NATO REVIEW 2008
Edition 1: New media: weapons of mass communication?
Current Edition:
Bucharest: the place where answers take shape?
In the next issue In the Next Issue
 Videos
 RSS
 Subscribe
All archives - Schedule
LANGUAGE
Due to translations, the other language editions of NATO Review go online approximately two weeks after the English version.
© - About
  
 Subscribe
Bucharest: the place where answers take shape?
NATO Review's March photostory gives some background facts, figures and behind the scene views on how to make a Summit.
What would the host country of NATO's Summit like to see the event achieve? Romanian President Traian Băsescu highlights the main areas where he hopes progress can be made.
Bucharest has four major areas where Bucharest can make a difference, says NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. Here he tells NATO Review what they are and why they are so important. And how he sees these issues 'beyond Bucharest'
Ron Asmus argues that NATO's partnerships have to evolve as much, and as quickly, as the security threats they tackle.
At first sight, NATO and Madonna may not seem to have much in common. But here, Peter van Ham makes a compelling case that one has shown a knack of successful self-reinvention - and the other one needs to.
What is the best way for NATO to obtain the most strategic effect? Here Julian Lindley-French and James Townsend describe the potential path - and pitfalls - to pursuing optimal effect for NATO. One of the main recommendations is clearer focus.
Friis Arne Petersen and Hans Binnendijk give a comprehensive description of how to best arrive at a Comprehensive Approach.
The end of the Cold War brought questions about the need for the Warsaw Pact and NATO. Soon, one crumbled, the other expanded. Why the difference? Petr Lunak looks for answers in Lawrence Kaplan's latest book.

Time for a NATO Q&A?

‘It is better to know some of the questions than all of the answers,’ said the US writer James Thurber in the middle of the last century. He remains right today.

At its Bucharest Summit, NATO will be looking at the right questions and working towards real answers. These largely concern changing security challenges and how to deal with them. In both cases, there are clear, present day needs - and unknown future ones.

Current day challenges in Afghanistan and Kosovo are well documented. But future and emerging challenges such as climate change security implications and cyber-defence are still evolving. All require close attention.

And this leads on to questions for NATO: about what it is - and what it will become. Several of these questions are tackled in this edition of NATO Review, starting with a piece by NATO’s Secretary General, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer.

Other authors look at questions such as: Is it not sooner rather than later that a move towards a new Strategic Concept is necessary? How can Partnerships evolve to suit both NATO and Partner countries? And what is NATO’s role to be in areas such as energy security?

There are two sides to most dilemmas. And helping choose which side is, in a way, what the Bucharest Summit is about. This task will not end at the Summit. But as Romania’s President, Traian Băsescu, says in his article, ‘Bucharest could be a bridge between our past achievements and new tasks.’

Paul King