Guest post by Sean Kay Recently in Washington, D.C., a group of experts met as part of an ongoing review to develop a new “strategic concept” for the NATO allies to approve at a heads-of-state summit to be held in late 2010. Key speeches were presented by the NATO Secretary General Fogh Rassmussen, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. The result, however, has been an exercise in NATO “group think” with little relevance to real strategic thinking about America and its core national security interes. This NATO review process is failing to account for three fundamental contradictions. First, NATO Secretary General Rassmussen stated that: “We must face new challenges. Terrorism, proliferation, cyber security or even climate change will oblige us to seek new ways of operating. And in a time of financial and budget constraints, we need to maximize our efficiency within limited resources.” However, all of these issues are challenges far better suited for the European Union (EU) and a special US-EU relationship to manage rather than NATO. Second, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton noted that: “This Alliance has endured because of the skill of our diplomats, the strength of our soldiers, and – most importantly – the power of its founding principles.” Yet, one of NATO’s core founding principles was to create a circumstance in which Europe could stand on its own two feet. This is, effectively, NATO’s last unfulfilled mission after the Cold War and it is now hindered by an institutional framework allowing Europeans to free-ride on American security provision. Third, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stated: “The demilitarization of Europe – where large swaths of the general public and political class are averse to military force and the risks that go with it – has gone from a blessing in the 20th century to an impediment to achieving real security and lasting peace in the 21 st .” The demilitarization of Europe, however, means that NATO has succeeded in its fundamental mission – that Europe no longer fights wars is a good thing. Moreover, Europe has no incentive to contribute to global security missions so long as America takes the lead. Europe has every incentive to free-ride on American power and NATO perpetuates that. Secretary Gates did provide his audience with a dose of realism, noting that: “Right now, the alliance faces very serious, long-term, systemic problems.” What he fails to appreciate, however, is that these problems are not going to be solved by berating European allies for pursuing obvious benefit to their national interests. Rather, the solution is to change the strategic dynamic by beginning to reduce American military commitments overseas and realigning – including cutting – defense spending to reflect new security realities. Recently, Secretary of State Clinton testified to Congress that: We have to address this deficit and the debt of the U.S.

Link:
Time to Get Real on NATO
Great write-up, this is very similar to a site that I have. Please check it out sometime and feel free to leave me a comenet on it and tell me what you think. I’m always looking for feedback.
Outstanding blog post, this is very similar to a site that I have. Please check it out sometime and feel free to leave me a comenet on it and tell me what you think. Im always looking for feedback.
This is a very intriguing post, I was looking for this info. Just so you know I located your blog site when I was checking for blogs like mine, so please check out my site sometime and leave me a comment to let me know what you think.
Very good post. Hope to see much more great posts in the future.
This is a great post, but I was wondering how do I suscribe to the RSS feed?
I don’t agree with everything in this blog, but you do make some very good points. I’m very interested in this subject and I myself do alot of research as well. Either way it was a well thoughtout and nice read so I figured I would leave you a comment. Feel free to check out my website sometime and let me know what you think.