NATO divided, NATO united: the evolution of an Alliance
Westport, CT: Praeger, 2004
'This history of NATO concentrates on the differences within the Alliance, particularly between the US and its European partners. NATO's war against terrorism began on September 11, 2001. Invoking Article 5 was a fitting response to the assault on the United States, but the spirit did not last long. Within a few weeks, old fissures within the Alliance re-emerged, threatening once again to dissolve an entity that had survived over half a century. In the first two generations of NATO's existence, the Cold War with the Soviet Union had been the major purpose of its existence. NATO has struggled to seek new raisons d'etre, and has succeeded to some degree in finding them in crisis management in Europe and in areas beyond the boundaries of the Alliance. How the Alliance managed the unequal relationship in the past may offer insights into the common ground the alliance partners can identify in the 21st century.'
NATO's role in the collective security system
JOURNAL OF CONFLICT & SECURITY LAW, vol. 8, no. 2, October 2003, p. 231-263.
This article discusses NATO military activities carried out since the end of the Cold War. The great majority of these activities were conducted not under the provisions of the Washington Treaty, and in particular article 5, but rather on the basis of ad hoc decisions adopted by the North Atlantic Council in accordance with the Alliance strategic doctrines. Different legal grounds were invoked to justify - not always convincingly - these activities, which consisted of peacekeeping operations, implementation of peace accords, and military coercive measures. The most striking feature of NATO involvement in the management of international crises has been the progressive erosion of UN Security Council authority, which culminated with the intervention in Kosovo.
The first casualty in the War Against Terror: the fall of NATO and Europe's reluctant coming of age
EUROPEAN SECURITY, vol. 12, no. 2, Summer 2003, p. 63-76.
Hardly a keynote speech goes by without Western leaders stressing that the transatlantic bond is as important as ever. This is perhaps true - a timelier question is whether the same can be said for the perception of common values and common threats that used to define this partnership and its sole institutional link: NATO. This essay explores five security policy conundrums that point towards a revised burden-sharing and power-sharing in the transatlantic strategic partnership; the UK's ambiguous role in the European Security and Defence Policy; the blocking of the formal bond between NATO and the EU; the implications of a change in US policy towards Europe; NATO's improbable move into soft security and, finally, NATO's invocation of Article 5 in the wake of the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington.
Does a superpower need an Alliance ?
INTERNATIONALE POLITIK, vol. 3, no. 3, 2002, p. 9-12.
At first the answer seems to be yes, as the Bush administration accepted NATO's instant invocation of Article 5, solicited UN backing, and refused to conduct an anti-jihad against the whole Muslim world. But the US largely shut NATO out of the action and selected its own colourful bedfellows. Thus in the end the answer is probably no.
NATO after 11 September
SURVIVAL, vol. 43, no. 4, Winter 2001, p. 89-106.
On the evening of 12 September 2001, the members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation invoked that treaty's mutual defence guarantee for the first time in the Alliance's 52 year history. When that treaty's Article 5 was drafted - pledging that an attack on one ally would be treated as an attack on all - not a single signatory could have imagined that its first invocation would involve Europeans coming to the aid of the United States rather than the other way around. Yet that is precisely what happened, and NATO will never be the same again. The notion that mutual defence could be a two-way street, and that NATO might use its military power to deal with international terrorism - in Central Asia no less - are just some of the ways that the attacks have begun to transform the world's largest and longest-standing defence alliance.
Issues of Alliance expansion for NATO
STRATEGIC REVIEW, vol. 23, no. 4, Fall 1995, p. 16-26.
NATO is struggling with the issue of alliance expansion and the members must resolve difficult issues: what makes an attractive candidate, what conditions prospective members should fulfil in order to gain entry, and what actions should be taken to mitigate the objections of Russia to the admission of new members. Extending membership will not address the security challenges confronting the current members, and wider membership may cause other difficulties. Alliance enlargement has many constituents, and membership might be extended to worthy states without compromising European security, and ensuring that the NATO military instrument is capable of defending all parties to whom the security guarantee of Article 5 has been extended. Although the Alliance’s current status quo may be preferable, there are steps that could mitigate some of the problems associated with expansion.
Le Pacte de l'Atlantique Nord (5 articles)
DEFENSE NATIONALE, 45e annee, aout - septembre 1989, p. 25-68.