between the Soviet Union and the United States, NATO decided, under the impetus of the [[Ronald Reagan|Reagan]] presidency, to deploy Pershing II and cruise missiles in Western Europe, primarily West Germany. These missiles were theater 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 September 1, 1983, the Soviet Union shot down a [[Korean Air Lines Flight 007|Korean airliner]], loaded with passengers, when it crossed into Soviet airspace&ndash;an act which President Reagan characterized as a "massacre." The barbarity of this act, as the United States and the world understood it, galvanized support for the deployment&mdash;which stood in place until the later accords between Reagan and [[Mikhail Gorbachev]].
  
In November 1983, NATO manoeuvres simulating a nuclear launch caused panic in the Kremlin. The Soviet leadership, led by ailing General Secretary [[Yuri Andropov]], became concerned that the manoeuvres, codenamed [[Able Archer 83]], were the beginnings of a genuine [[first strike]]. In response, Soviet nuclear forces were readied and air units in Eastern Germany and Poland 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.
+
The membership of the organization in this time period likewise remained largely static. In 1974, as a consequence of the [[Turkish invasion of Cyprus]], Greece withdrew its forces from NATO's military command structure, but, with Turkish cooperation, were readmitted in 1980. On May 30, 1982, NATO gained a new member when, following a [[referendum]], the newly democratic [[Spain]] joined the alliance.  
  
===Cold War stay-behind armies===
+
In November 1983, NATO maneuvers simulating a nuclear launch caused panic in the [[Kremlin]]. The Soviet leadership, led by ailing General Secretary [[Yuri Andropov]], became concerned that the manoeuvres, codenamed [[Able Archer 83]], were the beginnings of a genuine [[first strike]]. In response, Soviet nuclear forces were readied and air units in [[East Germany]] and [[Poland]] 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.
{{main|Operation Gladio|Stay-behind}}
 
NATO was founded early in the Cold War with the express aim of defending western Europe against a military invasion by the Soviet Union. On [[24 October]] [[1990]], Italian Prime minister [[Giulio Andreotti]], a member of the Italian [[Christian Democracy (Italy)|Christian Democracy]] party, publicly revealed the existence of [[Gladio]], known as "[[stay-behind]] armies", clandestine [[paramilitary]] [[militia]] whose role would be to wage [[guerrilla warfare]] behind enemy lines in the case of a successful Warsaw Pact invasion. Andreotti told the [[Italian Parliament]] that NATO had long held a covert policy of training [[Partisan (military)|partisan]]s in the event of a Soviet invasion of Western Europe.<ref name="ed">{{cite journal |first=Ed |last=Vulliamy |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1990 |month=5 December |title=Secret agents, freemasons, fascists... and a top-level campaign of political 'destabilisation' |journal=[[The Guardian]] |volume= |issue= |pages=12 |id= |url=http://www.cambridgeclarion.org/press_cuttings/vinciguerra.p2.etc_graun_5dec1990.html}}</ref><ref name="felix">{{cite journal |first=Felix |last=Würsten |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=2005 |month=October 2 |title=Conference "Nato Secret Armies and P26": The dark side of the West |journal=ETH Life Magazine |volume= |issue= |pages= |id= |url=http://www.ethlife.ethz.ch/e/articles/sciencelife/NatoGeheimarmee.html}}</ref><ref name= "gladio">{{cite journal |first=Charles |last=Richards |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1990 |month=1 December |title=Gladio is still opening wounds |journal=The Independent |volume= |issue= |pages=12 |id= |url=http://www.cambridgeclarion.org/press_cuttings/gladio.parliamentary.committee_indep_1dec1990.html}}</ref>
 
  
Spurred by the difficulties in setting up partisan organisation in [[occupied Europe]] during the [[World War II|Second World War]], the [[CIA]], British [[MI6]] and NATO trained and armed partisan groups in NATO states to fight a [[guerilla warfare|guerrilla war]] if they were conquered in the event of a Warsaw Pact invasion. Operating in all of NATO and even in neutral countries ([[Austria]], [[Finland]] - see also [[Operation Stella Polaris]] -, [[Sweden]]<ref> Concerning Finland, Sweden, and NATO members Norway and Denmark, see [[William Colby]] ([[director of Central Intelligence|CIA director]] from 1973 to 1976) and Peter Forbath, ''Honourable Men: My Life in the CIA'', London: Hutchinson & Co., 1978 {{PDFlink|[http://www.isn.ethz.ch/php/documents/collection_gladio/colby.pdf extract concerning Gladio stay-behind operations in Scandinavia available here]}}{{dead link|date=April 2007}} </ref> or [[Switzerland]], one of the three states who had a parliamentary inquiry in the matter) or in Spain before its 1982 adhesion to NATO, Gladio was first coordinated by the [[Clandestine Committee of the Western Union]] (CCWU), founded in 1948.<ref name="Ganser">''NATO's Secret Armies: [[Operation Gladio]] and Terrorism in Western Europe'', by Daniele Ganser, Franck Cass, London, 2005 ISBN 0-7146-5607-0. See also [http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GAN412A.html NATO’s secret armies linked to terrorism?], by Daniele Ganser, December 17, 2004 &mdash; URL accessed on January 18, 2007 </ref> After the 1949 creation of NATO, the CCWU was integrated into the [[Clandestine Planning Committee]] (CPC), founded in 1951 and overseen by the [[Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe|SHAPE]] (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe), transferred to Belgium after France’s official retreat from NATO in 1966 — which was not followed by the dissolution of the French stay-behind paramilitary movements. According to historian Daniele Ganser, one of the major researcher on the field, "Next to the CPC, a second secret army command centre, labeled [[Allied Clandestine Committee]] (ACC), was set up in 1957 on the orders of NATO's [[Supreme Allied Commander|Supreme Allied Commander in Europe]] (SACEUR). This military structure provided for significant U.S. leverage over the secret stay-behind networks in Western Europe as the SACEUR, throughout NATO's history, has traditionally been a U.S. General who reports to the Pentagon in Washington and is based in NATO's Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium. The ACC's duties included elaborating on the directives of the network, developing its clandestine capability, and organising bases in Britain and the United States. In wartime, it was to plan stay-behind operations in conjunction with SHAPE. According to former CIA director [[William Colby]], it was 'a major programme'."<ref name="Ganser"> {{PDFlink|[http://www.isn.ethz.ch/php/documents/collection_gladio/Terrorism_Western_Europe.pdf "Terrorism in Western Europe: An Approach to NATO’s Secret Stay-Behind Armies" Acrobat file]}}{{dead link|date=April 2007}} [[ETH Zurich]] research project on Gladio directed by Dr. Daniele Ganser </ref>
+
=== Post Cold War ===
 
+
[[Image:NATO March 29 2004.jpg|400px|thumb|The NATO Secretary General, the U.S. President, and the Prime Ministers of Latvia, Slovenia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Estonia after a ceremony welcoming them into NATO on March 29, 2004 at the [[Istanbul]] Summit.]]
The existence of Gladio, one of the best kept secrets of the Cold War, is now widely recognised. Belgium, Italy and Switzerland have held parliamentary inquiries in the matter. What remains controversial is the ties between Gladio members, of whom many belonged to [[neo-fascist]] movements, and [[false flag]] terrorist attacks. A NATO spokesman denied on [[5 November]] [[1990]] any knowledge or involvement with Gladio<ref name="European">''[[The European]], Nov 9th 1990, quoted by Ganser, p25</ref> and has since refused to comment.<ref name="Ganser"/> The [[U.S. State Department]] has itself admitted the existence of Gladio, but denied it has been involved in terrorism, in particular in Italy and in Greece.<ref name="StateDept">{{cite web|title=Misinformation about "Gladio/Stay Behind" Networks Resurfaces |publisher=[[United States Department of State]] |url=http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2006/Jan/20-127177.html}}</ref>
+
The end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the [[Warsaw Pact]] 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 [[reunification of Germany]] on October 3, 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 east.  
  
In Italy in particular, Gladio paramilitary groups have been accused by the justice of having carried out dozens of terrorist bombings, which were officially blamed on leftist groups such as the [[Red Brigades]]. It has been alleged that these groups and the individuals in them were responsible for the [[strategy of tension]] in Italy which aimed at impeding the "[[historic compromise]]" between the Christian Democracy and the Italian Communist Party (PCI) (including the 1969 [[Piazza Fontana bombing]] and the [[Bologna massacre|Bologna massacre (1980)]])<ref name = "translate"> {{cite web| title =Translated from Bologna massacre Association of Victims Italian website| work =Google.com| url =http://translate.google.com/translate?sourceid=navclient-menuext&hl=en&u=http://www.stragi.it/index.php?pagina=vicenda | accessdate=2006-07-30}}{{it icon}} </ref><ref name = "mt"> {{cite journal| first =Chris | last =Floyd| authorlink =| coauthors =| year =2005| month =February 18|title =Global Eye - Sword Play| journal =[[The Moscow Times]]| volume =| issue =| pages =| id =| url =http://context.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/02/18/120.html }}</ref><ref name="Ganser"/> political [[Belgian stay-behind network|assassinations in Belgium]],<ref> Hans Depraetere and Jenny Dierickx, ''"La Guerre froide en Belgique"'' ("Cold War in Belgium") (EPO-Dossier, Anvers, 1986) {{fr icon}} </ref> military coups in [[Greek military junta of 1967-1974|Greece (1967)]] and [[Military coup in Turkey, 1980|Turkey (1980)]]<ref name="Our boys"> Selahattin Celik, ''Türkische Konterguerilla. Die Todesmaschinerie'' (Köln: Mesopotamien Verlag, 1999; see also ''Olüm Makinasi Türk Kontrgerillasi'', 1995), quoting Cuneyit Arcayurek, ''Coups and the Secret Services'', p.190 </ref> and an attempted coup in [[Algiers putsch|France (1961)]].<ref>[[Pierre Abramovici]] and Gabriel Périès, ''La Grande Manipulation'', éd. [[Hachette]], 2006</ref> The supposed aim of this group was to prevent Communist movements in Western Europe from gaining power. Some researchers have said that the true aim was to increase the power and control of the United States over Europe.<ref name="Ganser"/><ref name = "tim"> {{cite journal| first =Tim | last =Howells| authorlink =| coauthors =| year =November 28 | month =2005| title =How our governments use terrorism to control us| journal =The On-Line Journal Special Reports| volume =| issue =| pages =| id =| url =http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_277.shtml }}</ref><ref name = "arthur"> {{cite journal| first =Arthur E. | last =Rowse| authorlink =| coauthors =| year =January 31 | month =2004| title =Gladio: The Secret U.S. War to Subvert Italian Democracy| journal =Independent Media Center| volume =| issue =| pages =| id =| url =http://italy.indymedia.org/news/2004/01/473314.php?theme=1}}</ref><ref name="Ganser"/>  
+
The scholar [[Stephen F. Cohen]] argued in 2005 that a commitment was given that NATO would never expand further east,<ref> Stephen F. Cohen, [https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/gorbachevs-lost-legacy/ Gorbachev's Lost Legacy] ''The Nation'' (March 14, 2005). Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> but according to [[Robert B. Zoellick]], then a [[State Department]] 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, [https://www.aicgs.org/2015/09/lessons-of-german-unification-2/ Lessons of German Unification], ''American Institute for Contemporary German Studies'', September 30, 2015. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> On May 7, 2008, ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'' 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>Adrian Blomfield and Mike Smith, [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1933223/Gorbachev-US-could-start-new-Cold-War.html Gorbachev: US could start new Cold War] ''The Daily Telegraph'' (May 6, 2008). Retrieved March 27, 2024.</ref>
  
In 2000, a report from the [[Democratic Party of the Left|Italian Left Democrat party]], "Gruppo Democratici di Sinistra l'Ulivo", concluded that the [[strategy of tension]] had been supported by the United States to "stop the [[Italian Communist Party|PCI]] (Communist Party), and to a certain degree also the [[Italian Socialist Party|PSI]] (Socialist Party), from reaching executive power in the country". A report, stated that "Those massacres, those bombs, those military actions had been organised or promoted or supported by men inside Italian state institutions and, as has been discovered more recently, by men linked to the structures of [[CIA|United States intelligence]]."<ref name = "anti"> {{cite journal| first =| last =| authorlink =| coauthors =| year =2000| month =June 24| title =US 'supported anti-left terror in Italy'| journal =[[The Guardian]]| volume =| issue =| pages =| id =| url =http://www.cambridgeclarion.org/press_cuttings/us.terrorism_graun_24jun2000.html }}</ref><ref name = "obit"> {{cite journal| first =Philip | last =Willan| authorlink =| coauthors =| year =2001| month =June 21 | title =Obituary: Paolo Emilio Taviani| journal =[[The Guardian]]| volume =| issue =| pages =| id =| url =http://www.guardian.co.uk/obituaries/story/0,,510075,00.html }}</ref>
+
As part of post-Cold War restructuring, NATO's military structure was cut back and reorganized, with new forces such as the [[Headquarters Allied Command Europe Rapid Reaction Corps]] established. The [[Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe]] 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 [[Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty]], signed some years later.  
  
=== Post-Cold War ===
+
The first NATO military operation caused by the conflict in the former Yugoslavia was [[Operation Sharp Guard]], which ran from June 1993–October 1996. It provided maritime enforcement of the [[arms embargo]] and [[economic sanctions]] against the [[Federal Republic of Yugoslavia]]. On February 28, 1994, NATO took its first military action, shooting down four Bosnian Serb aircraft violating a [[United Nations|U.N.]]-mandated [[no-fly zone]] over central [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]]. [[Operation Deny Flight]], the no-fly-zone enforcement mission, had begun a year before, on April 12, 1993, and was to continue until December 20, 1995. NATO air strikes that year helped bring the [[Yugoslav wars|war in Bosnia]] to an end, resulting in the [[Dayton Agreement]], which in turn meant that NATO deployed a peacekeeping force, under [[Operation Joint Endeavor]], first named [[IFOR]] and then [[SFOR]], which ran from December 1996 to December 2004. Following the lead of its member nations, NATO began to award a service medal, the [[NATO Medal]], for these operations.
The end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the [[Warsaw Pact]] 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 [[reunification of Germany]] 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 east, and also that NATO would never expand further east.<ref>Gorbachev's Lost Legacy by Stephen F. Cohen [http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050314/cohen (link)] [[The Nation]], February 24, 2005</ref>
 
  
On [[28 February]] [[1994]], NATO also took its first military action, shooting down four Bosnian Serb aircraft violating a U.N.-mandated [[no-fly zone]] over central [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]]. [[Operation Deny Flight]], the no-fly-zone enforcement mission, had began a year before, on [[12 April]] [[1993]], and was to continue until [[20 December]] [[1995]]. NATO air strikes that year helped bring the [[Yugoslav wars|war in Bosnia]] to an end, resulting in the [[Dayton Agreement]].
+
Between 1994 and 1997, wider forums for regional cooperation between NATO and its neighbors were set up, like the [[Partnership for Peace]], the [[Mediterranean Dialogue]] initiative and the [[Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council]]. On July 8, 1997, three former communist countries, [[Hungary]], the [[Czech Republic]], and [[Poland]], were invited to join NATO, which finally happened in 1999. In 1998, the [[NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council]] was established.
  
Between 1994 and 1997, wider forums for regional cooperation between NATO and its neighbours were set up, like the [[Partnership for Peace]], the [[Mediterranean Dialogue]] initiative and the [[Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council]]. On [[8 July]] [[1997]], three former communist countries, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, were invited to join NATO, which finally happened in 1999.
+
A NATO bombing campaign, [[Operation Deliberate Force]], began in August, 1995, against the [[Army of Republika Srpska]], after the [[Srebrenica massacre]]. On March 24, 1999, NATO saw its first broad-scale military engagement in the [[Kosovo War]], where it waged an 11-week bombing campaign, which NATO called [[Operation Allied Force]], against what was then the [[Federal Republic of Yugoslavia]], in an effort to stop Serbian-led ethnic cleansing. 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 [[Slobodan Milosevic]] agreed to NATO’s demands by accepting [[United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244|UN resolution 1244]]. NATO then helped establish the [[Kosovo Force|KFOR]], a NATO-led force under a [[United Nations]] mandate that operated the military mission in Kosovo. In August–September 2001, the alliance also mounted [[Operation Essential Harvest]], a mission disarming ethnic Albanian militias in the [[Republic of Macedonia]].
  
On [[24 March]] [[1999]], NATO saw its first broad-scale military engagement in the [[Kosovo War]], where it waged an [[Operation Allied Force|11-week bombing campaign]] against what was then the [[Federal Republic of Yugoslavia]]. A formal declaration of war never took place. Yugoslavia referred to the Kosovo War as ''military aggression'', as being undeclared and contravening the UN Charter.<ref>In regards to the definition of ''aggression'' reached by consensus and approved by the [[United Nations General Assembly]] on [[14 December]] [[1974]] as Resolution 3314 (XXIX): ''"Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the UN."''</ref> The conflict ended on [[11 June]] [[1999]], when Yugoslavian leader [[Slobodan Milošević]] agreed to NATO’s demands by accepting [[United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244|UN resolution 1244]]. NATO then helped establish the [[Kosovo Force|KFOR]], a NATO-led force under a [[United Nations]] mandate that operated the military mission in Kosovo.
+
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 ongoing action against Yugoslavia, 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 [[Russia]] and [[China]] would have exercised their Security Council vetoes to block the strike on [[Yugoslavia]], and could do the same in future conflicts where NATO intervention was required, thus nullifying the entire potency and purpose of the organization.
  
Debate concerning NATO's role and the concerns of the wider international community continued throughout its expanded military activities: The United States opposed efforts to require the U.N. Security Council to approve NATO military strikes, such as the ongoing action against Yugoslavia, while France and other NATO countries claimed the alliance needed U.N. approval. American officials said that this would undermine the authority of the alliance, and they noted that [[Russia]] and [[China]] would have exercised their Security Council vetoes to block the strike on [[Yugoslavia]]. In April 1999, at the Washington summit, a German proposal that NATO adopt a [[no-first-use]] [[nuclear strategy]] was rejected.
+
=== After the September 11 attacks ===
 +
[[Image:NATO Summit in Poiana Brasov 2004.jpg|thumb|right|400px|NATO Defence Ministers' Summit in [[Poiana Brasov]], October 13-14, 2004]]
 +
The [[September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11 attacks]] 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 4 October 2001 when NATO determined that the attacks were indeed eligible under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty. The eight official actions taken by NATO in response to the attacks included : [[Operation Eagle Assist]] and [[Operation Active Endeavour]].
  
=== After the September 11 attacks ===
+
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.
The expansion of the activities and geographical reach of NATO grew even further as an outcome of the [[September 11, 2001 attacks|September 11 attacks]]. These caused as a response the provisional invocation (on [[September 12]]) of the collective security of NATO's charter—Article 5 which states that any attack on a member state will be considered an attack against the entire group of members. The invocation was confirmed on [[4 October]] [[2001]] when NATO determined that the attacks were indeed eligible under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty.<ref>http://www.nato.int/docu/update/2001/1001/e1002a.htm</ref> The eight official actions taken by NATO in response to the attacks included the first two examples of military action taken in response to an invocation of Article 5: [[Operation Eagle Assist]] and [[Operation Active Endeavour]].
 
  
Despite this early show of solidarity, NATO faced a crisis little more than a year later, when on [[10 February]] [[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 [[Iraq]]. Germany did not use its right to break the procedure but said it supported the veto.
+
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 [[Iraq]]. Germany did not use its right to break the procedure but said it supported the veto.
  
On the issue of [[Afghanistan]] on the other hand, the alliance showed greater unity: On [[16 April]] [[2003]] NATO agreed to take command of the [[International Security Assistance Force]] (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 19 NATO ambassadors approved it unanimously. The handover of control to NATO took place on [[11 August]], and marked the first time in NATO’s history that it took charge of a mission outside the north Atlantic area. [[Canada]] had originally been slated to take over ISAF by itself on that date.
+
;Afghanistan
 +
On the issue of [[Afghanistan]] on the other hand, the alliance showed greater unity: On April 16, 2003 NATO agreed to take command of the [[International Security Assistance Force]] (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 19 NATO ambassadors approved it unanimously.  
  
In January 2004, NATO appointed Minister [[Hikmet Çetin]], 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.
+
On August 11, 2003 NATO commenced its first mission ever outside Europe when it assumed control over [[International Security Assistance Force]] (ISAF) in [[Afghanistan]]. This marked the first time in NATO’s history that it took charge of a mission outside the north Atlantic area. [[Canada]] had originally been slated to take over ISAF by itself on that date. However, some critics feel that [[national caveats]] or other restrictions undermine the efficiency of ISAF. For instance, political scientist [[Joseph Nye]] 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 United States 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 allowed a squadron of [[Mirage 2000]] fighter/attack aircraft to be moved into the area, to [[Kandahar International Airport|Khandahar]], in order to reinforce the alliance's efforts. 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> Joseph S. Nye, [http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/nye40 NATO after Riga] ''Project Syndicate'', December 7, 2006. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> If these caveats were to be eliminated, it is argued that this could help NATO to succeed.
  
On [[31 July]] [[2006]], a NATO-led force, made up mostly of troops from Canada, Great Britain, Turkey and the Netherlands, took over [[Coalition combat operations in Afghanistan in 2006|military operations in the south of Afghanistan]] from a U.S.-led anti-terrorism coalition.
+
In January 2004, NATO appointed Minister [[Hikmet Çetin]], 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 United States pressure, NATO formed the [[NATO Training Mission - Iraq]], a training mission to assist the Iraqi security forces in conjunction with the U.S. led [[MNF-I]].
  
===Expansion and restructuring===
+
On July 31, 2006, a NATO-led force, made up mostly of troops from Canada, Great Britain, Turkey and the Netherlands, took over [[Coalition combat operations in Afghanistan in 2006|military operations in the south of Afghanistan]] from a United States-led anti-terrorism coalition.
[[Image:NATO March 29 2004.jpg|250px|thumb|The NATO Secretary General, the U.S. President, and the Prime Ministers of Latvia, Slovenia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Estonia after a ceremony welcoming them into NATO on [[29 March]] [[2004]].]]
 
New NATO structures were also formed while old ones were abolished: The [[NATO Response Force]] (NRF) was launched at the [[2002 Prague Summit of NATO|2002 Prague Summit]] on [[21 November]]. On [[19 June]] [[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, [[Allied Command Transformation]] (ACT), was established in [[Norfolk, Virginia]], [[USA]], and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) became the Headquarters of [[Allied Command Operations]] (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: [[Estonia]], [[Latvia]] and [[Lithuania]] (see [[Baltic Air Policing]]) and also [[Slovenia]], [[Slovakia]], [[Bulgaria]], and [[Romania]]. They were first invited to start talks of membership during the 2002 Prague Summit, and joined NATO on [[29 March]] [[2004]], shortly before the [[2004 Istanbul Summit]].  
+
;Libya
 +
[[File:Palmaria bengasi 1903 0612 b1.jpg|thumb|right|400px|Libyan Army [[Palmaria (artillery)|Palmaria howitzers]] destroyed by the [[French Air Force]] near [[Benghazi]] on 19 March 2011|alt=Pieces of a destroyed tank, notably the gun turret, lie on a sandy landscape.]]
 +
During the [[2011 Libyan civil war]], violence between protestors and the Libyan government under Colonel [[Muammar Gaddafi]] escalated, and on 17&nbsp;March 2011 led to the passage of [[United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973]], which called for a ceasefire, and authorized military action to protect civilians. A&nbsp;coalition that included several NATO members began enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya shortly afterwards. On 20 March 2011, NATO states agreed on enforcing an arms embargo against Libya with [[Operation Unified Protector]] using ships from NATO [[Standing NRF Maritime Group 1|Standing Maritime Group&nbsp;1]] and [[Standing NRF Mine Countermeasures Group 1|Standing Mine Countermeasures Group&nbsp;1]],<ref name="NATOSecGen1">[http://www.nato.int/cps/en/SID-E403D555-2A5EEC9A/natolive/news_71689.htm?mode=pressrelease Statement by the NATO Secretary General on Libya arms embargo] ''NATO'', March 22, 2011. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> and additional ships and submarines from NATO members.<ref name="NATOPressBriefing1">[http://www.nato.int/cps/en/SID-83A5384E-C37D94AC/natolive/opinions_71716.htm?selectedLocale=en Press briefing by NATO Spokesperson Oana Lungescu, Brigadier General Pierre St-Amand, Canadian Air Force and General Massimo Panizzi, spokesperson of the Chairman of the Military Committee] ''NATO'', March 23, 2011. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> They would "monitor, report and, if needed, [[interdiction|interdict]] vessels suspected of carrying illegal arms or [[mercenary|mercenaries]]".<ref name="NATOSecGen1"/>
  
A number of other countries have also expressed a wish to join the alliance, including [[Albania]], [[Croatia]], the [[Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia]], [[Georgia (country)|Georgia]], [[Montenegro]] and [[Ukraine]].
+
On 24&nbsp;March, NATO agreed to take control of the no-fly zone from the initial coalition, while command of targeting ground units remained with the coalition's forces.<ref>[https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2011/3/25/nato-to-police-libya-no-fly-zone NATO to police Libya no-fly zone] ''Al Jazeera'' (March 25, 2011). Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref>
  
From the Russian point of view, NATO's eastward expansion since the end of the Cold War has been in clear breach of an agreement between Soviet leader [[Mikhail Gorbachev]] and U.S. President [[George H. W. Bush]] which allowed for a peaceful [[German reunification|unification of Germany]]. NATO's expansion policy is seen as a continuation of a Cold War attempt to surround and isolate Russia.<ref>NATO Seeking to Weaken CIS by Expansion — Russian General [http://www.mosnews.com/news/2005/12/01/balusaid.shtml (link)] MosNews 01.12.2005</ref><ref>Ukraine moves closer to NATO membership By [[Taras Kuzio]] [http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=407&issue_id=3316&article_id=2369682 (Link)] Jamestown Foundation</ref><ref>Global Realignment [http://www.lrna.org/doc.4/globalre.html]</ref><ref>Condoleezza Rice wants Russia to acknowledge USA's interests on post-Soviet space [http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/04-05-2006/79870-rice-0 (Link)] Pravda 04.05.2006</ref>
+
===Expansion and restructuring===
 +
[[File:NATO 32 Members.png|thumb|350px|Current membership of NATO in Europe.<br>Blue: current members, light blue: countries in the process of accession, purple: countries seeking membership, grey: membership is not a goal, red: CSTO.]]
 +
New NATO structures were also formed while old ones were abolished: The [[NATO Response Force]] (NRF) was launched at the [[2002 Prague Summit of NATO|2002 Prague Summit]] 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, [[Allied Command Transformation]] (ACT), was established in [[Norfolk, Virginia]], [[USA]], and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) became the Headquarters of [[Allied Command Operations]] (ACO). ACT is responsible for driving transformation (future capabilities) in NATO, while ACO is responsible for current operations.
  
The [[2006 NATO summit]] was held in [[Riga]], [[Latvia]], which had joined the Atlantic Alliance two years earlier. It is the first [[NATO summit]] to be held in a country that was part of the [[Soviet Union]], and the second one in a former [[COMECON]] country (after the [[2002 Prague Summit]]). 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=May 17, 2007 | url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20070517&articleId=5677}}</ref>
+
Membership went on expanding with the accession of seven more Northern European and Eastern European countries to NATO: [[Estonia]], [[Latvia]] and [[Lithuania]] and also [[Slovenia]], [[Slovakia]], [[Bulgaria]], and [[Romania]]. They were first invited to start talks of membership during the 2002 Prague Summit, and joined NATO on March 29, 2004, shortly before the [[2004 Istanbul Summit]]. The same month, NATO's [[Baltic Air Policing]] 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.  
  
===ISAF===
+
The [[2006 NATO summit]] was held in [[Riga, Latvia|Riga]], [[Latvia]], which had joined the Atlantic Alliance two years earlier. It is the first [[NATO summit]] to be held in a country that was part of the [[Soviet Union]], and the second one in a former [[COMECON]] country (after the [[2002 Prague Summit]]). Energy Security was one of the main themes of the Riga Summit.<ref>Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, [http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20070517&articleId=5677 The Globalization of Military Power: NATO Expansion] ''Global Research'', May 18, 2007. Retrieved March 17, 2024. </ref>
{{main|International Security Assistance Force}}
 
In August 2003, NATO commenced its first mission ever outside Europe when it assumed control over [[International Security Assistance Force]] (ISAF) in [[Afghanistan]]. However, some critics feel that [[national caveats]] or other restrictions undermine the efficiency of ISAF. For instance, political scientist [[Joseph Nye]] 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. At the hands of the escalation of the fighting, France has recently accepted to redeploy its [[bomber]]s in the south to help the other countries.<ref>http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3232,36-949296@51-947771,0.html</ref> It is difficult to see how NATO can succeed in stabilising 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 missile defence talks controversy===
+
At the April 2008 summit in [[Bucharest]], [[Romania]], NATO agreed to the accession of [[Croatia]] and [[Albania]] and invited them to join; they both joined in April, 2009.
For some years, the United States negotiated with Poland and the Czech Republic 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. The proposed American missile defence site in Central Europe is believed to be fully operational in 2015 and would be capable of covering most of Europe except part of Romania plus Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey.<ref name=xinhuanet20070419>http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-04/19/content_6001014.htm</ref>
+
{{readout||right|250px|The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) began as a defense against [[Communism|Communist]] expansion and today many former Communist countries of Eastern Europe are members of the alliance}}
 +
Future expansion is a topic of debate in many countries. [[Cyprus]] and [[Republic of Macedonia|Macedonia]] are stalled from accession by, respectively, [[Turkey]] and [[Greece]], pending the resolution of disputes between them. Other countries which have a stated goal of eventually joining include [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]], [[Montenegro]], and [[Georgia (country)|Georgia]]. The incorporation of former [[Warsaw Pact]] countries has been a cause of increased tension between NATO countries and [[Russia]]. Following the 2022 Russian invasion of [[Ukraine]], [[Finland]], and [[Sweden]] submitted formal applications to join NATO, but faced objections from Turkey. Finland officially joined NATO on April 4, 2023, exactly 74 years after the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty which founded NATO. Following the acceptance of its application for membership in June 2022, Sweden become the 32nd member on March 7, 2024.
  
In April 2007, NATO's European allies called for a NATO missile defence system which would complement the American [[National Missile Defense]] system to protect Europe from missile attacks and NATO's decision-making North Atlantic Council held consultations on missile defence in the first meeting on the topic at such a senior level.<ref name=xinhuanet20070419/>
+
===Future of NATO===
 +
[[File:NATO partnerships.png|thumb|500px|{{col-begin}}{{col-2}}{{legend|darkblue|Current members}}{{legend|#2a7fff|Membership Action Plan countries}}{{legend|darkgreen|Intensified Dialogue countries}}{{col-2}}{{legend|#FFD900|Individual Partnership Action Plan countries}}{{legend|#FF7826|Partnership for Peace members}}{{legend|#F00|Aspiring Partnership for Peace members}}{{col-end}}]]
  
In response, Russian president [[Vladimir Putin]] 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 should freeze its compliance with the 1990 [[Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe]] (CFE) - which limits military deployments across the continent - until all NATO countries had ratified the [[adapted CFE treaty]].<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6594379.stm</ref>
+
NATO remains the key security structure in Europe. As such it has expansion plans to extend its security reach.
  
Secretary General [[Jaap de Hoop Scheffer]] said the system would not affect strategic balance or threaten Russia, as the plan is to base only 10 interceptor missiles in Poland with an associated radar in the Czech Republic.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6570533.stm</ref>
+
Russia continues to oppose further expansion, seeing it as inconsistent with understandings between Soviet leader [[Mikhail Gorbachev]] and United States President [[George H. W. Bush]] which allowed for a peaceful [[German reunification|unification of Germany]]. NATO's expansion policy is seen by Russia as a continuation of a Cold War attempt to surround and isolate Russia.<ref>James Platt, [http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/04-05-2006/79870-rice-0 Condoleezza Rice wants Russia to acknowledge USA's interests on post-Soviet space] ''Pravda'' (May 4, 2006). Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref>
  
On July 14, Russia notified its intention to suspend the CFE treaty, effective 150 days later.
+
NATO began in an attempt to thwart feared Communist expansionism, and despite the [[History of post-Soviet Russia|collapse of communism]] in Eastern Europe, the relationship between Russia and NATO still remains problematic.
  
 
==Membership==
 
==Membership==
 
+
There are currently 32 members within NATO.
There are currently 26 members within NATO.
 
  
 
{| class="wikitable"
 
{| class="wikitable"
!width=12% | '''Date'''
+
! width=12% | Date
!width=14% | '''Country'''
+
! width=14% | Country
!width=8% | '''Expansion'''
+
! width=8% | Enlargement
!width=55% | '''Notes'''
+
! width=55% | Notes
 
|-
 
|-
| rowspan=12| [[April 4]] [[1949]]
+
| rowspan=12| April 4, 1949
 
| {{BEL}} || rowspan=12 align=center|Founders ||  
 
| {{BEL}} || rowspan=12 align=center|Founders ||  
 
|-
 
|-
 
| {{CAN}} ||
 
| {{CAN}} ||
 
|-
 
|-
| {{DEN}} ||
+
| {{DEN}} || Unlike Denmark's EU membership, its NATO membership does include the [[Faroe Islands]] and [[Greenland]].
 
|-
 
|-
| {{FRA}} || France withdrew from the integrated military command in 1966. From then it had remained solely a member of NATO's political structure. Its forces have still not rejoined the military command.
+
| {{FRA}} || France withdrew from the integrated military command in 1966 to pursue an independent defense system but returned to full membership on April 4, 2009.
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Iceland}} || Iceland, the sole member that does not have its own standing army, joined on the condition that they would not be expected to establish one. However, it has a [[Icelandic Coast Guard|Coast Guard]] and has recently provided troops trained in Norway for NATO peacekeeping.
+
| {{flagcountry|Iceland}} || Iceland, the sole member that does not have its own standing army, joined on the condition that it would not be expected to establish one. However, its strategic geographic position in the Atlantic made it an invaluable member. It has a [[Icelandic Coast Guard|Coast Guard]] and has recently contributed a voluntary peacekeeping force, trained in Norway for NATO.
 
|-
 
|-
 
| {{ITA}} ||
 
| {{ITA}} ||
Line 155: Line 160:
 
| {{flagcountry|USA}} ||   
 
| {{flagcountry|USA}} ||   
 
|-
 
|-
| rowspan=2| [[18 February]] [[1952]] || {{flagcountry|Greece}} || rowspan=2 align=center |First || Greece withdrew its forces from NATO’s military command structure from 1974 to 1980 as a result of [[Greco-Turkish relations|Greco-Turkish tensions]] following the 1974 [[Turkish invasion of Cyprus]].
+
| rowspan=2| February 18, 1952 || {{flagcountry|Greece}} || rowspan=2 align=center |First || Greece withdrew its forces from NATO’s military command structure from 1974 to 1980 as a result of [[Greco-Turkish relations|Greco-Turkish tensions]] following the 1974 [[Turkish invasion of Cyprus]].
 
|-
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Turkey}} ||  
 
| {{flagcountry|Turkey}} ||  
 
|-
 
|-
| [[9 May]] [[1955]] || {{flagcountry|Germany}} || align=center| Second || (as [[West Germany]]; [[Saarland]] reunited with it in 1957 and the territory of the former [[German Democratic Republic]] reunited with it on [[3 October]] [[1990]])
+
| May 9, 1955 || {{flagcountry|Germany}} || align=center| Second || Joined as [[West Germany]]; [[Saarland]] reunited with it in 1957 and the territories of [[Berlin]] and the former [[German Democratic Republic]] reunited with it on 3 October 1990. The [[German Democratic Republic|GDR]] (East Germany) was a member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1956–1990.
|-
 
| [[30 May]] [[1982]] || {{flagcountry|Spain}} || align=center| Third ||
 
|-
 
| rowspan=3| [[12 March]] [[1999]] || {{flagcountry|Czech Republic}} || rowspan=3 align=center| Fourth ||
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Hungary}} ||
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Poland}} ||
 
|-
 
| rowspan=7| [[29 March]] [[2004]] || {{flagcountry|Bulgaria}} || rowspan=7  align=center| Fifth ||
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Estonia}} ||
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Latvia}} ||
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Lithuania}} ||
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Romania}} ||
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Slovakia}} ||
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Slovenia}} ||
 
|-
 
|}
 
[[Image:Map of NATO chronological.gif|300px|right|thumb|Map of NATO countries chronological membership.]]
 
[[Image:NATO expansion.png|thumb|230px|Membership of NATO in Europe.]]
 
 
 
===Future membership===
 
Article X of the [[North Atlantic Treaty]] makes it possible that non-member states join NATO:<ref> ''North Atlantic Treaty'', Washington D.C. - 4 April 1949, [http://www.nato.int/docu/basictxt/treaty.htm], retrieved on February 22 2007.</ref>
 
{{cquote| 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.}}
 
 
 
Note that this article poses two general limits to non-member states: (1) only [[Europe]]an states are eligible for membership and (2) these states need the approval of all the existing member states. The second criterion means that every member state can put some criteria forward that have to be attained. In practice, NATO formulates in most cases a common set of criteria, but for instance in the case of Cyprus, Turkey blocks Cyprus' wish to be able to apply for membership as long as the [[Cyprus dispute]] is not resolved.
 
 
 
====Membership Action Plan====
 
{{main|Membership Action Plan}}
 
 
 
As a procedure for nations wishing to join NATO, a mechanism called [[Membership Action Plan]] (MAP) was approved in the Washington Summit of 1999. 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 organisation'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.<ref>http://www.nato.int/issues/map/index.html</ref>
 
 
 
NATO is also unlikely to invite countries such as the [[Republic of Ireland]], [[Sweden]], [[Finland]], [[Austria]] and [[Switzerland]], where popular opinions do not support NATO membership. NATO officially recognises the [[policy of neutrality]] practised in these countries, and does not consider the failure to set a goal for NATO membership as a sign of distrust.
 
 
 
{| class="wikitable sortable"
 
! Country
 
! [[Partnership for Peace]]
 
! [[Individual Partnership Action Plan]]
 
! NATO membership declared as goal
 
! [[Intensified Dialogue]]
 
! [[Membership Action Plan]]
 
! NATO membership
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Albania}} || February 1994 || - || {{Yes_check}}|| - || April 1999 || Expected April 2008<ref>http://www.mod.gov.al/botime/html/revista/2007/4/faqe13.htm</ref>
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Croatia}} || May 2000 || - || {{Yes_check}} || - || May 2002 || Expected April 2008{{Fact|date=May 2007}}
 
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|MKD|name=The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia}} || November 1995 || - || {{Yes_check}} || - || April 1999 || Expected April 2008{{Fact|date=May 2007}}
+
| May 30, 1982 || {{flagcountry|Spain}} || align=center| Third ||  
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Georgia}} || March 1994 || October 2004 || {{Yes_check}} || September 2006<ref>http://civil.ge/eng/article.php?id=13613</ref> || Expected April 2008 || Expected 2010
+
| rowspan=3| 12 March 1999 || {{flagcountry|Czech Republic}} || rowspan=3  align=center| Fourth || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1991 as part of [[Czechoslovakia]].
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Montenegro}} || December 2006 || - || {{Yes_check}} || - || Expected April 2010 || Expected 2012<br>{{Fact|date=March 2007}}
+
| {{flagcountry|Hungary}} || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1991.
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Serbia}} || December 2006 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Bosnia and Herzegovina}} || December 2006 || (exp.2008)<ref>http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2007/04/13/feature-02</ref>|| {{Yes_check}} || - || - || -
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Ukraine}} || February 1994 || - || {{Yes_check}} || April 2005 || - || -
 
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Azerbaijan}} || May 1994 || May 2005 || -<ref>RADIO FREE EUROPE, ''Azerbaijan: Baku Seems Ambivalent About NATO Membership'', March 22, 2007, [http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/03/f3cd4e65-608f-462c-8a2c-99b449c2648e.html]</ref> || - || - || -
 
 
|-  
 
|-  
| {{flagcountry|Armenia}} || October 1994 || December 2005 || {{No_mark}}<ref>ARMENIAN NEWS, ''Armenia-NATO Partnership Plan corresponds to interests of both parties'', March 15, 2007, [http://www.panarmenian.net/news/eng/?nid=21489]</ref> || - || - || -
+
| {{flagcountry|Poland}} || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1991.
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Kazakhstan}} || May 1994 || January 2006 || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| rowspan=7| March 29, 2004 || {{flagcountry|Bulgaria}} || rowspan=7  align=center| Fifth || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1991.
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Moldova}} || March 1994 || May 2006 || - || - || - || -
+
| {{flagcountry|Estonia}} || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1991 as part of the [[Soviet Union]].
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Finland}} || May 1994 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| {{flagcountry|Latvia}} || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1991 as part of the [[Soviet Union]].
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Sweden}} || May 1994 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| {{flagcountry|Lithuania}} || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1991 as part of the [[Soviet Union]].
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Turkmenistan}} || May 1994 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| {{flagcountry|Romania}} || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1991.
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Kyrgyzstan}} || June 1994 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| {{flagcountry|Slovakia}} || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1991 as part of [[Czechoslovakia]].
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Russia}} || June 1994 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| {{flagcountry|Slovenia}} || Previously part of [[SFR Yugoslavia|Yugoslavia]] 1945–1991 ([[Non-aligned movement|Non-aligned]])
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Uzbekistan}} || July 1994 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| rowspan=2| April 1, 2009 || {{flagcountry|Albania}} || rowspan=2  align=center| Sixth || Member of the rival [[Warsaw Pact]] 1955–1968.
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Belarus}} || January 1995 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| {{flagcountry|Croatia}} || Previously part of [[SFR Yugoslavia|Yugoslavia]] 1945–1991 ([[Non-aligned movement|Non-aligned]])
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Austria}} || February 1995 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| June 5, 2017  || {{flagcountry|Montenegro}} || align=center| Seventh || Previously part of Yugoslavia 1945–2006 (Non-aligned)
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Switzerland}} || December 1996 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
 
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Ireland}} || December 1999 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -  
+
| March 27, 2020  || {{flagcountry|North Macedonia}} || align=center| Eighth || Previously part of Yugoslavia 1945–2006 (Non-aligned)
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Tajikistan}} || February 2002 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
+
| April 4, 2023  || {{flagcountry|Finland}} || align=center| Ninth ||  
 
|-
 
|-
| {{flagcountry|Cyprus}} || Pending resolution of the [[Cyprus dispute]] || - || - || - || - || -
+
| March 7, 2024  || {{flagcountry|Sweden}} || align=center| Tenth ||  
|-
 
| {{flagcountry|Malta}} || Former signatory, 1995–1996 || - || {{No_mark}} || - || - || -
 
 
|}
 
|}
  
====Debate about membership====
+
== Partnerships==
=====Croatia=====
+
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>[https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_50349.htm Partnership for Peace Programme] ''NATO'', March 8, 2024. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref>
The Croatian government considers NATO membership a top priority,<ref name=Veselica/> and a 2003 opinion poll showed that about 60% of the Croatian citizens were in favor of NATO membership.<ref> [http://story.malaysiasun.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/b8de8e630faf3631/id/165770/cs/1/ "Poll: Croatians against NATO membership"] in ''The Malaysian Sun'', [[May 4]] [[2006]]</ref> Support for membership declined after 2003, was only 29% in 2006, but resurged during 2007.<ref> N. RADIC, "Croatia mulls new strategy for NATO" in ''The Southeast European Times'', [[4 December]] [[2006]], [http://www.setimes.com/cocoon/setimes/xhtml/en_GB/features/setimes/features/2006/12/04/feature-01]</ref><ref name=Veselica> L. VESELICA, [http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1759599&C=europe ''U.S. Backs Albania, Croatia, Macedonia NATO Bid''], [[June 5]] [[2006]]</ref> It is not yet known how Croatia will make the final decision about membership: through an act of parliament or via a binding [[referendum]], but on 23 March 2007, Croatian president [[Stjepan Mesić]], prime minister [[Ivo Sanader]] and president of parliament [[Vladimir Šeks]] declared that there is no need for a referendum, because they are convinced that the Croatian population supports entry to NATO.<ref>http://www.seeurope.net/?q=node/6610</ref> Earlier, in 2006, the Croatian government was planning a public campaign to promote the benefits of membership. A May 2007 poll conducted by the government shows growing support for NATO membership as 52% of the population (up 9% from March) supports membership and only 25% are against.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.seeurope.net/?q=node/9134 |title=?}}</ref>  
 
  
Recently, it was made public that a Slovenian military air base in [[Cerklje ob Krki]], near the Croatian border would be transformed in a NATO base. In 2010 the base would become operational and it is expected that the military planes of this base will have to use Croatian air space.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.limun.hr/en/main.aspx?id=159374 |title=The Government is keeping the arrival of a NATO base to the border a secret |date=2007-05-17 |publisher=limun.hr |accessdate=2007-06-18}}</ref> Local inhabitants and environmentalists from both sides of the border are expressing their concerns about this base.
+
Additionally, NATO cooperates and discusses its activities with numerous other non-NATO members. The [[Mediterranean Dialogue]] was established in 1994 to coordinate in a similar way with [[Foreign relations of Israel|Israel]] and countries in North Africa. The [[Istanbul Cooperation Initiative]] was announced in 2004 as a dialog forum for the Middle East along the same lines as the Mediterranean Dialogue. The four participants are also linked through the [[Gulf Cooperation Council]].<ref name=partners>[https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_84336.htm NATO’s partnerships] ''NATO'', March 7, 2024. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref>
  
===== Finland =====
+
Political dialogue with [[Japan]] began in 1990, and since then, the Alliance has gradually increased its contact with countries that do not form part of any of these cooperation initiatives.<ref>[https://www.nato.int/summit2009/topics_en/12-contact_countries.html NATO’s relations with Contact Countries] ''NATO'', April 9, 2009. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> In 1998, NATO established a set of general guidelines that do not allow for a formal institutionalization of relations, but reflect the Allies' desire to increase cooperation. Following extensive debate, the term "Contact Countries" was agreed by the Allies in 2000. By 2012, the Alliance had broadened this group, which meets to discuss issues such as counter-piracy and technology exchange, under the names "partners across the globe" or "global partners."<ref name=gao>[http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d101015.pdf NATO PARTNERSHIPS: DOD Needs to Assess U.S. Assistance in Response to Changes to the Partnership for Peace Program] United States Government Accountability Office, September 2010. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref><ref name=partners/> [[Australia]] and [[New Zealand]], both contact countries, are also members of the [[AUSCANNZUKUS]] strategic alliance, and similar regional or bilateral agreements between contact countries and NATO members also aid cooperation. [[Colombia]] is the NATO’s latest partner and Colombia has access to the full range of cooperative activities NATO offers to partners; [[Colombia]] became the first [[Latin American]] country to cooperate with NATO.<ref>[http://nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_143936.htm?selectedLocale=en Relations with Colombia] ''NATO'', October 16, 2023. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref>
[[Finland]] is participating in nearly all sub-areas of the Partnership for Peace programme, and has provided peacekeeping forces to the Afghanistan and Kosovo missions. Polls in Finland indicate that the public is strongly against NATO membership<ref>[http://www.hs.fi/english/article/1101978684236 "Clear majority of Finns still opposed to NATO membership"], ''Helsingin Sanomat''.</ref> and the possibility of Finland's membership in NATO was one of the most major issues debated in relation to the [[Finnish presidential election, 2006|Finnish presidential election of 2006]].  
 
  
The main contester of the [[President of Finland|presidency]], [[Sauli Niinistö]] of the [[National Coalition Party (Finland)|National Coalition Party]], supported Finland joining a "more European" NATO. Fellow right-winger [[Henrik Lax]] of the [[Swedish People's Party (Finland)|Swedish People's Party]] likewise supported the concept. On the other side, president [[Tarja Halonen]] of the [[Social Democratic Party of Finland|Social Democratic Party]] opposed changing the status quo, as did most other candidates in the election. Her victory and re-election to the post of president has currently put the issue of a NATO membership for Finland on hold for at least the duration of her term. Finland could however change its official position on NATO membership after the new E.U. treaty clarifies if there will be any new E.U.–level defence deal, but in the meantime [[Helsinki]]'s [[Finnish Defence Forces|defence ministry]] is pushing to join NATO and its [[Finnish Army|army]] is making technical preparations for membership,<ref>http://euobserver.com/9/23948</ref> stating that it would increase Finland's security.<ref>[http://www.mtv3.fi/uutiset/kotimaa.shtml/arkistot/kotimaa/2007/04/522422 "Häkämies: Nato-jäsenyys Suomen etu"], MTV3 Internet. Retrieved on 4-26-2007.</ref>
+
==Structures==
 
+
The internal NATO organization includes political structures, military structures, and agencies and organizations immediately subordinate to NATO headquarters. The main headquarters of NATO is located on Boulevard Léopold III, B-1110 BRUSSELS, which is in Haren, part of the [[City of Brussels]].<ref> [https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49284.htm NATO Headquarters] ''NATO'', April 19, 2023. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref>
Other political figures of Finland who have weighed in with opinions include former President of Finland [[Martti Ahtisaari]] who has argued that Finland should join all the organisations supported by other Western democracies in order "to shrug off once and for all the burden of [[Finlandisation]]".<ref>[http://www2.hs.fi/english/archive/news.asp?id=20031215IE6 "Former President Ahtisaari: NATO membership would put an end to Finlandisation murmurs"], ''Helsingin Sanomat''.</ref> An ex-president, [[Mauno Koivisto]], opposes the idea, arguing that NATO membership would ruin Finland's relations with Russia.<ref>[http://www2.hs.fi/english/archive/news.asp?id=20040120IE3 "Finland, NATO, and Russia"], ''Helsingin Sanomat''.</ref>
 
 
 
=====Serbia=====
 
During the [[2006 Riga Summit]] [[Serbia]] joined the [[Partnership for Peace|PFP]] programme. While this programme is often the first step towards full NATO membership, it is uncertain whether Serbia perceives it an intent to join the alliance<ref name="Minister Jocic about military neutrality">Dragan Jočić, Minister of interior affairs of Serbia: [http://www.b92.net/info/vesti/index.php?yyyy=2007&mm=10&dd=06&nav_category=11&nav_id=266655 Military independence is not isolation] (in Serbian)</ref> (NATO fought [[Bosnian Serb|Bosnian-Serbian]] forces during the [[Bosnia war]] and [[Serbia]] during the 1999 [[Kosovo conflict]]). An overwhelming Serbian majority opposes NATO membership.<ref name="Minister Jocic about military neutrality" /> Recently the [[DS]] party of Serbia which is seen as overwhelmingly pro-[[EU]] has given hints that it is also wished to integrate the country into NATO. Although they remain silent on the issue most of the time (so as not to lose popularity) it is facing a problem from its coalition partners [[DSS]] and [[NS]] which are diametrically opposed to NATO membership. Recently these parties have begun verbal attacks on NATO for its presence in the Serbian province of [[Kosovo]] accusing them of establishing a NATO state, governed from [[Camp Bondsteel]].<ref>http://www.b92.net/eng/news/in_focus.php?id=96&start=0&nav_id=43417</ref> As of now Serbia does not intend to join NATO and the idea has been shelved as a low priority in the Serbian governments plans.{{Fact|date=September 2007}}
 
 
 
Unofficially a poll has not been taken to see just how many people in Serbia are in support for NATO, some believe this to be deliberate, choosing to "not know" how many people would voice their "support".{{Fact|date=September 2007}} The [[DS]] party is taking an incredible risk to its popularity in the case of supporting NATO membership. Its confrontation with [[DSS]] will directly affect the two party's popularity.{{Fact|date=September 2007}} The Serbian Ministry of Defense and the Serbian President are both from the [[DS]] party while the Prime Minister is of the [[DSS]].
 
 
 
===== Sweden =====
 
In 1949 Sweden elected{{Fact|date=October 2007}} not to join NATO and declared a security policy aiming for: non-alignment in peace, neutrality in war. A modified version now states: non-alignment in peace for possible neutrality in war. 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.{{Fact|date=May 2007}} While the governing parties in Sweden have opposed membership, they have participated in NATO-led missions in Bosnia ([[IFOR]] and [[SFOR]]), Kosovo ([[Kosovo Force|KFOR]]) and Afghanistan ([[International Security Assistance Force|ISAF]]).
 
 
 
The Swedish [[Centre Party (Sweden)|Centre Party]] and [[Swedish Social Democratic Party|Social Democratic party]] have remained in favour of non-alignment. This view is shared by Green and Left parties in Sweden. The [[Moderate Party]] and the [[Liberal People's Party (Sweden)|Liberal party]] lean toward NATO membership.{{Fact|date=May 2007}}
 
 
 
These ideological cleavages were visible again in November 2006 when Sweden could either buy two new transport planes or join NATO's plane pool,<ref> "Sweden 'should join Nato plane pool'" in ''The Local'', November 11, 2006, [http://www.thelocal.se/5481/20061111/] </ref> and in December 2006, when Sweden was invited to join the [[NATO Response Force]].<ref> "Sweden could join new Nato force" in ''[[The Local]]'', December 2, 2006, [http://www.thelocal.se/5670/20061202/] </ref>
 
 
 
A 2005 poll indicated that more Swedes were opposed to NATO membership than there were supporters (46% against, 22% for).<ref> AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, "Swedes Still Opposed to NATO Membership: Poll" in ''DefenseNews, May 15, 2006, [http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1800844&C=europe] </ref>
 
 
 
===== Ukraine =====
 
[[Ukraine]] Defence Minister [[Anatoliy Hrytsenko]] declared that Ukraine would have an Action Plan on NATO membership by the end of March 2006, to begin implementation by September 2006. A final decision concerning Ukraine's membership in NATO is expected to be made in 2008, with full membership possible by 2010.<ref>http://en.for-ua.com/news/2006/03/20/114232.html</ref>
 
 
 
The idea of Ukrainian membership in NATO has gained support from a number of NATO leaders, including President [[Traian Băsescu]] of [[Romania]]<ref>[http://www.sofiaecho.com/article/bulgarias-capital-to-host-nato-talks/id_14114/catid_66 "Bulgaria’s capital to host NATO talks"]</ref> and president [[Ivan Gašparovič]] of Slovakia.<ref>http://www.slovakspectator.sk/clanok.asp?cl=22855</ref> The Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia, [[Alexander Grushko]], announced however that NATO membership for Ukraine was not in Russia's best interests and wouldn't help the relations of the two countries.<ref>http://www.interfax.kiev.ua/eng/go.cgi?31,20060424001</ref>
 
 
 
Currently a majority of Ukrainian citizens oppose NATO membership, independently of their respective political views and beliefs.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} Protests have taken place by opposition blocs against the idea, and petitions signed urging the end of relations with NATO. Former Prime Minister [[Yuriy Yekhanurov]] has indicated Ukraine will not enter NATO as long as the public continues opposing the move.<ref>http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=4735634&PageNum=0</ref>
 
Plans for membership were shelved on [[14 September]] [[2006]] due to the overwhelming disapproval of NATO membership.<ref>http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/09/14/ukraine.nato.reut/index.html?section=cnn_world</ref> Currently the Ukrainian Government started an information campaign, aimed at informing the Ukrainian people about the consequences of membership. The likelihood of a referendum regarding membership is growing.{{Fact|date=February 2007}}
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
== Cooperation with non-member states==
 
 
 
[[Image:NATO Partners.png|240px|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 23 "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)''' on the other hand was first established on [[29 May]] [[1997]], and is a forum for regular coordination, consultation and dialogue between all 49 participants.<ref>http://www.nato.int/issues/eapc/index.html</ref>
 
 
 
The 23 partner countries are the following:
 
 
 
{|
 
|- valign=top
 
|
 
* [[Post-Soviet states|Former Soviet republics]]:
 
:# {{flagcountry|Armenia}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Azerbaijan}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Belarus}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Georgia}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Kazakhstan}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Kyrgyzstan}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Moldova}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Russia}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Tajikistan}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Turkmenistan}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Ukraine}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Uzbekistan}}
 
|
 
* Countries that (though militarily neutral) possessed capitalist economies during the Cold War:
 
:# {{flagcountry|Austria}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Finland}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Ireland}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Sweden}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Switzerland}}
 
 
 
* Nations that (though militarily neutral) possessed socialist economies during the Cold War:
 
:# {{flagcountry|Albania}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Bosnia and Herzegovina}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Croatia}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Montenegro}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Macedonia}}
 
:# {{flagcountry|Serbia}}
 
|}
 
 
 
* {{flagcountry|Malta}} joined [[Partnership for Peace|PfP]] in 1994, but its new government withdrew in 1996. Because of this Malta is not participating in [[European Security and Defence Policy|ESDP]] activities that use NATO assets and information.
 
* {{flagcountry|Cyprus}}'s admission to [[Partnership for Peace|PfP]] is resisted by [[Turkey]], because of the [[Northern Cyprus]] issue. Because of this Cyprus is not participating in ESDP activities that use NATO assets and information.
 
 
 
===Individual Partnership Action Plans===
 
Launched at the November 2002 Prague Summit, [[Individual Partnership Action Plan]]s (IPAPs) are open to countries that have the political will and ability to deepen their relationship with NATO.<ref>http://www.nato.int/issues/ipap/index.html</ref>
 
 
 
Currently '''IPAPs''' are in implementation with the following countries:
 
 
 
* {{flagcountry|Georgia}} ([[29 october]] [[2004]])
 
* {{flagcountry|Azerbaijan}} ([[27 May]] [[2005]])
 
* {{flagcountry|Armenia}} ([[16 December]] [[2005]])
 
* {{flagcountry|Kazakhstan}} ([[31 January]] [[2006]])
 
* {{flagcountry|Moldova}} ([[19 May]] [[2006]])
 
 
 
===Intensified Dialogue===
 
Intensified Dialogue with NATO is viewed as a stage before being invited to enter the alliance [[Membership Action Plan]] (MAP), while the latter should eventually lead to NATO membership.
 
 
 
Countries currently engaged in an [[Intensified Dialogue]] with NATO:
 
 
 
* {{flagcountry|Ukraine}} ([[21 April]] [[2005]])
 
* {{flagcountry|Georgia}} ([[21 September]] [[2006]])
 
 
 
===Mediterranean Dialogue===
 
 
 
The [[Mediterranean Dialogue]], first launched in 1994 is a forum of cooperation between NATO and seven countries of the Mediterranean:<ref>http://www.nato.int/med-dial/home.htm</ref>
 
* {{flagcountry|Algeria}}
 
* {{flagcountry|Egypt}}
 
* {{flagcountry|Israel}}
 
* {{flagcountry|Jordan}}
 
* {{flagcountry|Mauritania}}
 
* {{flagcountry|Morocco}}
 
* {{flagcountry|Tunisia}}
 
On 16 October 2006, NATO and Israel finalised the first ever Individual Cooperation Programme (ICP) under the enhanced Mediterranean Dialogue, where Israel will be contributing to the NATO maritime Operation Active Endeavour.<ref>http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2006/p06-123e.htm</ref> The ICP covers many areas of common interest, such as the fight against terrorism and joint military exercises in the [[Mediterranean Sea]].
 
 
 
===NATO-Russian Federation Council===
 
{{main|NATO-Russia Council}}
 
 
 
NATO and the [[Russia|Russian Federation]] made a reciprocal commitment in 1997 "to work together to build a stable, secure and undivided continent on the basis of partnership and common interest."
 
 
 
In May 2002, this commitment was strengthened with the establishment of the NATO-Russia Council, which brings together the NATO members and the Russian Federation. The purpose of this council is to identify and pursue opportunities for joint action with the 27 participants as equal partners.
 
 
 
===Other partners===
 
The [[Philippines]] has been a longstanding ally and friend of the U.S. The Philippines was designated a Major Non-NATO Ally on October 6, 2003 to allow the U.S. and the Philippines to work together on military research and development. In April 2005, [[Australia]], which had been appointed a U.S. [[Major non-NATO ally]] (MNA) in 1989, signed a [[security]] agreement with NATO on enhancing intelligence co-operation in the fight against terrorism. Australia also posted a defence attache to NATO's headquarters.<ref>http://english.people.com.cn/200504/02/eng20050402_179138.html</ref> Cooperation with [[Japan]] (MNA, 1989), [[El Salvador]], [[South Korea]] (MNA, 1989) and [[New Zealand]] (MNA, 1996) was also announced as priority.<ref>http://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2006/s060427d.htm</ref>
 
[[Israel]] (MNA, 1989) is currently a [[Mediterranean Dialogue]] country and has been recently seeking to expand its relationship with NATO. The first visit by a head of NATO to Israel occurred on [[23 February]] - [[24 February]] [[2005]]<ref>[http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=12960 "Israel, NATO to seek closer ties during Scheffer visit"]</ref> and the first joint Israel-NATO naval exercise occurred on [[27 March]] [[2005]].<ref>http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/nato032705.html</ref> In May of the same year Israel was admitted to the [[NATO Parliamentary Assembly]]. Israeli troops also took part in NATO exercises in June 2005.
 
 
 
There have been advocates for the NATO membership of [[Israel]], amongst them the former Prime Minister of Spain [[José María Aznar]] and Italian Defence Minister [[Antonio Martino]]. However Secretary-General of the organisation [[Jaap de Hoop Scheffer]] has dismissed such calls, saying that membership for Israel is not on the table. Martino himself said that a membership process could only come after an Israeli request; such a request has not taken place.<ref>[http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1525103&C=europe Israel NATO Membership ‘Not on the Table’: Scheffer], [[REUTERS]] cable, September 2, 2006, mirrored on ''[[Defense News]]'' </ref>
 
 
 
Israeli Foreign Minister [[Silvan Shalom]] stated in February 2005 that his country was looking to upgrade its relationship with NATO from a dialogue to a partnership, but that it was not seeking membership, saying that "NATO members are committed to mutual defence and we don't think we are in a position where we can intervene in other struggles in the world", and also that "We don't see that NATO should get engaged in our conflict here in the Middle East."<ref>[http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=2&article_id=12960 Israel, NATO to seek closer ties during Scheffer visit], [[Agence France Presse|AFP]] cable, February 25, 2005, mirrored by ''[[The Daily Star]]'' </ref>
 
 
 
The issue of Israel's potential membership again came to the forefront in early 2006 after heightened tensions between Israel and [[Iran]]. Former Prime Minister of Spain [[José María Aznar]] argued that Israel should become a member of the organisation alongside Japan and Australia, saying that "So far, expansion of NATO was an attempt at the growth and consolidation of democratic change in the former communist countries. Now it is time to do the opposite, to expand toward those democratic nations that are committed to the struggle against our common enemy and ready to contribute to the common effort to free ourselves from it."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.spainherald.com/2674.html|work=The Spain Herald|accessdate=2006-03-22|title=Aznar proposes NATO reform to Hoover Institute}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.spainherald.com/2754.html|work=The Spain Herald|accessdate=2006-03-22|title=Aznar criticised the Iranian regime, called for a firm response from Europe}}</ref>
 
 
 
Aznar also proposed a strategic co-operation with [[India]] and [[Colombia]].
 
  
==Structures==
 
 
===Political structure===
 
===Political structure===
[[Image:Bush dehoopscheffer.jpg|thumb|[[Secretary General of NATO|Secretary General]] [[Jaap de Hoop Scheffer]] meeting [[George W. Bush]] on [http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060320-1.html March 20, 2006].]]
+
[[Image:Bush dehoopscheffer.jpg|thumb|400px|[[Secretary General of NATO|Secretary General]] [[Jaap de Hoop Scheffer]] meeting [[George W. Bush]] on White House news release March 20, 2006.]]
Like any alliance, NATO is ultimately governed by its 26 member states. However, the North Atlantic Treaty, 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 [[Brussels]], [[Belgium]].<ref>{{cite web | title = National delegations to NATO What is their role? | publisher = NATO | date = [[2007-06-18]] | 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 [[civil servant]] or an experienced [[ambassador]] (and holding that diplomatic rank).  
+
Like any alliance, NATO is ultimately governed by its member states. The North Atlantic Treaty (also known as the Washington Treaty)<ref>[https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_67656.htm Founding Treaty] ''NATO''. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> and other agreements outline how decisions are to be made within NATO. Each of the members sends a delegation or mission to NATO’s headquarters in [[Brussels]], [[Belgium]].<ref>[https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49205.htm National delegations to NATO] ''NATO'', March 7, 2024. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> The senior permanent member of each delegation is known as the Permanent Representative and is generally a senior [[civil servant]] or an experienced [[ambassador]] (and holding that diplomatic rank).  
  
 
Together the Permanent Members form the [[North Atlantic Council]] (NAC), a body which meets together at least once a week and has effective political authority and powers of decision in NATO.  
 
Together the Permanent Members form the [[North Atlantic Council]] (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 [[Foreign Minister]]s, [[Defence Minister]]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.
+
 
 +
From time to time the Council also meets at higher levels involving [[Foreign Minister]]s, [[Defense Minister]]s or Heads of State or Government (HOSG); 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. [[NATO summit]]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 [[Secretary General of NATO]] 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.
 
The meetings of the North Atlantic Council are chaired by the [[Secretary General of NATO]] 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.
  
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.  
+
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 defense 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 [[Operation Iraqi Freedom]].<ref>{{cite web | first = Thomas | last = Fuller | title = Reaching accord, EU warns Saddam of his 'last chance' | work =  International Herald Tribune | date = [[2003-02-18]] | url = http://www.iht.com/articles/2003/02/18/eu_ed3__1.php | accessdate = 2007-07-15 }}</ref>
 
  
The current Chairman of the NATO Military Committee is [[Ray Henault]] of [[Canada]] (since 2005).
+
Like the council, from time to time the Military Committee also meets at a higher level, namely at the level of Chiefs of defense, the most senior military officer in each nation's armed forces. The Defense Planning Committee excludes France, due to that country's 1966 decision to remove itself from NATO's integrated military structure.<ref>Eide Espen Barth and Frédéric Bozo, [https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2005/03/01/should-nato-play-a-more-political-role/index.html Should NATO play a more political role?] ''Nato Review'', March 1, 2005. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</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 Defense Planning Committee for more expedient resolution.  
  
The [[NATO Parliamentary Assembly]], presided by [[José Lello]], is made up of legislators from the member countries of the North Atlantic Alliance as well as 13 associate members.<ref>http://www.nato-pa.int/Default.asp?SHORTCUT=1</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.
+
The [[NATO Parliamentary Assembly]], founded in 1955, serves as the consultative interparliamentary organization for the North Atlantic Alliance. Bringing together legislators from all the member states of the Atlantic Alliance, the NATO PA provides a link between NATO and the parliaments of its member nations. At the same time, it facilitates parliamentary awareness and understanding of key security issues and contributes to a greater transparency of NATO policies. Crucially, it helps maintain and strengthen the transatlantic relationship, which underpins the Atlantic Alliance.<ref name=NatoHandbook>[http://www.nato.int/docu/handbook/2006/hb-en-2006.pdf NATO Handbook] ''NATO''. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref>
  
====List of officials====
+
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 name=NatoHandbook/>
 
 
{| class="wikitable"
 
|+ '''Secretaries General'''<ref name="secgen">http://www.nato.int/cv/secgen.htm</ref>
 
|-
 
| 1
 
| [[General]] [[Hastings Lionel Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay|Lord Ismay]]
 
| {{flagcountry|United Kingdom}}
 
| [[4 April]] [[1952]] &ndash; [[16 May]] [[1957]]
 
|-
 
| 2
 
| [[Paul-Henri Spaak]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Belgium}}
 
| [[16 May]] [[1957]] &ndash; [[21 April]] [[1961]]
 
|-
 
| 3
 
| [[Dirk Stikker]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Netherlands}}
 
| [[21 April]] [[1961]] &ndash; [[1 August]] [[1964]]
 
|-
 
| 4
 
| [[Manlio Brosio]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
 
| [[1 August]] [[1964]] &ndash; [[1 October]] [[1971]]
 
|-
 
| 5
 
| [[Joseph Luns]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Netherlands}}
 
| [[1 October]] [[1971]] &ndash; [[25 June]] [[1984]]
 
|-
 
| 6
 
| [[Peter Carington, 6th Baron Carrington|Lord Carrington]]
 
| {{flagcountry|United Kingdom}}
 
| [[25 June]] [[1984]] &ndash; [[1 July]] [[1988]]
 
|-
 
| 7
 
| [[Manfred Wörner]]
 
| {{flagcountry|West Germany}}/{{flagcountry|Germany}}
 
| [[1 July]] [[1988]] &ndash; [[13 August]] [[1994]]
 
|-
 
| 8
 
| [[Sergio Balanzino]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
 
| [[13 August]] [[1994]] &ndash; [[17 October]] [[1994]]''
 
|-
 
| 9
 
| [[Willy Claes]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Belgium}}
 
| [[17 October]] [[1994]] &ndash; [[20 October]] [[1995]]
 
|-
 
| 10
 
| [[Sergio Balanzino]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
 
| [[20 October]] [[1995]] &ndash; [[5 December]] [[1995]]''
 
|-
 
| 11
 
| [[Javier Solana]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Spain}}
 
| [[5 December]] [[1995]] &ndash; [[6 October]] [[1999]]
 
|-
 
| 12
 
| [[George Robertson, Baron Robertson of Port Ellen|Lord Robertson of Port Ellen]]
 
| {{flagcountry|United Kingdom}}
 
| [[14 October]] [[1999]] &ndash; [[1 January]] [[2004]]
 
|-
 
| 13
 
| [[Jaap de Hoop Scheffer]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Netherlands}}
 
| [[1 January]] [[2004]] &ndash; present
 
|}
 
  
{| class="wikitable"
+
Over the years, non-governmental citizens' groups have grown up in support of NATO, broadly under the banner of the [[Atlantic Council]]/[[Atlantic Treaty Association]] movement.
|+ '''Deputy Secretary General of NATO'''<ref name="secgen">http://www.nato.int/cv/secgen.htm</ref>
 
|-
 
! #
 
! Name
 
! Country
 
! Duration
 
|-
 
| 1
 
| [[Sergio Balanzino]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
 
| 1994 &ndash; 2001
 
|-
 
| 2
 
| [[Alessandro Minuto Rizzo]]
 
| {{flagcountry|Italy}}
 
| 2001 &ndash; present
 
|}
 
  
 
===Military structure===
 
===Military structure===
 +
[[Image:Nato awacs.jpg|thumb|right|400px|NATO [[E-3 Sentry|E-3A]] flying with [[United States Air Force|US]] [[F-16 Fighting Falcon|F-16s]] in a NATO exercise.]]
  
[[Image:Nato awacs.jpg|thumb|right|240px|NATO [[E-3 Sentry|E-3A]] flying with [[United States Air Force|American]] [[F-16 Fighting Falcon|F-16s]] in NATO exercise.]]
+
NATO's military operations are directed by the [[Chairman of the Military Committee|Chairman of the NATO Military Committee]], 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 Military Committee for the overall direction and conduct of all Alliance military matters within their areas of command.
  
NATO’s military operations are directed by two Strategic Commanders, both senior U.S. officers assisted by a staff drawn from across NATO. The Strategic Commanders are responsible to the Military Committee for the overall direction and conduct of all Alliance military matters within their areas of command.
+
Before 2003 the Strategic Commanders were the [[Supreme Allied Commander Europe]] (SACEUR) and the [[Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic]] (SACLANT) but the current arrangement is to separate [[command responsibility]] between [[Allied Command Transformation]] (ACT), responsible for transformation and training of NATO forces, and [[Allied Command Operations]], responsible for NATO operations worldwide.
  
Before 2003 the Strategic Commanders were the [[Supreme Allied Commander Europe]] (SACEUR) and the [[Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic]] (SACLANT) but the current arrangement is to separate [[command responsibility]] between [[Allied Command Transformation]] (ACT), responsible for transformation and training of NATO forces, and [[Allied Command Operations]], 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 [[Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe]] (SHAPE) located at [[Casteau]], north of the [[Belgian]] city of [[Mons]]. This is about 80 km (50 miles) south of NATO’s political headquarters in Brussels. ACO is headed by [[SACEUR]], a US four star general with the dual-hatted role of heading [[United States European Command|US European Command]], which is headquartered in [[Stuttgart]], Germany. SHAPE was in Paris until 1966, when French president [[Charles de Gaulle]] withdrew French forces from the Atlantic Alliance. NATO's headquarters were then forced to move to Belgium, while many military units had to move.  
  
The commander of Allied Command Operations retained the title "Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR)", and is based in the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe ([[SHAPE]]) located at [[Casteau]], north of the [[Belgian]] city of [[Mons]]. This is about 80 km (50 miles) south of NATO’s political headquarters in Brussels. Allied Command Transformation (ACT) is based in the former Allied Command Atlantic headquarters in [[Norfolk, Virginia]], [[USA]].
+
ACO includes [[Joint Force Command Brunssum]] in the Netherlands, [[Allied Joint Force Command Naples|Joint Force Command Naples]] in Italy, and [[Joint Command Lisbon]], all multinational headquarters with many nations represented. JFC Brunssum has its land component, [[Joint Force Command Brunssum#Land Component, Heidelburg|Allied Land Component Command Headquarters Heidelberg]] at [[Heidelberg]], [[Germany]], its air component at [[Allied Air Forces Central Europe|Ramstein]] in Germany, and its naval component at the [[Northwood Headquarters]] in the northwest suburbs of [[London]]. JFC Naples has its land component in Madrid, air component at Izmir, Turkey, and naval component in Naples, Italy. It also directs [[KFOR]] in Kosovo. JC Lisbon is a smaller HQ with no subordinate commands. [[Lajes Field]], in the Portuguese Azores, is an important transatlantic staging post. Directly responsible to SACEUR is the NATO Airborne Early Warning Force at [[NATO Air Base Geilenkirchen]] in Germany where a jointly funded fleet of [[E-3 Sentry]] [[AWACS]] airborne radar aircraft is located. The [[C-17]]s of the [[NATO Strategic Airlift Capability]], to be made operational in the next few years, will be based at [[Pápa]] airfield in [[Hungary]], and probably come under SACEUR's control.
  
== NATO bases worldwide ==
+
[[Allied Command Transformation]] (ACT) is based in the former Allied Command Atlantic headquarters in [[Norfolk, Virginia]], [[USA]]. Allied Command Atlantic, usually known as [[SACLANT]] (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 [[United States Joint Forces Command|US Joint Forces Command]] (COMUSJFCOM). There is also an ACT command element located at SHAPE in Mons, Belgium.  
''Further information: [[:Category:Military facilities of NATO|Category:Military facilities of NATO]]''
 
[[Image:Usaf-france-map.jpg|thumb|250px|Map of Major [[United States Air Forces in Europe|USAF]] bases in France before [[Charles de Gaulle]]'s 1966 withdrawal from NATO military integrated command.]]
 
The NATO structure is divided into two commands, one for operations and one for transformation. [[Allied Command Operations]] (ACO), on one hand, is based at [[Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe|SHAPE]] (Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe), located at [[Casteau]], north of [[Mons]] in Belgium. The ACO is headed by [[SACEUR]], a U.S. four star general with the dual-hatted role of heading [[United States European Command|U.S. European Command]], which is headquartered in [[Stuttgart]], Germany. SHAPE was in Paris until 1966, when French president [[Charles de Gaulle]] withdrew French forces from the Atlantic Alliance. NATO's headquarters were then forced to move to Belgium, while many military units had to move. During a large-scale relocation plan, Operation Freloc, [[United States Air Force in the United Kingdom|USAFE presence in the U.K.]] greatly increased.
 
  
On the other hand, [[Allied Command Transformation]] (ACT) is located in [[Norfolk, Virginia]], at the former headquarters of [[SACLANT]] (Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic, decommissioned in 2003) and headed by the '''[[Supreme Allied Commander Transformation]]''' (SACT), a U.S. four-star general or admiral with the dual-hatted role as commander [[U.S. Joint Forces Command]] (COMUSJFCOM). It the ACT is co-located in the [[United States Joint Forces Command]] in Norfolk, Virginia, there is also an ACT command element located at SHAPE in Mons, Belgium. Additional command elements include the [[Joint Warfare Center|Joint Warfare Centre]] (JWC) located in Stavanger, Norway (in the same site as the [[Norwegian Defence Force|Norwegian NJHQ]]); the [[Joint Force Training Centre]] (JFTC) in Bydgoszcz, Poland; the [[Joint Analysis and Lessons Learned Centre]] (JALLC) in Monsanto, Portugal; and the [[NATO Undersea Research Centre]] (NURC), La Spezia, Italy. These additional elements assist in ACT's transformation efforts. Under a customer-funded arrangement, ACT invests about 30 million Euros into research with the [[NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency]] ([[NC3A]]) each year to support scientific and experimental programmes.
+
Subordinate ACT organizations include the [[Joint Warfare Center]] (JWC) located in Stavanger, Norway (in the same site as the [[Norwegian Defence Force|Norwegian NJHQ]]); the [[Joint Force Training Center]] (JFTC) in [[Bydgoszcz]], [[Poland]]; the [[Joint Analysis and Lessons Learned Center]] (JALLC) in Monsanto, Portugal; and the Centre for Maritime Research and Experimentation (CMRE),<ref>[http://www.cmre.nato.int/ Centre for Maritime Research and Experimentation] Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> La Spezia, Italy.
  
The existence and ownership, or simple use via [[leasing]], of military bases is subject to domestic and international changes in political context. Some bases used by allied countries members of NATO are not NATO bases, but may be national or joint bases. The [[List of United States military bases|US have bases]] scattered all over the world, which may sometimes be used by allies (e.g. Spanish [[Morón Air Base]] was used by NATO during the 1999 [[Kosovo War]]). Since the end of the Cold War, the US have closed many bases, implementing [[Base Realignment and Closure]] plans, the latest being the [[Base Realignment and Closure, 2005|2005 plan]]. However, others bases are opened, and readjustments always occurring (i.e. transfer of planes from the Spanish [[Torrejon Air Base]] to the Italian [[Aviano Air Base]], etc.).
+
=== Organizations and Agencies ===
 +
NATO has numerous agencies and organizations.<ref>[https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/structure.htm Organizations and Agencies] ''NATO'', January 4, 2024. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> They include:
 +
*logistics bodies (including pipeline and medical), which include the:
 +
**[[NATO Maintenance and Supply Agency]]
 +
**Central European Pipeline System
 +
**NATO Pipeline System
 +
*production logistics bodies, including the:
 +
**[[NETMA|NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency]]
 +
*standardization bodies, including the NATO Standardization Agency
 +
*civil emergency planning bodies
 +
*Air Defense & Air Traffic Control bodies, including the:
 +
**[[NACMA|NATO ACCS Management Agency]] (NACMA), based in Brussels, manages around a hundred persons in charge of the [[Air Control and Command System]] (ACCS) due for 2009.
 +
**[[NATO Programming Centre]]
 +
*the NATO Airborne Early Warning & Control Programme Management Organization
 +
*[[NATO Communications and Information Systems Agency]] (NCSA),<ref>[https://www.nato.int/cps/ic/natohq/topics_69332.htm NATO Communications and Information Agency (NCI Agency)] ''NATO'', April 4, 2022. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref> based in [[Mons]] (BEL), was established in August 2004 from the former NATO Communications and Information Systems Operating and Support Agency (NACOSA).
 +
*[[electronic warfare]] agency
 +
*the Military Committee Meteorological Group (MCMG)
 +
*the Military Oceanography (MILOC) Group
 +
*the [[Science and Technology Organization]] (STO),<ref>[https://www.nato.int/cps/ua/natohq/topics_88745.htm NATO Science and Technology Organization] ''NATO'', May 30, 2023. Retrieved March 17, 2024.</ref>
 +
*education and training bodies, including the NATO School and [[NATO Defense College]]
 +
*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)
  
Beginning in 1953 [[USAFE]] (US Air Forces in Europe) [[NATO Dispersed Operating Bases]] were constructed in France and were completed in about two years. Each was built to a standard NATO design of a {{convert|7900|ft|m|0|sing=on}} runway. Four DOBs were built for USAFE use. They were designed to have the capability to base about 30 aircraft, along with a few permanent buildings serviced with utilities and space for a tent city to house personnel. Between 1950 and 1967, when all NATO forces had to withdraw from France, [[United States Air Force in France|the USAFE operated ten major air bases in France]].
+
=== NATO Centres of Excellence ===
 +
NATO has a number of [[Centre of Excellence|Centres of Excellence]] (COEs), essentially multinational research, development, and evaluation bodies. The Organization says they "provide recognized subject matter expertise in support of transformation and interoperability, especially in the fields of doctrine and concept development and validation, training, education and exercises, as well as analysis and lessons learned."<ref>[http://www.nato.int/docu/update/2008/05-may/e0514a.html NATO opens new centre of excellence on cyber defence - Contributing to transformation] ''NATO'', May 14, 2008. Retrieved March 17, 2004.</ref>
  
=== Bases in Germany ===
+
They are funded nationally or multi-nationally and have individual relationships with NATO formalized through memoranda of understanding.
{{see|List of United States Army installations in Germany}}
 
The [[United States Air Forces in Europe|USAFE]] (United States Air Forces in Europe)'s headquarters are located in [[Ramstein Air Base]] (West Germany), after having been relocated from [[Wiesbaden Army Airfield]] in 1973. [[Sembach Air Base]], used by NATO during the Cold War, was returned to German control and became an annexe of Ramstein Air Base in 1995. [[United States Air Forces in Europe|USAFE]] also maintains another base in Germany called Spangdahlem Air Base, The 52nd Fighter Wing the base's host wing maintains, deploys and employs F-16CJ and A/OA-10 aircraft and TPS-75 radar systems in support of NATO and the national defence directives. The wing supports the Supreme Allied Commander Europe with mission-ready personnel and systems providing expeditionary air power for suppression of enemy air defences, close air support, air interdiction, counterair, air strike control, strategic attack, combat search and rescue, and theater airspace control. The wing also supports contingencies and operations other than war as required. [[List of United States Army installations in Germany|Germany]] also hosts the [[Campbell Barracks]] in [[United States Army Garrison Heidelberg|Heidelberg, Germany]], which is the location of the Headquarters of the US Army in Europe and Seventh Army (HQ [[USAREUR]], [[U.S. Seventh Army|/7A]], as well as [[U.S. V Corps|V Corps]] and the headquarters of NATO’s Allied Land Component Command, Heidelberg, ([[CC-Land Heidelberg]]). The [[Kaiserslautern Military Community]] is the largest U.S. military community outside of the U.S., while the [[Landstuhl Regional Medical Center]] is the largest U.S. military hospital overseas, treating wounded soldiers from Iraq or Afghanistan. Furthermore, [[Patch Barracks]] is home to the [[U.S. European Command]] (EUCOM) and is the headquarters for U.S. armed forces in Europe. It is also the centre for the [[Special Operations Command, Europe]] (SOCEUR), which commands all [[US special forces]] units in Europe. NATO also operates a fleet of [[E-3 Sentry|E-3A Sentry]] [[AWACS]] airborne radar aircraft based at [[NATO Air Base Geilenkirchen|Geilenkirchen Air Base]] in Germany, and is establishing the [[NATO Strategic Airlift Capability]] through the planned purchase of a number of C-17s.
 
  
=== Bases in Italy ===
+
==Notes==
{{see|List of United States military bases in Italy}}
+
<references/>
NATO's Naval Forces' headquarters will be relocated from London to [[Napoli]] (Italy), where NATO's [[Joint Force Command]] (headed by a U.S. admiral) is also based. The [[Naval Air Station Sigonella]], in Sicily, is one of the most frequently used stops for U.S. airlifters bound from the continental United States to Southwest Asia and the Indian Ocean. In the nort-east of Italy, [[Aviano Air Base]] (used for the [[Imam Rapito]] [[extraordinary rendition]] case) is the HQ of the [[31st Fighter Wing]] which conducts and supports air operations in Europe's southern region and to maintain munitions for the NATO and national authorities. Aviano Air Base was brought into NATO after a 1954 US-Italian agreement, and received F-16 planes from [[Torrejon Air Base]] after its closure in the 1990s. [[San Vito dei Normanni Air Station]], also used as a U.S. naval base, hosted a [[FLR-9]] receiving system for [[COMINT]] intelligence purposes from 1964 to 1994. It hosts now the 691th Electronic Security Group and other assigned U.S. and NATO units. NATO also inaugurated a new base in 2004 in [[Chiapparo nel Mar Grande]] ([[Taranto]]).<ref> [http://www.ilmanifesto.it/g8/dopogenova/40ddd5214bf50.html Il nuovo fronte è a sud-est], Manlio Dinucci, ''[[Il Manifesto]]'', June 26, 2004 {{it icon}} </ref> The enlargement of the [[Caserma Ederle]] in [[Vicenza]], planned for 2007 and accepted by [[Silvio Berlusconi]]'s government, caused some opposition from [[Romano Prodi]]'s government, although it finally accepted the relocation.<ref> [http://www.ilmanifesto.it/ricerca/ric_view.php3?page=/oggi/art23.html&word=manlio;dinucci Perché è un problema politico l'ampliamento della base Usa], Manlio Dinucci, ''[[Il Manifesto]]'', January 18, 2007 {{it icon}} </ref> Between 40,000 to 100,000 Italians marched against this extension project on 17 February, 2007.<ref> [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6370671.stm Italians march in US base protest], [[BBC]], 17 February 2007 {{en icon}} </ref>
 
  
=== Bases in Spain ===
+
==References==
{{see|US-Spanish joint military bases}}
+
*Isby, David C. and Charles Kamps Jr. ''Armies of NATO's Central Front''. Jane's Publishing Company Ltd, 1985. ISBN 978-0710603418
[[Torrejon Air Base]], near Madrid in Spain, was the headquarters of the [[United States Air Forces in Europe]] (USAFE) [[Sixteenth Air Force]] as well as the 401st Tactical Fighter Wing. However, under popular discontent in particular from the [[PSOE]] and the [[Communist Party of Spain|PCE]], an agreement was reached in 1988 to reduce U.S. military presence in Spain. Henceforth, aircraft (mostly [[F-16 Fighting Falcon|F-16]]) based at Torrejon were rotated to other USAFE airbases at [[Aviano Air Base]], Italy, and at [[Incirlik Air Base|Incirlik AB]], Turkey. Torrejon was, in addition, a staging, reinforcement, and logistical airlift base. The USAFE completely withdrew its forces on 21 May, 1992.  
+
*Kaplan, Lawrence S. ''NATO and the United States: the Enduring Alliance''. Twayne Publishers, 1994. ISBN 978-0805779264
 +
*Osgood, Robert E. ''NATO: The Entangling Alliance''. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1999. ISBN 978-0275964191
 +
*Reynolds, David (ed.). ''The Origins of the Cold War in Europe: International Perspectives''. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1994. ISBN 978-0300105629
  
[[Morón Air Base]], near Seville, became in 1992 the home of the US [[92d Air Refueling Wing]], which was tasked with providing fuel to NATO forces during the [[1999 NATO bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia|1999 bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia]]. Morón Air Base was the largest tanker base during the [[Kosovo War]].  
+
== External links ==
 +
All links retrieved March 17, 2024.
  
As of 2007, [[Zaragossa]] is expected to host the new [[Alliance Ground Surveillance]] (AGS) system of NATO, produced by the [[Transatlantic Industrial Proposed Solution]] (TIPS) consortium with the goal of having an initial operational capability in 2010.<ref> [http://www.nato.int/issues/ags/index.html Alliance Ground Surveillance], NATO (last updated on October 27, 2006 &mdash; URL accessed on January 18, 2007 </ref> As in Italy, this has been met with some opposition from various [[anti-militarist]] sectors of Spanish society.<ref> [http://www.antimilitaristas.org/article.php3?id_article=2591 El gobierno español pretende que la OTAN instale en Zaragoza el centro de mando del sistema de vigilancia y espionaje global de los Estados Unidos], June 28, 2006 on www.antimilitaristas.org, {{es icon}} </ref>
+
* [https://www.nato.int/ NATO website]  
 +
* [https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/57772.htm Basic NATO Documents]
 +
* [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4232381.stm NATO searches for defining role] ''BBC'', February 3, 2005.  
  
=== Others ===
 
 
The [[SHAPE Technical Centre]] (STC) in [[The Hague]] (Netherlands) merged in 1996 with the [[NATO Communications and Information Systems Agency]] (NACISA) based in Brussels (Belgium), forming the [[NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency]] (NC3A). The agency comprises around 650 staff, of which around 400 are located in The Hague and 250 in Brussels. It reports to the [[NATO Consultation, Command and Control Board]] (NC3B).
 
 
NATO's [[Joint Force Command Brunssum]] (Netherlands) houses members of the central European NATO countries, but includes the US armed forces, Canadian forces, British, German, Belgian and Dutch personnel.
 
 
In the Portuguese territory of the [[Azores]], the [[Lajes Field]] provides support to 3,000 aircraft including fighters from the U.S. and 20 other allied nations each year. The geographic position has made this airbase strategically important to both American and NATO's warfighting capability. Beginning in 1997, large fighter aircraft movements called Air Expeditionary Forces filled the Lajes flightline. Lajes also has hosted B-52 and B-1 bomber aircraft on global air missions. Lajes also supports many routine NATO exercises, such as the biennial Northern Viking exercise.
 
 
In Netherlands the [[Soesterberg Air Base]], used by the USAFE, was closed after the Cold War, and the 298 and 300 300 Squadron are to be moved to [[Gilze-Rijen Air Base]]. The [[Leeuwarden Air Base]] is the home of the annual NATO exercise "Frisian Flag".
 
 
[[U.S. Secretary of State]] [[Condoleezza Rice]] has signed the [[Defense Cooperation Agreement]] with Sofia (Bulgaria), a new NATO member, in 2006. The treaty allows the US (not NATO) to develop as [[List of joint U.S.-Bulgarian military bases|joint U.S.-Bulgarian facilities]] the Bulgarian air bases at [[Bezmer]] (near [[Yambol]]) and [[Graf Ignatievo]] (near [[Plovdiv]]), the [[Novo Selo]] training range (near [[Sliven]]), and a logistics centre in [[Aytos]], as well as to use the commercial port of [[Burgas]]. At least 2,500 U.S. personnel will be located there. The treaty also allows the U.S. to use the bases "for missions in tiers country without a specific authorisation from Bulgarian authorities," and grants U.S. militaries [[Immunity from prosecution (international law)|immunity from prosecution]] in this country.<ref name="Dilucci">[http://www.legrandsoir.info/article.php3?id_article=3651 OTAN - Le grand jeu des bases militaires en terre européenne], Manlio Dilucci, French translation published on May 9, 2006 in ''[[Le Grand Soir]]'' newspaper of an article originally published in ''[[Il Manifesto]]'' on April 30, 2006 </ref> Another agreement with Romania permits the U.S. to use the [[Mihail Kogălniceanu International Airport|Mihail Kogălniceanu]] base and another one nearby.<ref name="Dilucci"/>
 
 
Various military bases are used in Turkey, including the [[Incirlik Air Base]], near [[Adana]], and [[İzmir Air Base]]. The U.S. [[39th Air Base Wing]], located at Incirlik since 1966, recently took part in [[Operation Northern Watch]], a [[U.S. European Command Combined Task Force]] (CTF) charged with enforcing its own no-fly zone above the 36th parallel in Iraq, which started in January 1997. It also took part in the 2001 [[War in Afghanistan (2001–present)|invasion of Aghanistan]] and in the [[2003 invasion of Iraq]].
 
 
In [[Serbian|Serbia]] province Kosovo, [[Camp Bondsteel]] serves as the NATO headquarters for [[Kosovo Force|KFOR]]'s Multinational Task Force East (MNTF-E). [[Camp Monteith]] has also been used by the KFOR.
 
 
[[Camp Arifjan]], a [[List of United States Army installations in Kuwait|US Army base in Kuwait]], has hosted various soldiers from allied countries. [[Manas Air Base]] in [[Kyrgyzstan]], owned by the US Air Force, has also been used by the [[French Air Force]] and the [[Royal Australian Air Force]] during (non-NATO) [[Operation Enduring Freedom]] in Afghanistan. Although NATO was not initially engaged in Afghanistan, it has since deployed the [[International Security Assistance Force|ISAF]] force, which took control of the country in October 2006.
 
 
Kyrgyz President [[Kurmanbek Bakiyev]], who succeeded to [[Askar Akayev]] after the 2005 [[Tulip Revolution]], threatened in April 2006 to expel U.S. troops from the base if the United States didn't agree by June 1 to pay more for stationing forces in the Central Asian nation. However, he finally withdrew this threat, but the U.S. and Kyrgyzstan have yet to agree to new terms for the military base. Beside the U.S. and NATO, others [[global power]]s such as Russia and China are trying to acquire bases in Central Asia, in a struggle dubbed the "[[New Great Game]]." Thus, [[President of Uzbekistan]] [[Islom Karimov]] ordered the US to leave the [[Karshi-Khanabad]] which was vacated in January 2006.
 
 
In [[Military of Djibouti|Djibouti]], NATO owns no bases, but both France and the U.S. (since 2002) are present, with the [[13th Foreign Legion Demi-Brigade]] sharing [[Camp Lemonier]] with the [[CJTF-HOA|Combined Joint Task Force Horn of Africa]] (CJTF-HOA) of the [[United States Central Command]]. It is from Djibouti that [[Abu Ali al-Harithi]], suspected mastermind of the 2000 [[USS Cole bombing]], and U.S. citizen [[Ahmed Hijazi]], along with four others persons, were assassinated in 2002 while riding a car in [[Yemen]], by a [[Hellfire missile]] sent by a [[RQ-1 Predator|RQ-1 Predator drone]] actionned from CIA headquarters in [[Langley, Virginia]].<ref> [http://mondediplo.com/2003/02/06djibouti Djibouti: a new army behind the wire], ''[[Le Monde diplomatique]]'', February 2003 {{en icon}} (+ {{fr icon}}/{{pt icon}}) </ref> It is also from there that the U.S. Army launched attacks in 2007 against [[War in Somalia (2006–present)|Islamic forces in Somalia]].
 
 
As NATO does not share a common intelligence interception system, each country develops its installations on its own. However, English-speaking countries members of the [[UKUSA Community]] have joined in the [[ECHELON]] programme, which has bases scattered around the world. France allegedly has developed its own interception system, nicknamed "[[Frenchelon]]," as did Switzerland with the [[Onyx interception system]] (which recently gave the proof of the existence of CIA-operated [[black site]]s in Europe).
 
 
==Equipment==
 
 
Most of NATO's military hardware belongs to member nations and bears the names of the respective members. Ground forces have repainted some of their vehicles to bear the '''NATO''' and '''OTAN''' markings.
 
 
* 3 [[Boeing 707|Boeing 707-320C]] Cargo Aircraft
 
* 17 [[Boeing]] [[E-3 Sentry|E-3A]] AWACS
 
 
These aircraft operate from bases in:
 
 
{{ITA}}
 
* [[Vincenzo Florio Airport]], [[Trapani|Trapani, Italy]] (1986)
 
* [[Aviano Air Base]]
 
* [[San Vito dei Normanni Air Station]]
 
* [[Caserma Ederle]]
 
 
{{flagicon|Greece}}
 
* [[Aktion National Airport]], [[Aktion, Greece]] (1987)
 
 
{{flagicon|Turkey}}
 
* [[Konya Airport]], [[Konya|Konya, Turkey]] (1983)
 
* [[Incirlik Air Base]], [[Turkey]]
 
 
{{flagicon|Norway}}
 
* [[Ørland Main Air Station|Ørland, Norway]] (1983)
 
 
{{flagicon|Afghanistan}}
 
* [[Bagram Air Base]]
 
* [[Kandahar Air Base]]
 
 
{{flagicon|Belgium}}
 
* [[Chievres Air Base]]
 
 
{{GER}}
 
* [[NATO Air Base Geilenkirchen|Geilenkirchen, Germany]] (1982) (home base)
 
* [[Ramstein Air Base]]
 
* [[Laupheim Air Base]]
 
 
{{flagicon|Kosovo}}
 
* [[Camp Casablanca]]
 
 
== Research and Technology (R&T) at NATO ==
 
NATO currently possesses three Research and Technology (R&T) organisations:
 
*'''[[NATO Undersea Research Centre]] (NURC)''',<ref>http://www.nurc.nato.int</ref> reporting directly to the Supreme [[Allied Command Transformation]];
 
*'''[[Research and Technology Agency]] (RTA)''',<ref>http://www.rta.nato.int</ref> reporting to the [[NATO Research and Technology Organisation]] (RTO);
 
*'''[[NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency]] (NC3A)''',<ref>http://www.nc3a.nato.int</ref> reporting to the NATO Consultation, Command and Control Organisation (NC3O).
 
*'''[[NACMA|NATO ACCS Management Agency]] (NACMA)''', based in Brussels, manages around a hundred persons in charge of the [[Air Control and Command System]] (ACCS) due for 2009.
 
 
==List of NATO operations==
 
During the [[Cold War]]:
 
*[[Operation Gladio]]
 
 
In [[Yugoslav Wars]] (1991&ndash;2001):
 
*[[NATO blockade of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia|Operation Sharp Guard]] (June 1993 – October 1996)
 
*[[NATO campaign against the Army of Republika Srpska|Operation Deliberate Force]] (August - September 1995)
 
*[[NATO deployment in Bosnia and Herzegovina|Operation Joint Endeavour]] (December 1995 - 1996)
 
*[[NATO bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia|Operation Allied Force]] (March - June 1999)
 
*[[NATO deployment in the Republic of Macedonia|Operation Essential Harvest]] (August - September 2001)
 
 
Other:
 
*[[International Security Assistance Force]] (since August 2003); ISAF was put under NATO command in August 2003, due to the fact that the majority of the contributed troops were from NATO member states.
 
*[[Baltic Air Policing]] (since March 2004); ''Operation Peaceful Summit'' temporarily enhanced this patrolling during the [[2006 Riga Summit]].<ref>L. NEIDINGER "NATO team ensures safe sky during Riga Summit" in ''[[Air Force Link]]'', December 8, 2006, [http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123034224]</ref>
 
*NATO-Sponsored Training of the Iraqi Police Force (part of the [[Multinational Force in Iraq]] since 2005)
 
 
==Further reading==
 
<div class="references-small">
 
* 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.
 
* 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.
 
* Daclon, Corrado Maria ''Security through Science: Interview with Jean Fournet, Assistant Secretary General of NATO'', Analisi Difesa, 2004. no. 42
 
* Ganser, Daniele ''Natos Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe'', ISBN 0-7146-5607-0
 
* Gearson, John and Schake, Kori, ed. ''The Berlin Wall Crisis: Perspectives on Cold War Alliances'' Palgrave Macmillan, 2002. 209 pp.
 
* 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.
 
* Hunter, Robert. "The European Security and Defense Policy: NATO's Companion - Or Competitor?" RAND National Security Research Division, 2002. 206 pp.
 
* Jordan, Robert S. ''Norstad: Cold War NATO Supreme Commander - Airman, Strategist, Diplomat'' St. Martin's Press, 2000. 350 pp.
 
* 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.
 
* Kaplan, Lawrence S., ed. ''American Historians and the Atlantic Alliance.'' Kent State U. Press, 1991. 192 pp.
 
* Lambeth, Benjamin S. ''NATO's Air War in Kosovo: A Strategic and Operational Assessment'' Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND, 2001. 250 pp.
 
* Létourneau, Paul. ''Le Canada et l'OTAN après 40 ans, 1949–1989'' Quebec: Cen. Québécois de Relations Int., 1992. 217 pp.
 
* Maloney, Sean M. ''Securing Command of the Sea: NATO Naval Planning, 1948–1954.'' Naval Institute Press, 1995. 276 pp.
 
* John C. Milloy. ''North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, 1948–1957: Community or Alliance?'' (2006), focus on non-military issues
 
* Powaski, Ronald E. ''The Entangling Alliance: The United States and European Security, 1950–1993.'' Greenwood, 1994. 261 pp.
 
* Ruane, Kevin. ''The Rise and Fall of the European Defense Community: Anglo-American Relations and the Crisis of European Defense, 1950–55'' Palgrave, 2000. 252 pp.
 
* Sandler, Todd and Hartley, Keith. ''The Political Economy of NATO: Past, Present, and into the 21st Century.'' Cambridge U. Press, 1999. 292 pp.
 
* [[Jean Edward Smith|Smith, Jean Edward]], and Canby, Steven L.''The Evolution of NATO with Four Plausible Threat Scenarios''. Canada Department of Defense: Ottawa, 1987. 117 pp.
 
* Smith, Joseph, ed. ''The Origins of NATO'' Exeter, UK U. of Exeter Press, 1990. 173 pp.
 
* Telo, António José. ''Portugal e a NATO: O Reencontro da Tradiçoa Atlântica '' Lisbon: Cosmos, 1996. 374 pp.
 
* Zorgbibe, Charles. ''Histoire de l'OTAN'' Brussels: Complexe, 2002. 283 pp.
 
</div>
 
 
== References ==
 
 
{{reflist|2}}
 
 
==See also==
 
{| border=0 cellpadding=0
 
|- valign=top
 
|
 
* [[Anglo-Portuguese Alliance]]
 
* [[Collective Security Treaty Organization]]
 
* [[Non-Aligned Movement]]
 
* [[South Atlantic Peace and Cooperation Zone]]
 
* [[Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe|OSCE]]
 
* [[Shanghai Cooperation Organization|Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)]]
 
* [[United Nations]]
 
* [[Warsaw Pact]]
 
* [[Western European Union]]
 
* [[International organisations in Europe]]
 
* [[Southeast Asia Treaty Organization]]
 
* [[Central Treaty Organization]]
 
* [[Strategic Air Command]]
 
* [[Strategic Defense Initiative]]
 
 
* [[Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe]]
 
* [[Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty]]
 
 
| &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;
 
|
 
* [[Atlantic Council]]
 
* [[Coalition Warrior Interoperability Demonstration]]
 
* [[Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council]]
 
* [[Headquarters Allied Command Europe Rapid Reaction Corps]]
 
* [[Partnership for Peace]]
 
* [[EU battle groups]]
 
 
* [[Silence procedure]]
 
 
* [[NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency]]
 
* [[NATO Medal]]
 
* [[NATO phonetic alphabet]]
 
* [[NATO Response Force]]
 
* [[NATO summit]]
 
* [[NATO Tiger Association]]
 
* [[List of NATO country codes]]
 
* [[Ranks and insignia of NATO]]
 
|}
 
 
==External links==
 
{{commons|North Atlantic Treaty Organisation}}
 
{{wikinewscat|NATO}}
 
* [http://www.nato.int/ NATO]
 
* {{PDFlink|[http://www.dodccrp.org/files/NATO_COBP.pdf NATO Code of Best Practice for C2 Assessment]|1.68&nbsp;[[Mebibyte|MiB]]<!-- application/pdf, 1771476 bytes —>}}
 
*[http://www.direct.gov.uk/Gtgl1/GuideToGovernment/InternationalBodies/InternationalBodiesArticles/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4003090&chk=6WCZhB History of NATO – the Atlantic Alliance] - UK Government site
 
* [http://www.nato.int/docu/basics.htm Basic NATO Documents]
 
* [http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20070517&articleId=5677 The Globalization of Military Power: NATO Expansion] ''(CRG)''
 
* [http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1211214,00.html 'NATO force 'feeds Kosovo sex trade'] ''(The Guardian)''
 
* [http://www.namsa.nato.int/ NATO Maintenance and Supply Agency (NAMSA) Official Website]
 
* [http://www.nc3a.nato.int/ NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency (NC3A) Official Website]
 
* [http://www.jwc.nato.int/ Joint Warfare Centre]
 
* [http://www.army-technology.com/contractors/missiles/nato.html NATO Response Force Article]
 
* [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4232381.stm NATO searches for defining role]
 
* [http://www.nato.int/issues/nrf/index.html Official Article on NATO Response Force]
 
*[http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/crs/search.tkl?q=nato&search_crit=subject&search=Search&date1=Anytime&date2=Anytime&type=form Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports regarding NATO]
 
* [http://www.geocities.com/b_antinato/ Balkan Anti NATO Center, Greece]
 
* [http://www.ndc.nato.int/ NATO Defense College]
 
* [http://www.acus.org Atlantic Council of the United States]
 
* [http://archives.cbc.ca/IDD-1-71-1538/conflict_war/nato/ CBC Digital Archives - One for all: The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation]
 
* [http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr990322.html NATO at Fifty: New Challenges, Future Uncertainties] [[U.S. Institute of Peace]] Report, March 1999
 
*[http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1999/nato/ NATO at 50]
 
* [http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/09/14/ukraine.nato.reut/index.html?section=cnn_world Ukraine shelves bid to join NATO]
 
*[http://www.afsouth.nato.int/operations/denyflight/DenyFlightFactSheet.htm Operation Deny Flight fact sheet]
 
*[http://dept.kent.edu/cicp/natoconference/ National Model NATO]
 
*[http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4303 The Impact of NATO forces in Afghanistan] An analysis of the effects of the U.S. led occupation on the political and social climate of Afghanistan.
 
*[http://paginas.pavconhecimento.pt/pessoais/dw/Mario%5FZanatti ESDI evolution in NATO: The presentation of the Eurocorps-Foreign Legion concept and its Single European Regiment at the European Parliament in June 2003]
 
 
{{NATO}}
 
{{NATO summits}}
 
 
{{Cold War}}
 
{{Cold War}}
{{War on Terrorism}}
 
 
 
[[category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[category:Politics]]
 
[[category:Politics]]
{{credits|170619912}}
+
[[category:History]]
 +
{{credits|218734769}}

Latest revision as of 20:25, 17 March 2024


North Atlantic Treaty Organization
Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord

Location NATO.png
NATO countries shown in green

Formation April 4, 1949
Type Military alliance
Headquarters Brussels, Belgium
Membership 32 member states
Official languages English, French[1]
Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer
Website

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO); French: Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord (OTAN); (also called the North Atlantic Alliance, the Atlantic Alliance, or the Western Alliance) is a military alliance established by the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty on April 4, 1949. Headquartered in Brussels, Belgium, the organization constitutes a system of collective defense in which 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 Korean War galvanized the member states, and an integrated military structure was built up under the direction of two U.S. supreme commanders. The first NATO Secretary General Lord Ismay, famously described the organization's goal was "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down."[2] Throughout the Cold War 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 defense against a prospective Soviet invasion—doubts that led to the development of the independent French nuclear deterrent 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 Balkans while building better links with former potential enemies to the east, which culminated with the former Warsaw Pact states joining the alliance. Since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, NATO has attempted to refocus itself to new challenges and has deployed troops to Afghanistan and trainers to Iraq.

NATO 2002 Summit in Prague.

History

Beginnings

The Treaty of Brussels, signed on March 17, 1948 by Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France and the United Kingdom is considered the precursor to the NATO agreement. The treaty and the Soviet Berlin Blockade led to the creation of the Western European Union's Defense Organization in September 1948.[3] However, participation of the United States was thought necessary in order to counter the military power of the USSR, and therefore talks for a new military alliance began almost immediately.

These talks resulted in the North Atlantic Treaty, which was signed in Washington, D.C. on April 4, 1949. It included the five Treaty of Brussels states, as well as the United States, Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland. Support for the Treaty was not unanimous; Iceland suffered an anti-NATO riot in March 1949 which may have been Communist-inspired. Three years later, on February 18, 1952, Greece and Turkey also joined.

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 must include military action. It is 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 invasion of the British Falkland Islands did not result in NATO involvement.

The outbreak of the Korean War 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.[3] The 1952 Lisbon conference, seeking to provide the forces necessary for NATO's Long-Term Defense Plan, called for an expansion to 96 divisions. 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 15 ready divisions in Central Europe, and another ten in Italy and Scandinavia.[4] Also at Lisbon, the post of Secretary General of NATO as the organization's chief civilian was also created, and Baron Hastings Ismay eventually appointed to the post. Later, in September 1952, the first major NATO maritime exercises began; Operation Mainbrace brought together 200 ships and over 50,000 personnel to practice the defense of Denmark and Norway. Meanwhile, while this overt military preparation was going on, covert stay-behind arrangements to continue resistance after a successful Soviet invasion ('Operation Gladio'), initially made by the Western European Union, were being transferred to NATO control. Ultimately unofficial bonds began to grow between NATO's armed forces, such as the NATO Tiger Association and competitions such as the Canadian Army Trophy for tank gunnery.

In 1954, the Soviet Union suggested that it should join NATO to preserve peace in Europe.[5] The NATO countries, fearing that the Soviet Union's motive was to weaken the alliance, ultimately rejected this proposal.

The incorporation of West Germany into the organization on May 9, 1955 was described as "a decisive turning point in the history of our continent" by Halvard Lange, Foreign Minister of Norway at the time.[6] 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 to resist a Soviet invasion.[3] Indeed, one of its immediate results was the creation of the Warsaw Pact, signed on May 14, 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 Cold War.

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

Considering the response given to be unsatisfactory, and in order to give France, 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 defense for his country. On 11 March 1959, France withdrew its Mediterranean fleet from NATO command; three months later, in June 1959, de Gaulle banned the stationing of foreign nuclear weapons on French soil. This caused the United States to transfer two hundred military aircraft out of France and return control of the ten major air force bases that had operated in France since 1950 to the French by 1967.

In the meantime, France had initiated an independent nuclear deterrence program, spearheaded by the "Force de frappe" ("Striking force"). France tested its first nuclear weapon, Gerboise Bleue, on February 13, 1960, in (what was then) French Algeria.

Though France showed solidarity with the rest of NATO during the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, de Gaulle continued his pursuit of an independent defense by removing France's Atlantic and Channel 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 Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) from Paris to Casteau, north of Mons, Belgium, by October 16, 1967. France remained a member of the alliance, and committed to the defense of Europe from possible Communist attack with its own forces stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany throughout this period. France rejoined NATO's Military Committee in 1995, and has since intensified working relations with the military structure. France has not, however, rejoined the integrated military command and no non-French NATO troops are allowed to be based on its soil. The policies of current French President Nicolas Sarkozy appear to be aimed at eventual re-integration.

The creation of NATO brought about some standardization of allied military terminology, procedures, and technology, which in many cases meant European countries adopting U.S. practices. The roughly 1,300 Standardization Agreements (STANAGs) codifies the standardization that NATO has achieved. Hence, the 7.62_51 NATO rifle cartridge was introduced in the 1950s as a standard firearm cartridge among many NATO countries. Fabrique Nationale's FAL became the most popular 7.62 NATO rifle in Europe and served into the early 1990s. Also, aircraft marshalling signals were standardized, so that any NATO aircraft could land at any NATO base. Other standards such as the NATO phonetic alphabet have made their way beyond NATO into civilian use.

Détente

During most of the duration of the Cold War, NATO maintained a holding pattern with no actual military engagement as an organization. On July 1, 1968, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty opened for signature: NATO argued that its nuclear weapons sharing arrangements did not breach the treaty as United States 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 May 30, 1978, NATO countries officially defined two complementary aims of the Alliance, to maintain security and pursue détente. This was supposed to mean matching defenses at the level rendered necessary by the Warsaw Pact's offensive capabilities without spurring a further arms race.

On December 12, 1979, in light of a build-up of Warsaw Pact nuclear capabilities in Europe, ministers approved the deployment of U.S. GLCM cruise missiles and Pershing II theater 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 Dual Track policy. Similarly, in 1983–1984, responding to the stationing of Warsaw Pact SS-20 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 peace movement protests throughout Western Europe.

KAL 007 and NATO deployment of missiles in W. Europe

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 theater 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 September 1, 1983, the Soviet Union shot down a Korean airliner, loaded with passengers, when it crossed into Soviet airspace–an act which President Reagan characterized as a "massacre." The barbarity of this act, as the United States and the world understood it, galvanized support for the deployment—which stood in place until the later accords between Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev.

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

In November 1983, NATO maneuvers simulating a nuclear launch caused panic in the Kremlin. The Soviet leadership, led by ailing General Secretary Yuri Andropov, became concerned that the manoeuvres, codenamed Able Archer 83, were the beginnings of a genuine first strike. In response, Soviet nuclear forces were readied and air units in East Germany and Poland 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.

Post Cold War

The NATO Secretary General, the U.S. President, and the Prime Ministers of Latvia, Slovenia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Estonia after a ceremony welcoming them into NATO on March 29, 2004 at the Istanbul Summit.

The end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact 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 reunification of Germany on October 3, 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 east.

The scholar Stephen F. Cohen argued in 2005 that a commitment was given that NATO would never expand further east,[7] but according to Robert B. Zoellick, then a State Department official involved in the Two Plus Four negotiating process, this appears to be a misperception; no formal commitment of the sort was made.[8] On May 7, 2008, The Daily Telegraph 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."[9]

As part of post-Cold War restructuring, NATO's military structure was cut back and reorganized, with new forces such as the Headquarters Allied Command Europe Rapid Reaction Corps established. The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe 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 Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty, signed some years later.

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

Between 1994 and 1997, wider forums for regional cooperation between NATO and its neighbors were set up, like the Partnership for Peace, the Mediterranean Dialogue initiative and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. On July 8, 1997, three former communist countries, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, were invited to join NATO, which finally happened in 1999. In 1998, the NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council was established.

A NATO bombing campaign, Operation Deliberate Force, began in August, 1995, against the Army of Republika Srpska, after the Srebrenica massacre. On March 24, 1999, NATO saw its first broad-scale military engagement in the Kosovo War, where it waged an 11-week bombing campaign, which NATO called Operation Allied Force, against what was then the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in an effort to stop Serbian-led ethnic cleansing. 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 Slobodan Milosevic agreed to NATO’s demands by accepting UN resolution 1244. NATO then helped establish the KFOR, a NATO-led force under a United Nations mandate that operated the military mission in Kosovo. In August–September 2001, the alliance also mounted Operation Essential Harvest, a mission disarming ethnic Albanian militias in the Republic of Macedonia.

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 ongoing action against Yugoslavia, 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 Russia and China would have exercised their Security Council vetoes to block the strike on Yugoslavia, 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

NATO Defence Ministers' Summit in Poiana Brasov, October 13-14, 2004

The September 11 attacks 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 4 October 2001 when NATO determined that the attacks were indeed eligible under the terms of the North Atlantic Treaty. The eight official actions taken by NATO in response to the attacks included : Operation Eagle Assist and Operation Active Endeavour.

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 Iraq. Germany did not use its right to break the procedure but said it supported the veto.

Afghanistan

On the issue of Afghanistan on the other hand, the alliance showed greater unity: On April 16, 2003 NATO agreed to take command of the International Security Assistance Force (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 19 NATO ambassadors approved it unanimously.

On August 11, 2003 NATO commenced its first mission ever outside Europe when it assumed control over International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan. This marked the first time in NATO’s history that it took charge of a mission outside the north Atlantic area. Canada had originally been slated to take over ISAF by itself on that date. However, some critics feel that national caveats or other restrictions undermine the efficiency of ISAF. For instance, political scientist Joseph Nye 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 United States 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 allowed a squadron of Mirage 2000 fighter/attack aircraft to be moved into the area, to Khandahar, in order to reinforce the alliance's efforts. 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."[10] If these caveats were to be eliminated, it is argued that this could help NATO to succeed.

In January 2004, NATO appointed Minister Hikmet Çetin, 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 United States pressure, NATO formed the NATO Training Mission - Iraq, a training mission to assist the Iraqi security forces in conjunction with the U.S. led MNF-I.

On July 31, 2006, a NATO-led force, made up mostly of troops from Canada, Great Britain, Turkey and the Netherlands, took over military operations in the south of Afghanistan from a United States-led anti-terrorism coalition.

Libya
Pieces of a destroyed tank, notably the gun turret, lie on a sandy landscape.
Libyan Army Palmaria howitzers destroyed by the French Air Force near Benghazi on 19 March 2011

During the 2011 Libyan civil war, violence between protestors and the Libyan government under Colonel Muammar Gaddafi escalated, and on 17 March 2011 led to the passage of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, which called for a ceasefire, and authorized military action to protect civilians. A coalition that included several NATO members began enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya shortly afterwards. On 20 March 2011, NATO states agreed on enforcing an arms embargo against Libya with Operation Unified Protector using ships from NATO Standing Maritime Group 1 and Standing Mine Countermeasures Group 1,[11] and additional ships and submarines from NATO members.[12] They would "monitor, report and, if needed, interdict vessels suspected of carrying illegal arms or mercenaries".[11]

On 24 March, NATO agreed to take control of the no-fly zone from the initial coalition, while command of targeting ground units remained with the coalition's forces.[13]

Expansion and restructuring

Current membership of NATO in Europe.
Blue: current members, light blue: countries in the process of accession, purple: countries seeking membership, grey: membership is not a goal, red: CSTO.

New NATO structures were also formed while old ones were abolished: The NATO Response Force (NRF) was launched at the 2002 Prague Summit 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, Allied Command Transformation (ACT), was established in Norfolk, Virginia, USA, and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) became the Headquarters of Allied Command Operations (ACO). ACT is responsible for driving transformation (future capabilities) in NATO, while ACO is responsible for current operations.

Membership went on expanding with the accession of seven more Northern European and Eastern European countries to NATO: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and also Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania. They were first invited to start talks of membership during the 2002 Prague Summit, and joined NATO on March 29, 2004, shortly before the 2004 Istanbul Summit. The same month, NATO's Baltic Air Policing 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.

The 2006 NATO summit was held in Riga, Latvia, which had joined the Atlantic Alliance two years earlier. It is the first NATO summit to be held in a country that was part of the Soviet Union, and the second one in a former COMECON country (after the 2002 Prague Summit). Energy Security was one of the main themes of the Riga Summit.[14]

At the April 2008 summit in Bucharest, Romania, NATO agreed to the accession of Croatia and Albania and invited them to join; they both joined in April, 2009.

Did you know?
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) began as a defense against Communist expansion and today many former Communist countries of Eastern Europe are members of the alliance

Future expansion is a topic of debate in many countries. Cyprus and Macedonia are stalled from accession by, respectively, Turkey and Greece, pending the resolution of disputes between them. Other countries which have a stated goal of eventually joining include Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Georgia. The incorporation of former Warsaw Pact countries has been a cause of increased tension between NATO countries and Russia. Following the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Finland, and Sweden submitted formal applications to join NATO, but faced objections from Turkey. Finland officially joined NATO on April 4, 2023, exactly 74 years after the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty which founded NATO. Following the acceptance of its application for membership in June 2022, Sweden become the 32nd member on March 7, 2024.

Future of NATO

██ Current members██ Membership Action Plan countries██ Intensified Dialogue countries

██ Individual Partnership Action Plan countries██ Partnership for Peace members██ Aspiring Partnership for Peace members

NATO remains the key security structure in Europe. As such it has expansion plans to extend its security reach.

Russia continues to oppose further expansion, seeing it as inconsistent with understandings between Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and United States President George H. W. Bush which allowed for a peaceful unification of Germany. NATO's expansion policy is seen by Russia as a continuation of a Cold War attempt to surround and isolate Russia.[15]

NATO began in an attempt to thwart feared Communist expansionism, and despite the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe, the relationship between Russia and NATO still remains problematic.

Membership

There are currently 32 members within NATO.

Date Country Enlargement Notes
April 4, 1949 Flag of Belgium Belgium Founders
Flag of Canada Canada
Flag of Denmark Denmark Unlike Denmark's EU membership, its NATO membership does include the Faroe Islands and Greenland.
Flag of France France France withdrew from the integrated military command in 1966 to pursue an independent defense system but returned to full membership on April 4, 2009.
Flag of Iceland Iceland Iceland, the sole member that does not have its own standing army, joined on the condition that it would not be expected to establish one. However, its strategic geographic position in the Atlantic made it an invaluable member. It has a Coast Guard and has recently contributed a voluntary peacekeeping force, trained in Norway for NATO.
Flag of Italy Italy
Flag of Luxembourg Luxembourg
Flag of Netherlands Netherlands
Flag of Norway Norway
Flag of Portugal Portugal
Flag of United Kingdom United Kingdom
Flag of United States United States
February 18, 1952 Flag of Greece Greece First Greece withdrew its forces from NATO’s military command structure from 1974 to 1980 as a result of Greco-Turkish tensions following the 1974 Turkish invasion of Cyprus.
Flag of Turkey Turkey
May 9, 1955 Flag of Germany Germany Second Joined as West Germany; Saarland reunited with it in 1957 and the territories of Berlin and the former German Democratic Republic reunited with it on 3 October 1990. The GDR (East Germany) was a member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1956–1990.
May 30, 1982 Flag of Spain Spain Third
12 March 1999 Flag of Czech Republic Czech Republic Fourth Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of Czechoslovakia.
Flag of Hungary Hungary Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991.
Flag of Poland Poland Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991.
March 29, 2004 Flag of Bulgaria Bulgaria Fifth Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991.
Flag of Estonia Estonia Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of the Soviet Union.
Flag of Latvia Latvia Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of the Soviet Union.
Flag of Lithuania Lithuania Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of the Soviet Union.
Flag of Romania Romania Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991.
Flag of Slovakia Slovakia Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1991 as part of Czechoslovakia.
Flag of Slovenia Slovenia Previously part of Yugoslavia 1945–1991 (Non-aligned)
April 1, 2009 Flag of Albania Albania Sixth Member of the rival Warsaw Pact 1955–1968.
Flag of Croatia Croatia Previously part of Yugoslavia 1945–1991 (Non-aligned)
June 5, 2017 Flag of Montenegro Montenegro Seventh Previously part of Yugoslavia 1945–2006 (Non-aligned)
March 27, 2020 Flag of North Macedonia North Macedonia Eighth Previously part of Yugoslavia 1945–2006 (Non-aligned)
April 4, 2023 Flag of Finland Finland Ninth
March 7, 2024 Flag of Sweden Sweden Tenth

Partnerships

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.[16]

Additionally, NATO cooperates and discusses its activities with numerous other non-NATO members. The Mediterranean Dialogue was established in 1994 to coordinate in a similar way with Israel and countries in North Africa. The Istanbul Cooperation Initiative was announced in 2004 as a dialog forum for the Middle East along the same lines as the Mediterranean Dialogue. The four participants are also linked through the Gulf Cooperation Council.[17]

Political dialogue with Japan began in 1990, and since then, the Alliance has gradually increased its contact with countries that do not form part of any of these cooperation initiatives.[18] In 1998, NATO established a set of general guidelines that do not allow for a formal institutionalization of relations, but reflect the Allies' desire to increase cooperation. Following extensive debate, the term "Contact Countries" was agreed by the Allies in 2000. By 2012, the Alliance had broadened this group, which meets to discuss issues such as counter-piracy and technology exchange, under the names "partners across the globe" or "global partners."[19][17] Australia and New Zealand, both contact countries, are also members of the AUSCANNZUKUS strategic alliance, and similar regional or bilateral agreements between contact countries and NATO members also aid cooperation. Colombia is the NATO’s latest partner and Colombia has access to the full range of cooperative activities NATO offers to partners; Colombia became the first Latin American country to cooperate with NATO.[20]

Structures

The internal NATO organization includes political structures, military structures, and agencies and organizations immediately subordinate to NATO headquarters. The main headquarters of NATO is located on Boulevard Léopold III, B-1110 BRUSSELS, which is in Haren, part of the City of Brussels.[21]

Political structure

Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer meeting George W. Bush on White House news release March 20, 2006.

Like any alliance, NATO is ultimately governed by its member states. The North Atlantic Treaty (also known as the Washington Treaty)[22] and other agreements outline how decisions are to be made within NATO. Each of the members sends a delegation or mission to NATO’s headquarters in Brussels, Belgium.[23] The senior permanent member of each delegation is known as the Permanent Representative and is generally a senior civil servant or an experienced ambassador (and holding that diplomatic rank).

Together the Permanent Members form the North Atlantic Council (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 Foreign Ministers, Defense Ministers or Heads of State or Government (HOSG); 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. NATO summits also form a further venue for decisions on complex issues, such as enlargement.

The meetings of the North Atlantic Council are chaired by the Secretary General of NATO 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.

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 defense 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 defense, the most senior military officer in each nation's armed forces. The Defense Planning Committee excludes France, due to that country's 1966 decision to remove itself from NATO's integrated military structure.[24] On a practical level, this means that issues that are acceptable to most NATO members but unacceptable to France may be directed to the Defense Planning Committee for more expedient resolution.

The NATO Parliamentary Assembly, founded in 1955, serves as the consultative interparliamentary organization for the North Atlantic Alliance. Bringing together legislators from all the member states of the Atlantic Alliance, the NATO PA provides a link between NATO and the parliaments of its member nations. At the same time, it facilitates parliamentary awareness and understanding of key security issues and contributes to a greater transparency of NATO policies. Crucially, it helps maintain and strengthen the transatlantic relationship, which underpins the Atlantic Alliance.[25]

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.[25]

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

Military structure

NATO E-3A flying with US F-16s in a NATO exercise.

NATO's military operations are directed by the Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, 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 Military Committee for the overall direction and conduct of all Alliance military matters within their areas of command.

Before 2003 the Strategic Commanders were the Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and the Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic (SACLANT) but the current arrangement is to separate command responsibility between Allied Command Transformation (ACT), responsible for transformation and training of NATO forces, and Allied Command Operations, responsible for NATO operations worldwide.

The commander of Allied Command Operations retained the title "Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR)," and is based in the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) located at Casteau, north of the Belgian city of Mons. This is about 80 km (50 miles) south of NATO’s political headquarters in Brussels. ACO is headed by SACEUR, a US four star general with the dual-hatted role of heading US European Command, which is headquartered in Stuttgart, Germany. SHAPE was in Paris until 1966, when French president Charles de Gaulle 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 Joint Force Command Brunssum in the Netherlands, Joint Force Command Naples in Italy, and Joint Command Lisbon, all multinational headquarters with many nations represented. JFC Brunssum has its land component, Allied Land Component Command Headquarters Heidelberg at Heidelberg, Germany, its air component at Ramstein in Germany, and its naval component at the Northwood Headquarters in the northwest suburbs of London. JFC Naples has its land component in Madrid, air component at Izmir, Turkey, and naval component in Naples, Italy. It also directs KFOR in Kosovo. JC Lisbon is a smaller HQ with no subordinate commands. Lajes Field, in the Portuguese Azores, is an important transatlantic staging post. Directly responsible to SACEUR is the NATO Airborne Early Warning Force at NATO Air Base Geilenkirchen in Germany where a jointly funded fleet of E-3 Sentry AWACS airborne radar aircraft is located. The C-17s of the NATO Strategic Airlift Capability, to be made operational in the next few years, will be based at Pápa airfield in Hungary, and probably come under SACEUR's control.

Allied Command Transformation (ACT) is based in the former Allied Command Atlantic headquarters in Norfolk, Virginia, USA. Allied Command Atlantic, usually known as SACLANT (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 US Joint Forces Command (COMUSJFCOM). There is also an ACT command element located at SHAPE in Mons, Belgium.

Subordinate ACT organizations include the Joint Warfare Center (JWC) located in Stavanger, Norway (in the same site as the Norwegian NJHQ); the Joint Force Training Center (JFTC) in Bydgoszcz, Poland; the Joint Analysis and Lessons Learned Center (JALLC) in Monsanto, Portugal; and the Centre for Maritime Research and Experimentation (CMRE),[26] La Spezia, Italy.

Organizations and Agencies

NATO has numerous agencies and organizations.[27] They include:

  • logistics bodies (including pipeline and medical), which include the:
    • NATO Maintenance and Supply Agency
    • Central European Pipeline System
    • NATO Pipeline System
  • production logistics bodies, including the:
    • NATO Eurofighter and Tornado Management Agency
  • standardization bodies, including the NATO Standardization Agency
  • civil emergency planning bodies
  • Air Defense & Air Traffic Control bodies, including the:
    • NATO ACCS Management Agency (NACMA), based in Brussels, manages around a hundred persons in charge of the Air Control and Command System (ACCS) due for 2009.
    • NATO Programming Centre
  • the NATO Airborne Early Warning & Control Programme Management Organization
  • NATO Communications and Information Systems Agency (NCSA),[28] based in Mons (BEL), was established in August 2004 from the former NATO Communications and Information Systems Operating and Support Agency (NACOSA).
  • electronic warfare agency
  • the Military Committee Meteorological Group (MCMG)
  • the Military Oceanography (MILOC) Group
  • the Science and Technology Organization (STO),[29]
  • education and training bodies, including the NATO School and NATO Defense College
  • 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)

NATO Centres of Excellence

NATO has a number of Centres of Excellence (COEs), essentially multinational research, development, and evaluation bodies. The Organization says they "provide recognized subject matter expertise in support of transformation and interoperability, especially in the fields of doctrine and concept development and validation, training, education and exercises, as well as analysis and lessons learned."[30]

They are funded nationally or multi-nationally and have individual relationships with NATO formalized through memoranda of understanding.

Notes

  1. "English and French shall be the official languages for the entire North Atlantic Treaty Organization", Final Communiqué following the meeting of the North Atlantic Council on September 17, 1949 NATO. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  2. David Reynolds (ed.), The Origins of the Cold War in Europe: International Perspectives (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1994, ISBN 978-0300105629), 13.
  3. 3.0 3.1 3.2 David C. Isby and Charles Kamps Jr., Armies of NATO's Central Front (Jane's Publishing Company Ltd, 1985, ISBN 978-0710603418).
  4. Robert E. Osgood, NATO: The Entangling Alliance (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1999, ISBN 978-0275964191), 76.
  5. Geoffrey Roberts, Molotov's Proposal that the USSR Join NATO, March 1954 Wilson Center, November 21, 2011. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  6. Christopher Cox, Address to the American Academy in Berlin and the American Chamber of Commerce in Germany U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, April 26, 2007. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  7. Stephen F. Cohen, Gorbachev's Lost Legacy The Nation (March 14, 2005). Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  8. Robert B. Zoellick, Lessons of German Unification, American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, September 30, 2015. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  9. Adrian Blomfield and Mike Smith, Gorbachev: US could start new Cold War The Daily Telegraph (May 6, 2008). Retrieved March 27, 2024.
  10. Joseph S. Nye, NATO after Riga Project Syndicate, December 7, 2006. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  11. 11.0 11.1 Statement by the NATO Secretary General on Libya arms embargo NATO, March 22, 2011. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  12. Press briefing by NATO Spokesperson Oana Lungescu, Brigadier General Pierre St-Amand, Canadian Air Force and General Massimo Panizzi, spokesperson of the Chairman of the Military Committee NATO, March 23, 2011. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  13. NATO to police Libya no-fly zone Al Jazeera (March 25, 2011). Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  14. Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, The Globalization of Military Power: NATO Expansion Global Research, May 18, 2007. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  15. James Platt, Condoleezza Rice wants Russia to acknowledge USA's interests on post-Soviet space Pravda (May 4, 2006). Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  16. Partnership for Peace Programme NATO, March 8, 2024. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  17. 17.0 17.1 NATO’s partnerships NATO, March 7, 2024. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  18. NATO’s relations with Contact Countries NATO, April 9, 2009. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  19. NATO PARTNERSHIPS: DOD Needs to Assess U.S. Assistance in Response to Changes to the Partnership for Peace Program United States Government Accountability Office, September 2010. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  20. Relations with Colombia NATO, October 16, 2023. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  21. NATO Headquarters NATO, April 19, 2023. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  22. Founding Treaty NATO. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  23. National delegations to NATO NATO, March 7, 2024. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  24. Eide Espen Barth and Frédéric Bozo, Should NATO play a more political role? Nato Review, March 1, 2005. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  25. 25.0 25.1 NATO Handbook NATO. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  26. Centre for Maritime Research and Experimentation Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  27. Organizations and Agencies NATO, January 4, 2024. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  28. NATO Communications and Information Agency (NCI Agency) NATO, April 4, 2022. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  29. NATO Science and Technology Organization NATO, May 30, 2023. Retrieved March 17, 2024.
  30. NATO opens new centre of excellence on cyber defence - Contributing to transformation NATO, May 14, 2008. Retrieved March 17, 2004.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Isby, David C. and Charles Kamps Jr. Armies of NATO's Central Front. Jane's Publishing Company Ltd, 1985. ISBN 978-0710603418
  • Kaplan, Lawrence S. NATO and the United States: the Enduring Alliance. Twayne Publishers, 1994. ISBN 978-0805779264
  • Osgood, Robert E. NATO: The Entangling Alliance. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1999. ISBN 978-0275964191
  • Reynolds, David (ed.). The Origins of the Cold War in Europe: International Perspectives. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1994. ISBN 978-0300105629

External links

All links retrieved March 17, 2024.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.