Most importantly, NATO has had a major contribution in the enforcement of UN Security Council deliberations within what was once called Yugoslavia (Kaplan, 2004, 22). NATO has some significant function in controlling and containing militarized disputes within eastern and central Europe. It even strives to evade such conflicts by vigorously encouraging stability in what was once the Soviet community. NATO aided in stabilizing Western Europe, the states of which were formerly usually bitter enemies.
Through solving the dilemma regarding security as well as offering some institutional system for building of shared security strategies, the alliance has had a contribution in rendering utilization of forceful modes as regards the relationships of the nations within such a region almost inconceivable (Duffeld, 1995). NATO persists in the enhancement of member country security with regard to external hazards through a number of methods. Firstly, NATO upholds the tactical balance within Europe by counterbalancing the lingering danger emanating from the Russian military strength.
Secondly, is assists to tackle emerging fresh dangers, encompassing the intricate dangers that could result from the disputes among and within the nations of eastern and central Europe. Thirdly, it obstructs such dangers from occurring by working towards nurturing stability within what was once the soviet community (Churchill, 2006). Western European countries strive to uphold some counterbalance to former Soviet Union’s residual armed forces power, particularly the nuclear ability of Russia.
Another post-cold war function of NATO is shielding of member states from an assortment of freshly emerging dangers. More focus has been directed to potential perils emanating out of Middle East and North Africa, partly due to the proliferation of expertise for developing missiles as well as weapons of mass destruction within such areas. The most prominent among fresh external dangers are however, territorial, ethnic as well as national disputes among and within the eastern and central European nations.
These disputes are able to produce many immigrants or as well overflow into neighboring nations’ territories, NATO member states included. In the most extreme of cases, outside nations could sense the compulsion to get involved, thus stoking broadening of enmity, as happened at the start of World War II. Despite the fact that NATO has not been able to terminate such conflicts so far, the alliance assists in tackling the issues emanating from the disputes through a number of modes. Firstly, NATO shield member nations from probable overflow of armed forces hostilities.
Although none of NATO member nations has ever received serious threats in such a way, the alliance’s extensive experience in arranging member nation defenses ensures NATO is adequately ready to handle such emergencies (Sandler, Hartley, 1999, 16). NATO as well assists other nations to avoid being inducted into such conflicts. NATO’s existence assures member nations located near such a zone that they will receive assistance in tackling nearby conflicts in the event that such conflicts shoot up and overflow, thus minimizing the motivation to unilaterally get involved.
Instead, the presence of NATO assists in ensuring that military participation of western nations in these disputes, if at all it happens, is consensual and collective. The likelihood of some quick, coordinated response from NATO could deter other nations from interfering (http://www. nato. int/docu/speech/2003/s031103a. htm). NATO in 1992 reached a consensus to avail NATO property in the support of peacekeeping actions sanctioned by the United Nations (UN) Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE).
At the beginning of 1994, NATO as well endorsed the construction of some mechanism named Combined Joint Task Forces (C JTF) which would allow member coalitions (coalitions of the willing) to utilize shared alliance possessions for particular actions outside the accord zone. Most spectacularly, NATO has acquired vital experience in what was once Yugoslavia. NATO personnel have imposed the Adriatic maritime barricade as well as a no-fly region over Bosnia. NATO as well offered defensive air authority for United Nations ground forces.
They utilized the warning of air ambushes to secure seclusion regions for serious arms around the united nations-selected safe Gorazde zone and Sarajevo. Pursuant to the disintegration of socialism, numerous former soviet community nations have embarked on aggressive economic and political reforms. Europe has substantial stakes in such efforts because failure may result to mass migrations, Domestic strife, armed disputes and direct dangers to surrounding NATO member states as well.
NATO encourages stability within the previous soviet community through 2 ways. Firstly, the alliance directly nurtures political restructuring success within the area. Starting in 1990, the alliance has initiated a broad spectrum of institutions and programs for consultation regarding security concerns, most conspicuously the Partnership for Peace (PfP) and the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC). NATO may utilize such initiatives to aid the young regimes to restructure their security structures, planning procedures and policies (Greenwood, 1993).
Such fresh arrangements may particularly strengthen democratic management of the military as well as reverence for civilian power through inducting eastern and central European heads to western civil-military associations’ models. Secondly, the alliance boosts eastern and central European security though reassuring such nations that they will be assisted in case they receive outside threats. This helps such states to abandon possibly destabilizing activities as well as to follow their aggressive domestic restructuring agendas with more confidence.
Starting from 1990, NATO’S North Atlantic Council has constantly issued candid oral statements of awareness as happened during 1991’s soviet coup d'etat attempt. The NACC permits states in the former Soviet Union to state their issues as well as discuss varied issues regularly as they engage their counterparts in NATO as identical partners. The freshly approved PfP provides every member official dialogue with NATO, in the vent that such a member perceives some direct danger to their security, as well as solid military liaisons with NATO member states through contribution to several military operations and activities (http://www. ato. int/docu/speech/2003/s031103a. htm). Since its formative years, NATO has significantly worked towards normalizing relationships among member states. Extremely important among NATO’s intra-alliance roles is reassurance. NATO’s existence assures member states that they should not fear each other. The alliance minimizes the likelihood of disputes among western European member states in 3 ways including: increasing stability; tying the US to Europe so as to guarantee the upholding of the equilibrium of authority within the area; and inhibiting re-nationalization of such nation’s security strategies.
A significant likely cause of conflict between nations is misunderstanding and misperception among nations. Without reliable and detailed data, policy makers could overstate the offensive armed capacities of other nations or misconstrue foreign objectives, usually regarding them as being more antagonistic that they are in the actual sense. They as well are inclined to overlooking the safety issues their own activities could arouse abroad (Kaplan, 2004, 41). Therefore, international relationships are usually characterized by mistrust and suspicion.
NATO assists in avoiding the mergence of such damaging dynamics; it instead encourages mutual self-assurance though facilitating elevated intra-alliance honesty. Contribution to NATO’s force strategizing procedure requires member states to share detailed data regarding their armed forces, defense financial statements as well as future strategies. Owing to this institutionalized transparency, member states only hide a few secret from their counterparts, and they possess minimal motivations to do likewise.
NATO also nurtures reassurance for member states through undertaking integration of members’ security strategies. To different but normally significant extents, Nations formulate as well as implement their defense strategies jointly as members of NATO as opposed to on exclusively state basis. Such security strategy denationalization neutralizes the usual competition and enmity for military supremacy that could otherwise happen amongst the key European big shots, it also assists to prevent any usage of armed forces posturing to attain political clout in Europe (Churchill, 2006).
In case re-nationalization happens, this could result to issues regarding internal inequities within Western Europe as well as arouse fresh competition, conflict and mistrust. NATO encourages security strategy denationalization in a number of ways. NATO’S consultative arms, force scheduling procedures as well as integrated armed systems assist to develop a shared identity amongst member states. Frequent and comprehensive dialogue results to an elevated level of common understanding.
Cooperative force scheduling assists reshape member states armed forces posture in order to reflect NATO-wide, as opposed to, national concerns. Also, assignments to NATO’s military associations and civilian officialdoms socialize military personnel and state officials into some shared NATO customs. Additionally contribution to NATO’s combined military system fosters minimized military independence among member states, particularly within central Europe; because it permits members relinquish or at the minimum deemphasize several components vital for an autonomous military capacity.
Numerous European nations, For instance, rely heavily upon the alliance’s multinational space early caution force as well as its combined air protection structures. Small as well as big nations have given up their capability to undertake particular missions, like the sweeping of mines and air surveillance, with the intention of husbanding security resources, after having known that counterpart allies could undertake such missions (Duffeld, 1995).
International integration develops a measure of shared control through increasing the extent of joint contribution to operational and organization planning. Therefore, the persistent existence of the multinational military system imposes restraints upon the capability of numerous member states to utilize their armed personnel for purely state objectives, at any rate on the short-to-medium period, as well as assures members regarding the shared objective of their armed might.
Without NATO, the likelihood of one nation’s forces raising alarm within another nation would be greater (http://www. direct. gov. uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/UKgovernment/TheUKandtheworld/DG_073420). NATO member states regard maintenance of the alliance to be mutually advantageous to them, since it carries on the performance of a number of essential security roles, both internal and external, including incorporation of Canada and the United States into European defense matters.
NATO has as well adapted impressively to the dynamic European defense environment, positive example being the experience in Bosnia. Whereas the joint defense of NATO territory is the core function of the NATO alliance, the fresh NATO, through widening its key role to incorporate peacekeeping and crisis handling as well as encouraging cooperation and partnership, including some strategic association with Moscow, has emerged to be the backbone of some European joint defense regime (Sandler, Hartley, 1999, 67).