NATO 1949-2009
A little more than 60 years after its creation, questions about the future of the Alliance emerge at the intersection of three observations. First, the complexity of the world, which makes the Alliance ‘inevitable,' since it is a rare source of stability and solidarity in a world marked by uncertainty. Second, American doubt. If the United States was the global policeman for some simple minds at the start of the 1990s, others see the US as having used up its power in the adventurism of the Bush Administration. The future will wipe out these two caricatures. For members of the Alliance, the US will long continue to be a necessary friend, whose power and possible abandonment are feared. The third observation is, obviously, Europe's incurable ethnocentricity: if Europeans knew how to look at the world and their place in it, they would rapidly give up their mediocre powerlessness. History is moving on elsewhere and raises questions on its chaotic path to which others are replying more quickly. In the years ahead, therefore, the Alliance may lorge ahead without Europe or nearly without it, despite the fact that Europeans' specific know-how could be useful.
The year 1989: 40 years – and victory, without a shot being fired. The Atlantic Alliance stood as the clearest symbol of victory by the West, as the opposing camp split up and unpicked the Warsaw Pact. The Alliance was victorious even though it had no responsibility for victory. It was first in line to take on the gains and risks of victory, including the new image of the West, which suddenly saw itself as the world, along with the danger of Western-centrism that took ten years to dissipate. Given its gains, successes, metaphysical doubts, errors, and failures, debates about the Alliance, albeit somewhat distorted but nevertheless truthful, reflected a West that no longer knew its limits, and that, basking in glory, wondered about its future.
Since 1989, the Atlantic Alliance has displayed great malleability, and an exceptional capacity to adapt itself to the world (it is recalled at the start of this publication that the French are the only ones who like to distinguish both institutionally and politically between the Atlantic Alliance and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization – NATO). The skeptics, often but not only French, have been wrong in believing that its bureaucratic torpor would prevent it from keeping up with rapidly changing history. The Alliance has turned into a formidable machine for ‘living together’ during the last 15 years, for obvious reasons, linked to the rejection of the all-too recent Soviet domination, along with other more complex issues that we will leave to future historians. This is undoubtedly its most spectacular success, which is far more unexpected than its considerable military might over the years. Yet, the Alliance’s military effectiveness (assumed though never questioned) also played a decisive role; for the last 20 years, NATO has been the only military coalition that was immediately credible (and it will probably remain thus for a long time to come). For this reason, NATO took over in the Balkans in 1994, only a few years after it had been marginalized there. It is also why NATO is primarily seen as the supreme guarantee of security – inalienable in the strongest meaning of the term – for all its members, old and new.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Background to the Debate
A Vibrant and Flexible Alliance, by Lord Robertson of Port Ellen
NATO from Washington (1949) to Strasbourg/Kehl (2009), by Karl-Heinz Kamp
From an enlarged NATO to a global NATO?
Towards a Security Web, by Zbigniew Brzezinski
The Global NATO Debate, by Michael Clarke
Considerations on NATO's Future Direction, by Christopher S. Chivvis
NATO, Europe and Russia
NATO: A View from Central Europe, by Bogdan Klich
NATO and ESDP: Institutional Complexities and Political Realities, by Jolyon Howorth
NATO and Russia: A View from Moscow, by Sergueï Rogov
NATO-Russia: Is the ‘Russian Question' European?, by Thomas Gomart
France and NATO
France and NATO: An History, by Maurice Vaïsse
France's ‘Return' to NATO: An Inopportune Decision, by Jean-Pierre Chevènement
Reforming NATO?
NATO and Nuclear Weapons, by Ian Anthony
Reforming NATO's Institutions: Pressing Need, Enduring Obstacles, New Opportunities, by Diego A. Ruiz Palmer
Counterpoint, 1964
The Reform of NATO and the Free World's Security Pact, by Eugen Gerstenmaier
Available in:
Regions and themes
ISBN / ISSN
Share
Related centers and programs
Discover our other research centers and programs
Security Studies Center
Heir to a tradition dating back to the founding of Ifri, the Security Studies Center provides public and private decision-makers as well as the general public with the keys to understanding power relations and contemporary modes of conflict as well as those to come. Through its positioning at the juncture of politics and operations, the credibility of its civil-military team and the wide distribution of its publications in French and English, the Center for Security Studies constitutes in the French landscape of think tanks a unique center of research and influence on the national and international defense debate.
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
Has ASEAN become Marginalized within Regional Security Architecture? / Politique étrangère, Vol. 90, No. 4, 2025
South Asian leaders continue to reiterate how “central” ASEAN is to the region’s security architecture. However, in practice, the tendency is to prioritize bilateral agreements, gradually marginalizing the organization. This fragmentation is weakening regional cooperation, accentuating divisions, and compromising stability in the context of growing tensions in the Indo-Pacific. These trends are worrying at a time when Sino-American rivalries are becoming more acute.
Caught between China and the US: Southeast Asia’s Strategic Fence-Sitting / Politique étrangère, Vol. 90, No. 4, 2025
The secret of success for many Southeast Asian countries has been their choice of economic and diplomatic multilateralism. Fence-sitting between rival powers is becoming fraught. China inspires a degree of fear in the region, due to its clout and geographical proximity. And under Trump, the United States is on the offensive against the multilateral trade system, with major diplomatic consequences. Can Southeast Asian countries maintain their balance by embracing new partnerships?
The Gulf Search for Power(s) / Politique étrangère, Vol. 90, No. 4, 2025
Persian Gulf countries have become heavyweights in the international arena, wielding influence both regionally and far beyond. Acting as diplomatic mediators, investors, and hosts of global events, they are attempting to move beyond their long-standing role as suppliers of energy resources and reshape their economic, social, and political foundations through ambitious national “Visions”. Their international alliances are proving increasingly flexible, broadening their diplomatic reach (even if Washington’s influence remains decisive)—with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates all part of a dynamic pushing many global actors toward multi-alignment.
Trump II: The Clash of Ideologies
The second Trump administration brings together a number of very different, even opposing, ideologies: far-right populism, the reactionary Christian right, paleolibertarianism, and technolibertarianism. The most visible measures taken since Donald Trump's return to the White House have been populist in nature, with the president's authority strengthened, checks and balances weakened, a form of identity politics embraced, and economic nationalism implemented.