69 million page views

Relevance of NATO Dependent Upon United States Dependency

Reader comment on item: Biden's Emerging Foreign Policy
in response to reader comment: NATO is becoming irrelevant as the Mideast realigns

Submitted by M Tovey (United States), Feb 23, 2021 at 15:15

To Whom Does NATO Owe Allegiance?

For quite a few decades, the reasons and purposes of maintaining a organization such as NATO is a questions of relevance, since in the mixtures of global reassurances of international relations, do the EU and the United Nations really provide the common resources to defend the lesser nations from ambitions of contentious nations; or the super powers with ambitions of empire variously entertained? NATO was initiated for a differing threat of an earlier era: does a changing threat scenario still call for a defense posture if a new paradigm of defense appears?
During the 45th American Administrative Chief Executive's tenure, the questions about the relevance of NATO in a modern scenario of threats were debated, but ultimately, members of NATO, such as Germany, were called upon to bear a greater financial responsibility, which reluctantly, some were responsive to answer. But with the current American 46th Administrative Chief Executive's rollback of previous policies and re-entering the Paris Accords which call for surrender of sovereign rights of American national interests, does NATO begin to lose creditability of being a persuasive presence, if/ when some international incident occurs?
To categorize a threat, does Turkey's intransigence and advancement towards self-proclaimed protectorate of the ancient Ottoman holdings represent the type of threat NATO was originally formed for protection from alliance enemies, or from other members? Prior to the resurgence of militant Islamic influences in Turkey, its membership was considered acceptable. Now what? A consideration of whose side Turkey would be on if, for instance, the Iranian Islamic Regime instigates an action by fomenting proxy attacks against Israel under the ruse of the 'Palestinian cause; or if Syria gets the notion about retaking the Golan; where do Turkish allegiances lay, since their ambitions of caliphate imperialism are not all that well understood?
In case there are reservations of how this might turn out; be sure that the United States' position is no longer all that well defined and a NATO response will be all the more reluctant as well, all for the very well positioned Russian presence in Syria. Does NATO owe allegiances to that scenario?


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)