Critique of NATO's Expansion
By Robert H. Whealey History News Service
On July 8, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, former
East European satellites of the former Soviet Union, were
admitted to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. But
President Clinton's push to expand NATO beyond these nations
will probably backfire.
His argument to expand NATO is based on an outdated
crusade against communism, a crusade launched against the
Soviet Union in the 1945-1948 period after World War II.
The mistakes of Presidents Roosevelt and Truman in 1945
were to exaggerate military factors and play down a
political agenda. At the Yalta and Potsdam conferences,
Stalin had a political program for the occupied territories
of Eastern Europe. In contrast, the United States, although
militarily more powerful than the U.S.S.R., was more devoted
to winning World War II than to looking at the political
future.
The State Department is making a similar mistake today.
NATO expansion will impose new duties which Americans would
be reluctant to assume. Secretary of State Madeleine
Albright's expansionist policy is based on a
misunderstanding of the nature of power. The Russian
Federation contains half the population of the former
U.S.S.R., and the Russian economy is in shambles. The
Russians find it hard even handling the tiny Baltic state of
Lithuania, let alone dominating the Great Power club.
In 1945, that club constituted London, Moscow and New
York, but by 1985, when Gorbachev came to power, relations
had changed. The European Union at Brussels had replaced
London, and Germany was the major economic force behind the
EU. Besides, Moscow had to watch out for Tokyo and Beijing.
American and German bureaucracies have apparently not
understood that the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 just as
the Austro-Hungarian empire disintegrated in 1919, at the
end of World War I. Expansion of NATO is not only
unnecessary, it is based on devotion to past anti-communist
cliches.
In addition, based on the experience of Britain, France,
and the United States, the State Department is ignoring the
preamble and the original purpose of NATO, which in 1949 was
an alliance of democracies. The Czech Republic has some
claim to be a democracy. Poland and Hungary have made
progress towards a democratic constitution, but it takes
decades to build a real democracy. Spain, for example, had
to wait forty years to qualify a eligible to enter NATO.
Today the French and the Germans, but for reasons
different from each other, both want to enlarge NATO, but in
different geographical directions. Italy wants its neighbor
Slovenia to join NATO. France, a second Mediterranean power,
supports Italy. Since Romania has historically been
pro-French, France backs Romanian membership. The Germans
want Lithuania in, which France opposes.
Since 1991 capitalism has replaced communism in Eastern
Europe, but democracy lags behind. The Bosnian civil war,
1992-1995, should have warned the Great Powers about hasty,
unplanned action. Based on bad memories and the ghosts of
the past, NATO has informally expanded its jurisdiction in
the Balkans. The diplomats should take another look at the
map to decide where, why, and whether to expand NATO.
Politicians and diplomats may make bad treaties, and one
day the authors of expansionist military plans may have
their bluff called.
What comes to mind is the defensive alliance of German
Chancellor Bismarck with Austria in 1879. The Kaiser and
Austrian Foreign Minister Alois Aerenthal later changed the
original defensive purpose of that treaty in 1914 to sponsor
imperialism in the Balkans. This was one factor in causing
the devastating destruction called World War I.
We should continue to expand our markets in Eastern
Europe. But Washington should let the Poles, Czechs,
Hungarians, and Russians protect that investment, if they
want American capital. The Congress and the State Department
should allow private corporations to take their own risks
and not ask America's youth to bail them out from the gamble
of expanded NATO guarantees.
Transformation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
in effect into a Eurasian Treaty Organization should not be
encouraged. If Senators do not veto expansion of NATO, at
least they should delay it or prepare to stall any further
expansion. American citizens should still be working to
prevent World War III.
Robert H. Whealey is an associate professor of history at
Ohio University (Athens, Ohio) and a writer for the History
News Service. [Robert H. Whealey, Department of
History, Ohio University, Athens, OH 45701. Phone: (614)
593-4334; e-mail: whealey@oak.cats.ohiou.edu.]
History News Service
Co-Directors:
Joyce Appleby: appleby@history.ucla.edu
Telephone: 310-470-8946
James M. Banner, Jr.: jbanner@aya.yale.edu
Telephone: 202-462-5655
Website designed and administered by Christopher
Bates.
This article was posted on October 1, 1997.
Pictured at top (left to right): "The Martyrdom
of Thomas-A-Becket", Voltaire, George Washington crosses the
Delaware river on the way to the Battle of Trenton, Theodore
Roosevelt, Thomas A. Edison, Nelson Mandela.
|