Following the end of the Cold War, and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, NATO expanded into eastern Europe into two major waves, in 1999 and 2004. The alliance saw itself as an insurance policy for newly established democracies. But seventy-five years on, NATO faces some tough challenges and much uncertainty.
With conflict on European soil once more, NATO is at a crossroads. Bluntly, what is it for? Does it remain simply a defensive agreement to protect its members from aggression? How far can and should it expand, and does it have natural geographical limits? Can it be a force for good in global terms, a benign international organization with a role to play in helping other countries navigate the twenty-first century?
Enlargement is a pressing issue. Russian president Vladimir Putin has long peddled the nonsense sob story that NATO’s eastward growth was some kind of imperialist project designed to threaten Russia’s security. Putin painted himself as a helpless victim of events when he invaded Ukraine in 2014. But Ukraine formally applied for NATO membership in 2022, and at the Vilnius summit the following June, leaders of the alliance approved the application in principle and waved the need for a membership action plan (MAP) usually required for countries wanting to join. The communiqué was clear: “Ukraine’s future is in NATO… Ukraine will become a member of NATO.”
Join the conversation as a VIP Member