NATO

BACKGROUND
U.S.-NATO RELATIONS
NATO STRUCTURE
NORTH ATLANTIC COOPERATION COUNCIL
NATO ADAPTATION/ENLARGEMENT
NATO PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE
CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE (CFE) TREATY
ADRIATIC CHARTER
SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS

Last Updated: March 2008

Official Name:

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

Editor's Note: The information in this article was compiled and edited from Fact Sheets and releases available 2006-2008 through the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs of the U.S. Department of State and updated by the editors.

BACKGROUND

NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is an international alliance of 26 countries of Europe and North America created to ensure the peace and security of the North Atlantic region. Signed April 4, 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty is NATO's founding document that details the principles upon which NATO was established.

NATO was founded to fulfill its goal of safeguarding the freedom and security of its members by way of political and military means. NATO's members consult together to address security issues of concern and work jointly to take whatever action is necessary to defend against threats. One principle that guides NATO is the policy that an attack against one member is considered an attack against all members. On September 12, 2001, this principle of collective defense was acted on after the terrorist attacks against the United States, when NATO invoked Article 5 of the NATO treaty, declaring the attacks to be an attack against all of the NATO member countries. All NATO decisions are made by the member countries on the basis of consensus. The North Atlantic Council, or NAC, is the main decision-making body in NATO, made up of permanent representatives from each member country which meets regularly in discussion.

The NAC also consults with Heads of Government, Foreign Ministers, and Defense Ministers and establishes committees to provide advice on military policy and strategy to NATO's political leaders.

Key Events in NATO History

April 4, 1949: The North Atlantic Treaty, NATO's founding document, was signed.

March 24, 1999: NATO began a 78-day air campaign against the military forces of Yugoslavia's Slobodan Milosevic. Following the campaign, the Kosovo Force (KFOR), a NATO-led international peace-enforcement force, entered Kosovo to maintain security in Kosovo.

Sept. 12, 2001: NATO declared the terrorist attacks on the United States to be an attack against all NATO member countries within the terms of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

May 28, 2002: The NATO-Russia Council was established at the NATO-Russia Summit, strengthening the commitment between NATO and Russia.

May 21, 2003: The NATO alliance agreed to support Poland in its leadership of a sector in the stabilization force in Iraq.

August 2003: NATO took over command and coordination of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). This is the first mission out-side the Euro-Atlantic area in NATO's history.

August 2004: NATO established a Training Implementation Mission in Iraq.

Member Countries

Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxem-bourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

U.S.-NATO RELATIONS

On September 12, 2001, NATO took the historic action of invoking—for the first time—Article 5 of the NATO treaty. This Article embodies the principle of collective defense—that an attack on one member is an attack on all. The Alliance backed up this action by sending five AWACs aircraft and a detachment of 200 personnel to the United States in October 2001. These aircraft logged 3,000 hours patrolling American skies and protecting North American airspace. In addition, NATO ships patrolled the Eastern Mediterranean to keep terrorists from infiltrating into Europe. All NATO Allies have participated in either Operation Enduring Freedom, the military campaign against al Qaeda and the former Taliban regime, or in the current International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

U.S. security today requires us to look closely at NATO, which is already the strongest security Alliance in history, and find ways to make it even stronger. To confront and eliminate such global threats as terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, we must ally with countries that share our values and act effectively with us. Since the end of the Cold War, Europe's newest democracies have proven themselves as able partners, whether securing stability in the Balkans or fighting terrorism in Afghanistan.

The enlargement of NATO will cement these benefits for the United States and its Allies, making the whole of NATO much stronger than the sum of the capabilities of individual members. NATO enlargement will help to enhance the political and economic stability for all countries in the Euro-Atlantic area. By helping Europe's newer democracies as they strengthen good governance, rule of law, and human rights, NATO will also facilitate a better long-term environment for American trade and investment.

NATO STRUCTURE

North Atlantic Council

The NAC is the principal forum for consultation and cooperation between NATO member governments on all issues affecting their common security. Its decisions are based on consensus, with each member having an equal right to express its views. The NATO Secretary General is chair. The NAC meets at least twice a year in ministerial session. It also meets weekly at the level of Permanent Representatives, who hold ambassadorial rank.

North Atlantic Council/ Defense Ministers (NAC/D)

The NAC/D deals with overall issues of defense and meets twice yearly when member countries are represented by their Defense Ministers.

Defense Planning Committee (DPC)

The DPC deals with defense planning and other issues related to NATO's integrated military structure. It is composed of all countries except France (which withdrew from NATO's integrated military structure in 1966). Like the NAC, it meets regularly at ambassadorial level and twice yearly with Defense Ministers, normally in conjunction with the NAC/D.

Nuclear Planning Group

This group has authority for nuclear matters. All countries except France participate. Iceland participates as an observer.

Military Committee

The highest military authority in the alliance; is composed of the chiefs of staff of each country. Iceland, which has no military forces, is represented by a civilian member. The Military Committee advises the NAC and the DPC on military measures necessary for the common defense and provides guidance to the NATO commanders.

Regional Commands

The strategic area covered by the North Atlantic Treaty is divided into two regional commands: Allied Command Europe and Allied Command Atlantic, with a regional planning group for North America. With the exception of France and Iceland, all countries assign forces to the integrated military command structure. The NATO Defense area covers the territories of member nations in North America, in the Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer, and in Europe, including Turkey. However, events occurring outside the area which affect the preservation of peace and security in the treaty area also may be considered by the NAC.

NORTH ATLANTIC COOPERATION COUNCIL

The precursor to the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council, North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) was established in November 1991 to conduct NATO's outreach program to the former Warsaw Pact states.

The North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies and the newly free and independent states of Central and Eastern Europe, the Baltics, and the former Soviet Union in a program of political security dialogue, partnership, and cooperation. Subjects discussed in regular meetings between allies and partner states include defense planning and budgeting, democratic concepts of civil-military relations, defense conversion, and scientific and environmental topics. Members also discussed current political issues of common concern. In this way, the NACC complemented the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), NATO, the European Union, and the Council of Europe in building a Euro-Atlantic community of stable, democratic, and market-oriented societies from Vancouver to Vladivostok.

As the advent of glasnost and perestroika in the Soviet Union and the crumbling of communist control in Eastern Europe changed the nature of the European security challenge, NATO turned from a posture of confrontation with the East to one of dialogue and cooperation. The June 1990 Turnberry North Atlantic Council ministerial and July 1990 London NATO summit extended the hand of friendship to NATO's former adversaries and called for the alliance to institute a liaison program with the Warsaw Pact states. The June 1991 Copenhagen North Atlantic Council ministerial developed this theme in its statement on “Partnership with the Countries of Central and Eastern Europe.”

In their October 3, 1991, joint statement, Secretary of State Baker and German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher proposed the institutionalization of the NATO liaison program in a North Atlantic Cooperation Council. The following month, the Rome NATO summit formally established the NACC as a forum in which allies could offer their experience and expertise to partner countries on security and related issues.

In its first year, NACC developed a solid basis of cooperation and dialogue. The first NACC ministerial, held on December 20, 1991, in Brussels, brought together representatives of the 16 NATO allies, the Baltic states, the U.S.S.R., Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania. Participants pledged to uphold CSCE principles, support arms control efforts, and work together in building a Europe whole and free.

The second NACC ministerial held on March 10, 1992, in Brussels, admitted all the states of the former Soviet Union except Georgia (which joined the following month). Ministers adopted the first NACC work plan, which spelled out a program of intensified consultations and cooperative activities focused on security and related issues, including political, military, economic, scientific, and environmental subjects. Specific topics for cooperation included defense planning, conceptual approaches to arms control, democratic concepts of civilian-military relations, civil-military coordination of air-traffic management, defense conversion, and enhanced participation in NATO's “Third Dimension” scientific and environmental programs. Ministers also pledged to cooperate in disseminating information about NATO in the partner countries and gave their support to the NACC's ad hoc High Level Group charged with facilitating entry-into-force of the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty.

Georgia and Albania joined in June 1992 and the Czech-Slovak split in January 1993 created two new members. Finland, Slovenia, and Sweden attended ministerial meetings as observers.

A major step forward in NACC cooperation came at the December 1992 ministerial in Brussels. Ministers adopted a work plan for 1993 that included for the first time a provision for joint planning and training for peace-keeping Subsequently, the NACC established an Ad Hoc Group on Cooperation in Peace-keeping to coordinate activities in this area The NACC welcomed the participation in Ad Hoc Group deliberations of three non-NACC states with extensive peace-keeping experience—Finland, Sweden, and Austria A representative from the OSCE also attends.

Building on the momentum of cooperation created by the NACC, NATO established in January 1994 a program within the framework of NACC called the Partnership for Peace (PFP). PFP activities complement other activities undertaken in the framework of the NACC and are designed to intensify political and military cooperation between the Alliance and members of the Partnership. The PFP is open to states participating in NACC and other OSCE states able and willing to contribute to the Partnership.

At their meeting in Brussels in December 1994, ministers reviewed progress on implementing PFP and held extensive consultations on regional issues. At the Noordwijk NAC in May 1995, the Secretary of State presented U.S. initiatives to “intensify the relationship between NATO and its partners,” including on ensuring democratic and civilian control of the military, widening the Partnership's focus, and working more closely together on exercise planning.

The 1996 work plan, adopted by ministers at the December 6, 1995, NACC Ministerial in Brussels, continues and expanded NACC/PFP work on peace-keeping and other topics.

The NACC established itself as an important element in post-Cold War Europe's security architecture. The NACC was succeeded by the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council (EAPC) in 1997. The EAPC is a multilateral forum created to improve relations between NATO and non-NATO countries in Europe and those parts of Asia on the European periphery. The 49 member states meet to cooperate and consult on a range of political and security issues. The EAPC works alongside the Partnership for Peace. In addition to the 26 members of NATO, there are 23 partner countries that participate in discussions. They are: Austria, Finland, Ireland, Sweden, and Switzerland in Europe; 12 former Soviet republics-Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan; and Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia in the Balkans.

NATO ADAPTATION/ENLARGEMENT

Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia joined NATO on March 29, 2004 in Washington, DC. Secretary of State Colin Powell accepted ratification documents known as instruments of accession from the prime ministers of the seven nations, making their countries formally eligible to join the 55-year-old alliance. The United States is the depositary nation for the North Atlantic Treaty, which means that new members must submit their accession documents to a U.S. official.

Significance

The event marked an important step forward toward President Bush's goal of a Europe “whole, free, and at peace.” With the addition of the seven nations, nearly 40% of NATO's membership is comprised of former communist countries.

Invitation to Membership

In November 2002, at the Prague Summit, NATO leaders invited the seven nations to join the Alliance. The nations then were required to demonstrate that they could take on the new responsibilities and commitments of NATO membership. In May 2003, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution ratifying the NATO invitation and by February 2004, all 19 NATO allies had ratified similar resolutions.

Qualifying for Membership

The seven countries committed themselves to the shared values of freedom and democracy that are the foundation of the Alliance. The seven countries pursued rigorous political, economic and defense reforms. They already have contributed to NATO operations in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan.

The U.S. and its NATO Allies decided at the Prague Summit that the invitees were ready to join based on their individual accomplishments under NATO's Membership Action Plan (MAP) and their contributions to the Global War on Terrorism. The MAP was created in April 1999 to help candidate countries to prepare themselves for membership in the Alliance. Under MAP, aspirants adopt an Annual National Program (ANP) that sets objectives and specific benchmarks for reform that will strengthen their country's candidacy. The ANP reforms encompass a broad range of issues, including anti-cor-ruption measures, protections for classified information, and establishment of coherent National Military Strategies. Aspirants receive practical and technical support from NATO, which regularly assesses their progress.

The total cost for the last enlargement is estimated at $1.5 billion over ten years; of this, the U.S. share is $400 million. The present round of enlargement is expected to carry similar costs, with greater benefits, as the previous round in 1999. That round of enlargement reduced the U.S. share of NATO's budget and the costs of its Balkan operations.

Through their strong and unwavering support for the anti-terrorism coalition and assistance in bringing stability to Bosnia and Kosovo, current aspirants have already shown that they can make positive contributions to NATO operations. They have clearly demonstrated their willingness and ability to participate in the work of the Alliance. The three newest allies have sent troops to the Balkans, Afghanistan, and other peacekeeping operations. They have also made excellent progress in building their capabilities and thus their contribution to common defense. NATO is committed to an open door policy: any European democracy that is willing and able to contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area can become a member of the Alliance. Enlargement is not a new phenomenon but an ongoing process, as illustrated by previous successful rounds of enlargement: Turkey and Greece in 1952, Germany in 1955, Spain in 1982, and the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland in 1999. Those countries not selected will continue to participate in MAP and work towards future membership.

Adding to NATO's Security Capabilities

• Bulgaria: engineers and minesweepers;
• Romania: unmanned aerial vehicles and mountain troops;
• Slovakia: nuclear, biological and chemical defense units;
• Slovenia: mountain warfare troops;
• Estonia: military divers and mine countermeasures;
• Latvia: explosive ordnance disposal;
• Lithuania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Slovakia, and Slovenia will provide special operations forces.

NATO PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE

A U.S. initiative, Partnership for Peace (PFP) was launched by the January 1994 NATO summit to establish strong links between NATO, its new democratic partners in the former Soviet bloc, and some of Europe's traditionally neutral countries to enhance European security.

It provides a framework for enhanced political and military cooperation for joint multilateral activities, such as humanitarian assistance, peacekeeping, and crisis management and enables Partners to improve their interoperability with NATO. It enables PFP members to consult with NATO when faced with a direct threat to its security but does not extend NATO security guarantees. Participation in PFP does not guarantee entry into NATO, but it is the best preparation for states interested in becoming NATO members.

PFP's utility has been demonstrated by the success of the NATO peacekeeping operations in Bosnia (IFOR and SFOR), in which 13 PFP Partners have worked side by side with NATO Allies. There are 33 member countries: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Georgia, Hungary, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. Once a country has joined the PFP, it submits a Presentation Document to NATO explaining what resources it will contribute to PFP activities and the steps that it will take to meet PFP political goals, such as democratic control of the military. A unique Individual Partnership Program (IPP), is then agreed to with the alliance. IPPs set forth shared objectives, (for instance, establishing democratic control over military forces; developing transparency in defense planning and budgetary processes; developing interoperability with NATO forces) and list activities planned to meet those objectives.

Partners can assign personnel on a full-time basis to NATO Headquarters in Brussels and to the Partnership Coordination Cell (PCC) at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium. Legislation which would enable Partners to accredit ambassadors to NATO is pending in Brussels. Partners may participate in an optional Defense Planning and Review Process (PARP) designed to evaluate and enhance a partner nation's interoperability with NATO. Participating states work with NATO to develop interoperability objectives, which can be used to help refine IPPs.

CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE (CFE) TREATY

The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (or CFE Treaty), signed in Paris on November 19, 1990, by the 22 members of NATO and the former Warsaw Pact, is a landmark arms control agreement that established parity in major conventional forces/armaments between East and West from the Atlantic to the Urals. It provides an unprecedented basis for lasting European security and stability. The original CFE Treaty (which is of unlimited duration) entered into force in 1992. Following the demise of the Warsaw Pact and the enlargement of NATO in the 1990s, the then 30 CFE States Parties signed the Adaptation Agreement at the Istanbul OSCE Summit on 19 November 1999, to amend the CFE Treaty to take account of the evolving European geo-strategic environment.

The CFE Treaty covers the entire land territory of the States Parties in Europe from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains (ATTU). It thus excludes much of the territory of Russia and all the territory of the U.S. and Canada—all signatories of the original and Adapted Treaty. The conventional forces of all three countries that are stationed in Europe are subject to CFE limits. The 30 CFE States Parties are: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Luxembourg, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and United States. However, on JUly 14, 2007, Russia notified the other CFE signatories of its intended suspension of the treaty.

The original CFE Treaty set equal limits for East and West in the ATTU on key conventional armaments essential for conducting surprise attacks or initiating large-scale offensive operations. Those armaments/ equipment include: battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, and artillery pieces, as well as combat aircraft (except for naval air) and attack helicopters. In addition to limitations on the number of armaments in each category, the Treaty also provides for central zonal limits to prevent destabilizing force concentrations in Europe and for regional (“flank”) limits, which were modified by the Flank Agreement of May 1996. Whereas the original CFE Treaty established an East-West group structure for limiting NATO and Warsaw Pact conventional armaments, the Adapted Treaty provides for a system of national and territorial ceilings (the former limits the number of armaments each state may possess, while the latter limits the total number of Treaty-limited equipment present within a State Party's borders); an accession mechanism for new States Parties; enhanced verification and transparency regimes; and honoring current Treaty commitments pending entry into force of the Adapted Treaty. The Adapted Treaty will facilitate NATO enlargement and reinforce the territorial sovereignty of individual States Parties. The principal accomplishment of the CFE Treaty has been the large-scale reduction or destruction of conventional military equipment in the ATTU during the first 5 years the Treaty was in effect. By the end of the Treaty's reduction period in 1995, when equipment limits took effect, the 30 States Parties completed and verified by inspection the destruction or conversion of over 52,000 battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, artillery pieces, combat aircraft and attack helicopters. In addition, they have conducted/accepted over 4000 intrusive on-site inspections of military units/installations, and of specified areas.

ADRIATIC CHARTER

Secretary of State Colin Powell, together with his colleagues, Foreign Ministers Meta, Picula and Mitreva, signed the Adriatic Charter in Tirana, Albania, May 2, 2003. The Adriatic Charter, an initiative in the spirit of the 1998 U.S.- Baltic Charter, was proposed jointly by the Presidents of Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia to President Bush at the NATO Prague Summit in November 2002. President Bush welcomed the Adriatic initiative as a strong contribution toward his vision of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. The Charter builds on the achievements of the NATO Prague Summit by reinforcing continued U.S. support for the Alliance's “Open Door,” underscoring the goal of Albania's, Croatia's, and Macedonia's eventual full integration into NATO and other Euro-Atlantic institutions.

The Charter:

• Underlines Albania's, Croatia's, and Macedonia's dedication to strengthening their individual and cooperative efforts to intensify and hasten domestic reforms that enhance the security, prosperity and stability of the region.
• Notes the tremendous accomplishments already achieved by Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia on the path of Euro-Atlantic integration, outlines areas of continuing focus, and reiterates the intention of the United States to continue assisting the countries in implementing necessary reforms. Notes also that each aspirant country will be judged individually on its progress toward meeting standards for membership in Euro-Atlantic bodies.
• Reaffirms the parties’ shared political commitment to strengthen democratic institutions, civil society, rule of law, market economies, and NATO-compatible militaries; to fight corruption and crime; and to protect human rights and civil liberties for all individuals in Albania, Croatia, Macedonia and the other countries of southeast Europe.
• Emphasizes close bilateral, regional and multilateral political, defense, and economic cooperation between the partners, and with their neighbors, as benefiting all the countries of southeast Europe by enhancing stability and accelerating the region's integration into European and transatlantic institutions.

The Adriatic Charter members met in Brijuni Croatia in November 2004, along with representatives from Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and seven neighboring NATO countries to discuss regional cooperation.

SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS

Afghanistan

Afghanistan is NATO's highest political and operational priority. With its expansion into eastern Afghanistan on October 5, 2006, NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) is now responsible for providing security assistance throughout the entire country. ISAF's primary role is to support the Government of Afghanistan (GOA) in providing and maintaining a secure environment in order to facilitate reconstruction and development.

NATO's ISAF force in Afghanistan assumed security responsibility for all of Afghanistan on October 5, 2006. With NATO's expansion into the east, ISAF now has more than 43,000 soldiers from 40 nations. Of the approximately 20,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, approximately 12,000 are under ISAF command, mainly in Regional Command East, making the U.S. the largest single contributor to ISAF.

NATO is buttressing security support with development aid working through 25 ISAF Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) that assist local authorities in reconstruction and the maintenance of security throughout the country. There are 5 PRTs in the North (Kunduz, Mey-mana, Pol-e Khomri, Mazar-e-Sharif and Feyzabad); 4 in the West (Herat, Farah, Qala-e-Naw and Chaghcharan); 4 in the South (Kandahar, Lash-kar Gah, Tarin Kowt and Qalat) and 12 in the East (Bagram, Bamyan, Sharan, Ghazni, Gardez, Asadabad, Jalalabad, Panjshir, Mitharlam, Kowst Nurestan, and Wardak).

Securing and reconstructing Afghanistan is a long-term endeavor that will require sustained investment. NATO is working in partnership with the Government of Afghanistan, and closely with the UN, EU, and other international organizations for Afghanistan's long-term development and stability.

Bosnia

In Bosnia, NATO successfully completed its SFOR mission in December 2004. At the same time, the EU started its largest ESDP mission, Operation ALTHEA, in Bosnia, with nearly 7,000 EU troops deployed on the ground. The NATO Headquarters in Sarajevo remains in place to assist with defense reform and coordinate with the EU as well as continuing SFOR missions related to counter-terrorism and the hunt for Persons Indicted for War Crimes. Since the creation of NHQ Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina has made dramatic progress in restructuring its military, creating a single defense ministry with a unified, national budget and laying the ground work for the establishment of a multiethnic military. Bosnia joined NATO's Partnership for Peace in 2006 after receiving an invitation at the Riga Summit. NATO remains committed to providing assistance to the Bosnian armed forces and alliance members have generously contributed to the NATO South East Europe Trust Fund Initiative which assists the transition of redundant military personnel to civilian life.

Kosovo

More than 7 years after Operation Allied Force ended the Milosevic regime's policy of ethnic cleansing, NATO remains firmly engaged in Kosovo. The NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR) is the Alliance's largest military mission in the Balkans and second largest overall behind Afghanistan, with over 16,000 troops from more than 25 countries participating. In addition to providing security in Kosovo, KFOR supports the UN in policing and other civilian functions that are focused on rebuilding a civil society. Resolving Kosovo's status has been a hey concern of NATO. NATO participates in the Kosovo's status process through its membership in the Contact Group Plus and will remain committed to maintaining peace and stability in post-status Kosovo.

Following Kosovo's declaration of independence on February 17, 2008, NATO reaffirmed that KFOR shall remain in Kosovo on the basis of UN Security Resolution 1244, as agreed by Foreign Ministers in December 2007, unless the Security Council decides otherwise. The NATO-led Force will continue to cooperate closely with the population of Kosovo, the United Nations (UN), the European Union (EU) and other international actors wherever appropriate to help further develop a stable, democratic, multi-ethnic and peaceful Kosovo. NATO currently has approximately 15,900 KFOR troops deployed in Kosovo to help maintain security and stability for all citizens, irrespective of their ethnic origin.

Darfur

NATO is supporting to the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS), by providing strategic airlift, and training in command and control and operational planning.

Early in 2005, the African Union (AU) began significantly expanding its peacekeeping mission in Darfur in an attempt to halt the continuing violence in the region. On April 26, 2005, the African Union asked NATO to consider the possibility of providing logistical support to its operation in Darfur.

Less than one month later, NATO's North Atlantic Council agreed on initial military options for possible NATO support to the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS), which included support in the areas of: strategic airlift; training, for example in command and control and operational planning; and improvement of the AU mission's ability to use information in Darfur.

The first airlift flights began on July 1, 2005. By October 2005, NATO had airlifted almost 5,000 African Union peacekeepers into Darfur, significantly boosting the force on the ground. NATO has also trained several hundred AU officers in strategic-level planning and operational procedures, and provided support to a UN-led map exercise.

NATO provided additional lift to rotate AU peacekeepers into and out of Darfur throughout the first half of 2006.

NATO Allies agreed to develop options for continued and enhanced support to the African Union, in response to a phone request by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer on March 27, 2006.

The May 5, 2006 Darfur Peace Agreement raised hopes for a transition to peace in this conflict-ravaged region of Sudan. Following consultations between NATO and the AU, AU Commission Chairperson Alpha Oumar Konare on June 2, 2006 sent a letter to Secretary General de Hoop Schef-fer requesting additional assistance for AMIS including: certification of the troops that are earmarked for the mission; assisting the AU with lessons learned from AMIS; and supporting the AU in setting up a Joint Operations Center for AMIS.

NATO is considering possible support to the follow-on UN mission in Darfur.

Iraq

At the 2004 Istanbul Summit, NATO Heads of State and Government agreed to assist Iraq with the training of its security forces. In response to a request by the Iraqi Government, NATO has established a Training Mission in Iraq and is running a training centre for senior security and defense officials on the outskirts of Baghdad.

The aim of the Training Mission and the Joint Staff College at Ar-Rusta-miyah is to help Iraq build the capability of its Government to address the security needs of the Iraqi people. NATO is training and mentoring middle and senior level personnel from the Iraqi security forces in Iraq and outside of Iraq, at NATO schools and training centers. The Alliance also plays a role in coordinating offers of equipment and training from individual NATO and partner countries.

To date, approximately 2,500 mid-and senior-level officers have been trained under the auspices of NATO's Training Mission in Iraq and in NATO facilities in Europe. In addition to the training center, NATO members have contributed to equipping the Iraqi army. With the donation in November 2005 of seventy-seven tanks and four tank-recovery vehicles, the total of NATO donations to the Iraqi Armed Forces in 2005 was 100 million.

Russia

The establishment of the NATO-Russia Council at the Rome Summit on 28 May 2002 opened a new chapter in NATO-Russia relations. The Council brings together the 26 NATO Allies and Russia as equal partners in areas of common interest to identify and pursue opportunities for joint action in 9 priority areas. These are: combating terrorism, crisis management, non-proliferation, arms control, theater missile defense, search and rescue at sea, mil-mil cooperation and defense reform, civil emergency planning, and new threats and challenges.

Chaired by NATO's Secretary General, meetings of the NATO-Russia Council are held at least monthly at the level of ambassadors and military representatives; twice yearly at the level of foreign and defense ministers and chiefs of staff; and occasionally at summit level. There are currently some 21 subgroups meeting regularly at working level.

NRC accomplishments to date include implementation of an Action Plan on terrorism; two civil emergency planning exercises in Russia; work on developing a joint theater missile defense capability; ongoing development of capabilities to share military and civilian air pictures; reciprocal nuclear security exercises in Russia, the UK, and (shortly) U.S.; enhanced capabilities on mutual search and rescue at sea; regular political dialogue as well as exchanges of views on defense and security issues; and robust military-to-military cooperation, including three field training exercises to be held in 2006 and Russian naval participation in NATO's maritime interdiction effort Operation Active Endeavor.

The U.S. seeks to deepen this relationship by increasing the interoperability of our military forces and civilian personnel in order to more effectively face the common tasks ahead. We hope that Russia joins us in seeking to make the NRC a success and ensuring that NRC cooperation results in tangible progress in areas where our interests coincide.

Ukraine

The world's skies were made a little safer when the controlled destruction of 1000 Ukrainian man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) was completed on September 20, 2006 in northeast Ukraine, outside the city of Shostka. These weapons, deemed by Ukraine to be excess to its defense needs, were but the first installment in a 12-year weapons and munitions destruction project being undertaken by Ukraine and NATO in a NATO-Partnership for Peace Trust Fund initiative—the largest such multilateral destruction project of its kind.

The United States is the lead sponsor of the first three-year phase of this project to which it already has contributed over $3.64 million. 12 other countries and the European Union have pledged over 5.6 million (approximately $7.2 million). Ukraine is providing most of the operational funding and in-kind support. A total of approximately $27 million will be required from donors to complete the project. Additional contributions, including those from non-NATO members, will be welcomed.

In addition to the MANPADS that were destroyed, 15,000 tons of stockpiled excess and unstable munitions, including ammunition for automatic weapons, artillery shells, and mortar rounds, and 400,000 small arms and light weapons, are scheduled to be destroyed during the first phase. By the end of the twelve-year project, a total of 1.5 million small arms and light weapons, and 133,000 tons of munitions will have been safely destroyed.

The impetus for this extraordinary project is twofold. First, Ukraine has suffered several major explosions of unstable ordnance in some of its munitions depots. Controlled destruction of the remaining dangerous ordnance will reduce the public safety threat and health risk to Ukrainians who live near such depots. Second, the destruction of weapons and munitions that are no longer needed by Ukraine to defend itself will ensure that they are never obtained by illicit arms traffickers, criminals, or terrorists.

NATO

Last Updated: March 2007

Official Name:
North Atlantic Treaty Organization

Editor’s Note: The information in this article was compiled and edited from Fact Sheets and releases available in 2006 through the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs of the U.S. Department of State.

BACKGROUND

U.S.-NATO RELATIONS

NATO STRUCTURE

NORTH ATLANTIC COOPERATION COUNCIL

NATO ADAPTATION/ENLARGEMENT

NATO PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE

CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE (CFE) TREATY

ADRIATIC CHARTER

SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS

BACKGROUND

NATO, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is an international alliance of 26 countries of Europe and North America created to ensure the peace and security of the North Atlantic region. Signed April 4, 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty is NATO’s founding document that details the principles upon which NATO was established.

NATO was founded to fulfill its goal of safeguarding the freedom and security of its members by way of political and military means. NATO’s members consult together to address security issues of concern and work jointly to take whatever action is necessary to defend against threats. One principle that guides NATO is the policy that an attack against one member is considered an attack against all members. On September 12, 2001, this principle of collective defense was acted on after the terrorist attacks against the United States, when NATO invoked Article 5 of the NATO treaty, declaring the attacks to be an attack against all of the NATO member countries. All NATO decisions are made by the member countries on the basis of consensus. The North Atlantic Council, or NAC, is the main decision-making body in NATO, made up of permanent representatives from each member country which meets regularly in discussion.

The NAC also consults with Heads of Government, Foreign Ministers, and Defense Ministers and establishes committees to provide advice on military policy and strategy to NATO’s political leaders.

Key Events in NATO History

April 4, 1949: The North Atlantic Treaty, NATO’s founding document, was signed.

March 24, 1999: NATO began a 78-day air campaign against the military forces of Yugoslavia’s Slobodan Milosevic. Following the campaign, the Kosovo Force (KFOR), a NATO-led international peace-enforcement force, entered Kosovo to maintain security in Kosovo.

Sept. 12, 2001: NATO declared the terrorist attacks on the United States to be an attack against all NATO member countries within the terms of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.

May 28, 2002: The NATO-Russia Council was established at the NATO-Russia Summit, strengthening the commitment between NATO and Russia.

May 21, 2003: The NATO alliance agreed to support Poland in its leadership of a sector in the stabilization force in Iraq.

August 2003: NATO took over command and coordination of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). This is the first mission outside the Euro-Atlantic area in NATO’s history.

August 2004: NATO established a Training Implementation Mission in Iraq.

Member Countries

Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.

U.S.-NATO RELATIONS

On September 12, 2001, NATO took the historic action of invoking—for the first time—Article 5 of the NATO treaty. This Article embodies the principle of collective defense—that an attack on one member is an attack on all. The Alliance backed up this action by sending five AWACs aircraft and a detachment of 200 personnel to the United States in October 2001. These aircraft logged 3,000 hours patrolling American skies and protecting North American airspace. In addition, NATO ships patrolled the Eastern Mediterranean to keep terrorists from infiltrating into Europe. All NATO Allies have participated in either Operation Enduring Freedom, the military campaign against al Qaeda and the former Taliban regime, or in the current International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

U.S. security today requires us to look closely at NATO, which is already the strongest security Alliance in history, and find ways to make it even stronger. To confront and eliminate such global threats as terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, we must ally with countries that share our values and act effectively with us. Since the end of the Cold War, Europe’s newest democracies have proven themselves as able partners, whether securing stability in the Balkans or fighting terrorism in Afghanistan.

The enlargement of NATO will cement these benefits for the United States and its Allies, making the whole of NATO much stronger than the sum of the capabilities of individual members. NATO enlargement will help to enhance the political and economic stability for all countries in the Euro-Atlantic area. By helping Europe’s newer democracies as they strengthen good governance, rule of law, and human rights, NATO will also facilitate a better long-term environment for American trade and investment.

NATO STRUCTURE

North Atlantic Council

The NAC is the principal forum for consultation and cooperation between NATO member governments on all issues affecting their common security. Its decisions are based on consensus, with each member having an equal right to express its views. The NATO Secretary General is chair. The NAC meets at least twice a year in ministerial session. It also meets weekly at the level of Permanent Representatives, who hold ambassadorial rank.

North Atlantic Council/Defense Ministers (NAC/D)

The NAC/D deals with overall issues of defense and meets twice yearly when member countries are represented by their Defense Ministers.

Defense Planning Committee (DPC)

The DPC deals with defense planning and other issues related to NATO’s integrated military structure. It is composed of all countries except France (which withdrew from NATO’s integrated military structure in 1966). Like the NAC, it meets regularly at ambassadorial level and twice yearly with Defense Ministers, normally in conjunction with the NAC/D.

Nuclear Planning Group

This group has authority for nuclear matters. All countries except France participate. Iceland participates as an observer.

Military Committee

The highest military authority in the alliance; is composed of the chiefs of staff of each country. Iceland, which has no military forces, is represented by a civilian member. The Military Committee advises the NAC and the DPC on military measures necessary for the common defense and provides guidance to the NATO commanders.

Regional Commands

The strategic area covered by the North Atlantic Treaty is divided into two regional commands: Allied Command Europe and Allied Command Atlantic, with a regional planning group for North America. With the exception of France and Iceland, all countries assign forces to the integrated military command structure. The NATO Defense area covers the territories of member nations in North America, in the Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer, and in Europe, including Turkey. However, events occurring outside the area which affect the preservation of peace and security in the treaty area also may be considered by the NAC.

NORTH ATLANTIC COOPERATION COUNCIL

The North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) was established in November 1991 to conduct NATO’s outreach program to the former Warsaw Pact states.

The North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) joins the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies and the newly free and independent states of Central and Eastern Europe, the Baltics, and the former Soviet Union in a program of political security dialogue, partnership, and cooperation. Subjects discussed in regular meetings between allies and partner states include defense planning and budgeting, democratic concepts of civil-military relations, defense conversion, and scientific and environmental topics. Members also discuss current political issues of common concern. In this way, the NACC complements the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), NATO, the European Union, and the Council of Europe in building a Euro-Atlantic community of stable, democratic, and market-oriented societies from Vancouver to Vladivostok.

As the advent of glasnost and perestroika in the Soviet Union and the crumbling of communist control in Eastern Europe changed the nature of the European security challenge, NATO turned from a posture of confrontation with the East to one of dialogue and cooperation. The June 1990 Turnberry North Atlantic Council ministerial and July 1990 London NATO summit extended the hand of friendship to NATO’s former adversaries and called for the alliance to institute a liaison program with the Warsaw Pact states. The June 1991 Copenhagen North Atlantic Council ministerial developed this theme in its statement on “Partnership with the Countries of Central and Eastern Europe.”

In their October 3,1991, joint statement, Secretary of State Baker and German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher proposed the institutionalization of the NATO liaison program in a North Atlantic Cooperation Council. The following month, the Rome NATO summit formally established the NACC as a forum in which allies could offer their experience and expertise to partner countries on security and related issues.

In its first year, NACC developed a solid basis of cooperation and dialogue. The first NACC ministerial, held on December 20,1991, in Brussels, brought together representatives of the 16 NATO allies, the Baltic states, the U.S.S.R., Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania. Participants pledged to uphold CSCE principles, support arms control efforts, and work together in building a Europe whole and free.

The second NACC ministerial held on March 10,1992, in Brussels, admitted all the states of the former Soviet Union except Georgia (which joined the following month). Ministers adopted the first NACC work plan, which spelled out a program of intensified consultations and cooperative activities focused on security and related issues, including political, military, economic, scientific, and environmental subjects. Specific topics for cooperation included defense planning, conceptual approaches to arms control, democratic concepts of civilian-military relations, civil-military coordination of air- traffic management, defense conversion, and enhanced participation in NATO’s “Third Dimension” scientific and environmental programs. Ministers also pledged to cooperate in disseminating information about NATO in the partner countries and gave their support to the NACC’s ad hoc High Level Group charged with facilitating entry-into-force of the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty.

With the admission of Albania in June 1992 and the Czech-Slovak split in January 1993, membership in the NACC now stands at 38. Finland, Slovenia, and Sweden have attended recent ministerial meetings as observers.

A major step forward in NACC cooperation came at the December 1992 ministerial in Brussels. Ministers adopted a work plan for 1993 that included for the first time a provision for joint planning and training for peace-keeping Subsequently, the NACC established an Ad Hoc Group on Cooperation in Peace-keeping to coordinate activities in this area The NACC has welcomed the participation in Ad Hoc Group deliberations of three non-NACC states with extensive peace-keeping experience-Finland, Sweden, and Austria A representative from the OSCE also attends.

Building on the momentum of cooperation created by the NACC, NATO established in January 1994 a program within the framework of NACC called the Partnership for Peace (PFP). PFP activities complement other activities undertaken in the framework of the NACC and are designed to intensify political and military cooperation between the Alliance and members of the Partnership. The PFP is open to states participating in NACC and other OSCE states able and willing to contribute to the Partnership.

At their meeting in Brussels in December 1994, ministers reviewed progress on implementing PFP and held extensive consultations on regional issues. At the Noordwijk NAC in May 1995, the Secretary of State presented U.S. initiatives to “intensify the relationship between NATO and its partners,” including on ensuring democratic and civilian control of the military, widening the Partnership’s focus, and working more closely together on exercise planning.

The 1996 work plan, adopted by ministers at the December 6,1995, NACC Ministerial in Brussels, continues and expands NACC/PFP work on peace-keeping and other topics.

In its fifth year, NACC already has established itself as an important element in post-Cold War Europe’s security architecture. It will continue to develop as a complement to other European and trans-Atlantic organizations forging the links of a peaceful, democratic, and prosperous Euro-Atlantic community of nations.

NATO ADAPTATION/ENLARGEMENT

Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia joined NATO on March 29, 2004 in Washington, DC. Secretary of State Colin Powell accepted ratification documents known as instruments of accession from the prime ministers of the seven nations, making their countries formally eligible to join the 55-year-old alliance. The United States is the depositary nation for the North Atlantic Treaty, which means that new members must submit their accession documents to a U.S. official.

Significance

The event marked an important step forward toward President Bush’s goal of a Europe “whole, free, and at peace.” With the addition of the seven nations, nearly 40% of NATO’s membership is comprised of former communist countries.

Invitation to Membership

In November 2002, at the Prague Summit, NATO leaders invited the seven nations to join the Alliance. The nations then were required to demonstrate that they could take on the new responsibilities and commitments of NATO membership. In May 2003, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution ratifying the NATO invitation and by February 2004, all 19 NATO allies had ratified similar resolutions.

Qualifying for Membership

The seven countries committed themselves to the shared values of freedom and democracy that are the foundation of the Alliance. The seven countries pursued rigorous political, economic and defense reforms. They already have contributed to NATO operations in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan.

The U.S. and its NATO Allies decided at the Prague Summit that the invitees were ready to join based on their individual accomplishments under NATO’s Membership Action Plan (MAP) and their contributions to the Global War on Terrorism. The MAP was created in April 1999 to help candidate countries to prepare themselves for membership in the Alliance. Under MAP, aspirants adopt an Annual National Program (ANP) that sets objectives and specific benchmarks for reform that will strengthen their country’s candidacy. The ANP reforms encompass a broad range of issues, including anti-corruption measures, protections for classified information, and establishment of coherent National Military Strategies. Aspirants receive practical and technical support from NATO, which regularly assesses their progress.

The total cost for the last enlargement is estimated at $1.5 billion over ten years; of this, the U.S. share is $400 million. The present round of enlargement is expected to carry similar costs, with greater benefits, as the previous round in 1999. That round of enlargement reduced the U.S. share of NATO’s budget and the costs of its Balkan operations.

Through their strong and unwavering support for the anti-terrorism coalition and assistance in bringing stability to Bosnia and Kosovo, current aspirants have already shown that they can make positive contributions to NATO operations. They have clearly demonstrated their willingness and ability to participate in the work of the Alliance. The three newest allies have sent troops to the Balkans, Afghanistan, and other peacekeeping operations. They have also made excellent progress in building their capabilities and thus their contribution to common defense.

NATO is committed to an open door policy: any European democracy that is willing and able to contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area can become a member of the Alliance. Enlargement is not a new phenomenon but an ongoing process, as illustrated by previous successful rounds of enlargement: Turkey and Greece in 1952, Germany in 1955, Spain in 1982, and the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland in 1999. Those countries not selected will continue to participate in MAP and work towards future membership.

Adding to NATO’s Security Capabilities

• Bulgaria: engineers and minesweepers;
• Romania: unmanned aerial vehicles and mountain troops;
• Slovakia: nuclear, biological and chemical defense units;
• Slovenia: mountain warfare troops;
• Estonia: military divers and mine countermeasures;
• Latvia: explosive ordnance disposal;
• Lithuania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Slovakia, and Slovenia will provide special operations forces.

NATO PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE

A U.S. initiative, Partnership for Peace (PFP) was launched by the January 1994 NATO summit to establish strong links between NATO, its new democratic partners in the former Soviet bloc, and some of Europe’s traditionally neutral countries to enhance European security. It provides a framework for enhanced political and military cooperation for joint multilateral activities, such as humanitarian assistance, peacekeeping, and crisis management and enables Partners to improve their interoperability with NATO. It enables PFP members to consult with NATO when faced with a direct threat to its security but does not extend NATO security guarantees. Participation in PFP does not guarantee entry into NATO, but it is the best preparation for states interested in becoming NATO members.

PFP’s utility has been demonstrated by the success of the NATO peace-keeping operations in Bosnia (IFOR and SFOR), in which 13 PFP Partners have worked side by side with NATO Allies. Twenty-seven countries: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakh-stan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. Once a country has joined the PFP, it submits a Presentation Document to NATO explaining what resources it will contribute to PFP activities and the steps that it will take to meet PFP political goals, such as democratic control of the military. To date, all PFP countries except Switzerland have submitted Presentation Documents. A unique Individual Partnership Program (IPP), is then agreed to with the alliance. IPPs set forth shared objectives, (for instance, establishing democratic control over military forces; developing transparency in defense planning and budgetary processes; developing interoperability with NATO forces) and list activities planned to meet those objectives.

NATO has reached agreement on IPPs with all PFP Partners except Switzerland and Uzbekistan. Many Partners have submitted revised IPPs. Partners can assign personnel on a full-time basis to NATO Headquarters in Brussels and to the Partnership Coordination Cell (PCC) at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium. Legislation which would enable Partners to accredit ambassadors to NATO is pending in Brussels. Partners may participate in an optional Defense Planning and Review Process (PARP) designed to evaluate and enhance a partner nation’s interoperability with NATO. Participating states work with NATO to develop interoperability objectives, which can be used to help refine IPPs. As of February 1997, 15 partners—Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, and Ukraine—are participating in PARP.

PFP Joint Military Exercises

1994. Three joint military exercises were held, including “Cooperative Bridge” in Poland marking the first time NATO forces had joined with former adversaries on the territory of a former Warsaw Pact state.

1995. Ten major field, maritime, search and rescue, and command post exercises were held.

1996. More than 14 major PFP exercises in the areas of search and rescue, humanitarian assistance, and peacekeeping were held. Numerous seminars, workshops, and bilateral “in the spirit of PFP” exercises also were held.

1997. More than 25 major and “in the spirit of PFP” exercises are planned. NATO is considering expanding the scope of PFP activities to include peace enforcement and Partner participation in the new Combined Joint Task Force concept.

CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE (CFE) TREATY

The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (or CFE Treaty), signed in Paris on November 19, 1990, by the 22 members of NATO and the former Warsaw Pact, is a landmark arms control agreement that established parity in major conventional forces/armaments between East and West from the Atlantic to the Urals. It provides an unprecedented basis for lasting European security and stability. The original CFE Treaty (which is of unlimited duration) entered into force in 1992. Following the demise of the Warsaw Pact and the enlargement of NATO in the 1990s, the then 30 CFE States Parties signed the Adaptation Agreement at the Istanbul OSCE Summit on 19 November 1999, to amend the CFE Treaty to take account of the evolving European geo-strategic environment.

The CFE Treaty covers the entire land territory of the States Parties in Europe from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains (ATTU). It thus excludes much of the territory of Russia and all the territory of the U.S. and Canada—all signatories of the original and Adapted Treaty. The conventional forces of all three countries that are stationed in Europe are subject to CFE limits. The 30 CFE States Parties are: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Luxembourg, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and United States.

The original CFE Treaty set equal limits for East and West in the ATTU on key conventional armaments essential for conducting surprise attacks or initiating large-scale offensive operations. Those armaments/equipment include: battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, and artillery pieces, as well as combat aircraft (except for naval air) and attack helicopters. In addition to limitations on the number of armaments in each category, the Treaty also provides for central zonal limits to prevent destabilizing force concentrations in Europe and for regional (“flank”) limits, which were modified by the Flank Agreement of May 1996. Whereas the original CFE Treaty established an East-West group structure for limiting NATO and Warsaw Pact conventional armaments, the Adapted Treaty provides for a system of national and territorial ceilings (the former limits the number of armaments each state may possess, while the latter limits the total number of Treaty-limited equipment present within a State Party’s borders); an accession mechanism for new States Parties; enhanced verification and transparency regimes; and honoring current Treaty commitments pending entry into force of the Adapted Treaty. The Adapted Treaty will facilitate NATO enlargement and reinforce the territorial sovereignty of individual States Parties.

The principal accomplishment of the CFE Treaty has been the large-scale reduction or destruction of conventional military equipment in the ATTU during the first 5 years the Treaty was in effect. By the end of the Treaty’s reduction period in 1995, when equipment limits took effect, the 30 States Parties completed and verified by inspection the destruction or conversion of over 52,000 battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, artillery pieces, combat aircraft and attack helicopters. In addition, they have conducted/accepted over 4000 intrusive on-site inspections of military units/installations, and of specified areas.

Ratification by NATO Allies of the Adapted Treaty is awaiting Russia’s compliance with adapted CFE flank provisions and continued fulfillment of its Istanbul summit commitments regarding withdrawals of Russian forces from Georgia and Moldova. The Adapted Treaty will enter into force 10 days after instruments of ratification have been deposited by all States Parties.

ADRIATIC CHARTER

Secretary of State Colin Powell, together with his colleagues, Foreign Ministers Meta, Picula and Mitreva, signed the Adriatic Charter in Tirana, Albania, May 2, 2003. The Adriatic Charter, an initiative in the spirit of the 1998 U.S.-Baltic Charter, was proposed jointly by the Presidents of Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia to President Bush at the NATO Prague Summit in November 2002. President Bush welcomed the Adriatic initiative as a strong contribution toward his vision of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. The Charter builds on the achievements of the NATO Prague Summit by reinforcing continued U.S. support for the Alliance’s “Open Door,” underscoring the goal of Albania’s, Croatia’s, and Macedonia’s eventual full integration into NATO and other Euro-Atlantic institutions.

The Charter

• Underlines Albania’s, Croatia’s, and Macedonia’s dedication to strengthening their individual and cooperative efforts to intensify and hasten domestic reforms that enhance the security, prosperity and stability of the region.
• Notes the tremendous accomplishments already achieved by Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia on the path of Euro-Atlantic integration, outlines areas of continuing focus, and reiterates the intention of the United States to continue assisting the countries in implementing necessary reforms. Notes also that each aspirant country will be judged individually on its progress toward meeting standards for membership in Euro-Atlantic bodies.
• Reaffirms the parties’shared political commitment to strengthen democratic institutions, civil society, rule of law, market economies, and NATO-compatible militaries; to fight corruption and crime; and to protect human rights and civil liberties for all individuals in Albania, Croatia, Macedonia and the other countries of southeast Europe.
• Emphasizes close bilateral, regional and multilateral political, defense, and economic cooperation between the partners, and with their neighbors, as benefiting all the countries of southeast Europe by enhancing stability and accelerating the region’s integration into European and transatlantic institutions.

The Adriatic Charter members most recently met in Brijuni Croatia in November 2004, along with representatives from Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and seven neighboring NATO countries to discuss regional cooperation. The Adriatic Charter members are currently in the planning stage to send a joint medical team to ISAF in Afghanistan in 2005.

SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS

Afghanistan

Afghanistan is NATO’s highest political and operational priority. With its expansion into eastern Afghanistan on October 5, 2006, NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) is now responsible for providing security assistance throughout the entire country. ISAF’s primary role is to support the Government of Afghanistan (GOA) in providing and maintaining a secure environment in order to facilitate reconstruction and development.

NATO’s ISAF force in Afghanistan, commanded by UK Gen. David Richards, assumed security responsibility for all of Afghanistan on October 5, 2006. With NATO’s expansion into the east, ISAF now has more than 31,000 soldiers from 37 nations. Of the approximately 20,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, approximately 12,000 are under ISAF command, mainly in Regional Command East, making the U.S. the largest single contributor to ISAF.

NATO is buttressing security support with development aid working through 25 ISAF Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) that assist local authorities in reconstruction and the maintenance of security throughout the country. There are 5 PRTs in the North (Kunduz, Meymana, Pol-e Khomri, Mazar-e-Sharif and Feyzabad); 4 in the West (Herat, Farah, Qala-e-Naw and Chaghcharan); 4 in the South (Kandahar, Lash-kar Gah, Tarin Kowt and Qalat) and 12 in the East (Bagram, Bamyan, Sharan, Ghazni, Gardez, Asadabad, Jalalabad, Panjshir, Mitharlam, Kowst Nurestan, and Wardak).

The U.S. currently leads 12 PRTs under ISAF: 10 in the East, 1 in the West and a joint PRT with Romania in the South.

Securing and reconstructing Afghanistan is a long-term endeavor that will require sustained investment. NATO is working in partnership with the Government of Afghanistan, and closely with the UN, EU, and other international organizations for Afghanistan’s long-term development and stability.

Bosnia

In Bosnia, NATO successfully completed its SFOR mission in December 2004. At the same time, the EU started its largest ESDP mission, Operation ALTHEA, in Bosnia, with nearly 7,000 EU troops deployed on the ground. The NATO Headquarters in Sarajevo remains in place to assist with defense reform and coordinate with the EU as well as continuing SFOR missions related to counterterrorism and the hunt for Persons Indicted for War Crimes. Since the creation of NHQ Sarajevo, BosniaHerzegovina has made dramatic progress in restructuring its military, creating a single defense ministry with a unified, national budget and laying the ground work for the establishment of a multiethnic military. Bosnia joined NATO’s Partnership for Peace in 2006 after receiving an invitation at the Riga Summit. NATO remains committed to providing assistance to the Bosnian armed forces and alliance members have generously contributed to the NATO South East Europe Trust Fund Initiative which assists the transition of redundant military personnel to civilian life.

Kosovo

More than 7 years after Operation Allied Force ended the Milosevic regime’s policy of ethnic cleansing, NATO remains firmly engaged in Kosovo. The NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR) is the Alliance’s largest military mission in the Balkans and second largest overall behind Afghanistan, with over 16,000 troops from more than 25 countries participating. In addition to providing security in Kosovo, KFOR supports the UN in policing and other civilian functions that are focused on rebuilding a civil society. UN Special Envoy Ahtisaari will present his proposal for resolving Kosovo’s status following Serbia’s January 21, 2007 parliamentary elections at which time Kosovo will enter a new phase of its development. NATO participates in the Status process through its membership in the Contact Group Plus and will remain committed to maintaining peace and stability in post-status Kosovo.

Darfur

NATO is supporting to the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS), by providing strategic airlift, and training in command and control and operational planning.

Early in 2005, the African Union (AU) began significantly expanding its peacekeeping mission in Darfur in an attempt to halt the continuing violence in the region. On April 26, 2005, the African Union asked NATO to consider the possibility of providing logistical support to its operation in Darfur.

Less than one month later, NATO’s North Atlantic Council agreed on initial military options for possible NATO support to the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS), which included support in the areas of: strategic airlift; training, for example in command and control and operational planning; and improvement of the AU mission’s ability to use information in Darfur.

The first airlift flights began on July 1, 2005. By October 2005, NATO had airlifted almost 5,000 African Union peacekeepers into Darfur, significantly boosting the force on the ground. NATO has also trained several hundred AU officers in strategic-level planning and operational procedures, and provided support to a UNled map exercise.

NATO provided additional lift to rotate AU peacekeepers into and out of Darfur throughout the first half of 2006.

NATO Allies agreed to develop options for continued and enhanced support to the African Union, in response to a phone request by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer on March 27, 2006.

The May 5, 2006 Darfur Peace Agreement raised hopes for a transition to peace in this conflict-ravaged region of Sudan.

Following consultations between NATO and the AU, AU Commission Chairperson Alpha Oumar Konare on June 2, 2006 sent a letter to Secretary General de Hoop Scheffer requesting additional assistance for AMIS including: certification of the troops that are earmarked for the mission; assisting the AU with lessons learned from AMIS; and supporting the AU in setting up a Joint Operations Center for AMIS.

NATO is considering possible support to the follow-on UN mission in Darfur.

Iraq

At the 2004 Istanbul Summit, NATO Heads of State and Government agreed to assist Iraq with the training of its security forces. In response to a request by the Iraqi Government, NATO has established a Training Mission in Iraq and is running a training centre for senior security and defense officials on the outskirts of Baghdad.

The aim of the Training Mission and the Joint Staff College at Ar-Rustamiyah is to help Iraq build the capability of its Government to address the security needs of the Iraqi people.

NATO is training and mentoring middle and senior level personnel from the Iraqi security forces in Iraq and outside of Iraq, at NATO schools and training centers. The Alliance also plays a role in coordinating offers of equipment and training from individual NATO and partner countries.

To date, approximately 2,500 midand senior-level officers have been trained under the auspices of NATO’s Training Mission in Iraq and in NATO facilities in Europe. In addition to the training center, NATO members have contributed to equipping the Iraqi army. With the donation in November 2005 of seventy-seven tanks and four tank-recovery vehicles, the total of NATO donations to the Iraqi Armed Forces in 2005 was 100 million.

Russia

The establishment of the NATO-Russia Council at the Rome Summit on 28 May 2002 opened a new chapter in NATO-Russia relations. The Council brings together the 26 NATO Allies and Russia as equal partners in areas of common interest to identify and pursue opportunities for joint action in 9 priority areas. These are: combating terrorism, crisis management, non-proliferation, arms control, theater missile defense, search and rescue at sea, mil-mil cooperation and defense reform, civil emergency planning, and new threats and challenges.

Chaired by NATO’s Secretary General, meetings of the NATO-Russia Council are held at least monthly at the level of ambassadors and military representatives; twice yearly at the level of foreign and defense ministers and chiefs of staff; and occasionally at summit level. There are currently some 21 subgroups meeting regularly at working level.

NRC accomplishments to date include implementation of an Action Plan on terrorism; two civil emergency planning exercises in Russia; work on developing a joint theater missile defense capability; ongoing development of capabilities to share military and civilian air pictures; reciprocal nuclear security exercises in Russia, the UK, and (shortly) U.S.; enhanced capabilities on mutual search and rescue at sea; regular political dialogue as well as exchanges of views on defense and security issues; and robust military-to-military cooperation, including three field training exercises to be held in 2006 and Russian naval participation in NATO’s maritime interdiction effort Operation Active Endeavor.

The U.S. seeks to deepen this relationship by increasing the interoperability of our military forces and civilian personnel in order to more effectively face the common tasks ahead. We hope that Russia joins us in seeking to make the NRC a success and ensuring that NRC cooperation results in tangible progress in areas where our interests coincide.

Ukraine

The world’s skies were made a little safer when the controlled destruction of 1000 Ukrainian man-portable air defense systems (MANPADS) was completed on September 20, 2006 in northeast Ukraine, outside the city of Shostka. These weapons, deemed by Ukraine to be excess to its defense needs, were but the first installment in a 12-year weapons and munitions destruction project being undertaken by Ukraine and NATO in a NATO-Partnership for Peace Trust Fund initiative—the largest such multilateral destruction project of its kind.

The United States is the lead sponsor of the first three-year phase of this project to which it already has contributed over $3.64 million. 12 other countries and the European Union have pledged over 5.6 million (approximately $7.2 million). Ukraine is providing most of the operational funding and in-kind support. A total of approximately $27 million will be required from donors to complete the project. Additional contributions, including those from non-NATO members, will be welcomed.

In addition to the MANPADS that were destroyed, 15,000 tons of stockpiled excess and unstable munitions, including ammunition for automatic weapons, artillery shells, and mortar rounds, and 400,000 small arms and light weapons, are scheduled to be destroyed during the first phase. By the end of the twelve-year project, a total of 1.5 million small arms and light weapons, and 133,000 tons of munitions will have been safely destroyed.

The impetus for this extraordinary project is twofold. First, Ukraine has suffered several major explosions of unstable ordnance in some of its munitions depots. Controlled destruction of the remaining dangerous ordnance will reduce the public safety threat and health risk to Ukrainians who live near such depots. Second, the destruction of weapons and munitions that are no longer needed by Ukraine to defend itself will ensure that they are never obtained by illicit arms traffickers, criminals, or terrorists.

NATO

Last Updated March 2006

Official Name:
North Atlantic Treaty Organization

Editor's Note: The information in this article was compiled and edited from 1997, 2002–2006 Fact Sheets made available through the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs of the U.S. Department of State.

BACKGROUND

NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is an international security alliance designed to ensure the peace and security of the North Atlantic region. It was created on April 4, 1949, with the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty, NATO's founding document. NATO currently has 19 members in Europe and North America, including the United States.

NATO was founded in order to provide a security structure against the threat of the Soviet Union for its 12 founding members; Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, United Kingdom, and the United States. In addition, NATO's European members wanted to ensure that the United States remained involved in European security. Over the past 53 years, NATO has enlarged four times. Greece and Turkey joined in 1952; the Federal Republic of Germany joined in 1955; Spain joined in 1982; and Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined in 1999. Seven nations were invited to join NATO at the Prague Summit in November, 2002, and their formal accession is pending ratification by the 19 current NATO members.

NATO is based on the principle of "collective defense," which means that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all members. The North Atlantic Treaty also provides for formal consultations among all members if any one feels that its "territorial integrity, political independence or security" is threatened.

Decisions in NATO are made by consensus, meaning that every decision is mutually agreed among all of its members and represents the expression of their collective will. Consensus is reached through regular consultations and coordination of Alliance members. Since every member preserves its full independence and sovereignty, no decision may be made by NATO against the will of one of its members. However, NATO cannot prevent one of its members from taking individual action.

The main decision-making body in NATO is the North Atlantic Council (NAC), which meets at least once a week and is comprised of the permanent representatives (Ambassadors) from each of its members. The current U.S. Ambassador to NATO is R. Nicholas Burns, a career diplomat in the U.S. Foreign Service.

In addition, the NAC also meets at different levels - with Heads of Government, Foreign Ministers, or Defense Ministers. The NAC establishes subsidiary groups and committees that provide advice on military policy and strategy to NATO's political leaders.

NATO's first major peacekeeping activity began in late 1995 when it led the Implementation Force (IFOR) to secure the Dayton Peace Agreement, thereby ending five years of civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The current Stabilization Force (SFOR) succeeded IFOR on December 20, 1996.

NATO's most significant military operation to date took place in Kosovo. On March 24, 1999, NATO began a 78-day air campaign against the military forces of former Yugoslavia's Slobodan Milosevic. Following the campaign, the Kosovo Force (KFOR), a NATO-led international peace-enforcement force, entered Kosovo. KFOR's objectives are to maintain security in Kosovo, monitor and enforce compliance with the agreements that ended the conflict, and support the UN Mission in Kosovo.

U.S.-NATO RELATIONS

On September 12, 2001, NATO took the historic action of invoking - for the first time - Article 5 of the NATO treaty. This Article embodies the principle of collective defense - that an attack on one member is an attack on all. The Alliance backed up this action by sending five AWACs aircraft and a detachment of 200 personnel to the United States in October 2001. These aircraft logged 3,000 hours patrolling American skies and protecting North American airspace. In addition, NATO ships patrolled the Eastern Mediterranean to keep terrorists from infiltrating into Europe. All NATO Allies have participated in either Operation Enduring Freedom, the military campaign against al Qaeda and the former Taliban regime, or in the current International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

U.S. security today requires us to look closely at NATO, which is already the strongest security Alliance in history, and find ways to make it even stronger. To confront and eliminate such global threats as terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, we must ally with countries that share our values and act effectively with us. Since the end of the Cold War, Europe's newest democracies have proven themselves as able partners, whether securing stability in the Balkans or fighting terrorism in Afghanistan. The enlargement of NATO will cement these benefits for the United States and its Allies, making the whole of NATO much stronger than the sum of the capabilities of individual members. NATO enlargement will help to enhance the political and economic stability for all countries in the Euro-Atlantic area. By helping Europe's newer democracies as they strengthen good governance, rule of law, and human rights, NATO will also facilitate a better long-term environment for American trade and investment.

NATO STRUCTURE

North Atlantic Council

The NAC is the principal forum for consultation and cooperation between NATO member governments on all issues affecting their common security. Its decisions are based on consensus, with each member having an equal right to express its views. The NATO Secretary General is chair. The NAC meets at least twice a year in ministerial session. It also meets weekly at the level of Permanent Representatives, who hold ambassadorial rank.

North Atlantic Council/Defense Ministers (NAC/D)

The NAC/D deals with overall issues of defense and meets twice yearly when member countries are represented by their Defense Ministers.

Defense Planning Committee (DPC)

The DPC deals with defense planning and other issues related to NATO's integrated military structure. It is composed of all countries except France (which withdrew from NATO's integrated military structure in 1966). Like the NAC, it meets regularly at ambassadorial level and twice yearly with Defense Ministers, normally in conjunction with the NAC/D.

Nuclear Planning Group

This group has authority for nuclear matters. All countries except France participate. Iceland participates as an observer.

Military Committee

The highest military authority in the alliance; is composed of the chiefs of staff of each country. Iceland, which has no military forces, is represented by a civilian member. The Military Committee advises the NAC and the DPC on military measures necessary for the common defense and provides guidance to the NATO commanders.

Regional Commands

The strategic area covered by the North Atlantic Treaty is divided into two regional commands: Allied Command Europe and Allied Command Atlantic, with a regional planning group for North America. With the exception of France and Iceland, all countries assign forces to the integrated military command structure. The NATO Defense area covers the territories of member nations in North America, in the Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer, and in Europe, including Turkey. However, events occurring outside the area which affect the preservation of peace and security in the treaty area also may be considered by the NAC.

NORTH ATLANTIC COOPERATION COUNCIL

The North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) was established in November 1991 to conduct NATO's outreach program to the former Warsaw Pact states.

The North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) joins the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies and the newly free and independent states of Central and Eastern Europe, the Baltics, and the former Soviet Union in a program of political security dialogue, partnership, and cooperation. Subjects discussed in regular meetings between allies and partner states include defense planning and budgeting, democratic concepts of civil-military relations, defense conversion, and scientific and environmental topics. Members also discuss current political issues of common concern. In this way, the NACC complements the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), NATO, the European Union, and the Council of Europe in building a Euro-Atlantic community of stable, democratic, and market-oriented societies from Vancouver to Vladivostok.

As the advent of glasnost and perestroika in the Soviet Union and the crumbling of communist control in Eastern Europe changed the nature of the European security challenge, NATO turned from a posture of confrontation with the East to one of dialogue and cooperation. The June 1990 Turnberry North Atlantic Council ministerial and July 1990 London NATO summit extended the hand of friendship to NATO's former adversaries and called for the alliance to institute a liaison program with the Warsaw Pact states. The June 1991 Copenhagen North Atlantic Council ministerial developed this theme in its statement on "Partnership with the Countries of Central and Eastern Europe."

In their October 3,1991, joint statement, Secretary of State Baker and German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher proposed the institutionalization of the NATO liaison program in a North Atlantic Cooperation Council. The following month, the Rome NATO summit formally established the NACC as a forum in which allies could offer their experience and expertise to partner countries on security and related issues.

In its first year, NACC developed a solid basis of cooperation and dialogue. The first NACC ministerial, held on December 20,1991, in Brussels, brought together representatives of the 16 NATO allies, the Baltic states, the U.S.S.R., Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania. Participants pledged to uphold CSCE principles, support arms control efforts, and work together in building a Europe whole and free.

The second NACC ministerial held on March 10,1992, in Brussels, admitted all the states of the former Soviet Union except Georgia (which joined the following month). Ministers adopted the first NACC work plan, which spelled out a program of intensified consultations and cooperative activities focused on security and related issues, including political, military, economic, scientific, and environmental subjects. Specific topics for cooperation included defense planning, conceptual approaches to arms control, democratic concepts of civilian-military relations, civil-military coordination of air-traffic management, defense conversion, and enhanced participation in NATO's "Third Dimension" scientific and environmental programs. Ministers also pledged to cooperate in disseminating information about NATO in the partner countries and gave their support to the NACC's ad hoc High Level Group charged with facilitating entry-into-force of the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty.

With the admission of Albania in June 1992 and the Czech-Slovak split in January 1993, membership in the NACC now stands at 38. Finland, Slovenia, and Sweden have attended recent ministerial meetings as observers.

A major step forward in NACC cooperation came at the December 1992 ministerial in Brussels. Ministers adopted a work plan for 1993 that included for the first time a provision for joint planning and training for peace-keeping Subsequently, the NACC established an Ad Hoc Group on Cooperation in Peace-keeping to coordinate activities in this area The NACC has welcomed the participation in Ad Hoc Group deliberations of three non-NACC states with extensive peace-keeping experience-Finland, Sweden, and Austria A representative from the OSCE also attends.

Building on the momentum of cooperation created by the NACC, NATO established in January 1994 a program within the framework of NACC called the Partnership for Peace (PFP). PFP activities complement other activities undertaken in the framework of the NACC and are designed to intensify political and military cooperation between the Alliance and members of the Partnership. The PFP is open to states participating in NACC and other OSCE states able and willing to contribute to the Partnership.

At their meeting in Brussels in December 1994, ministers reviewed progress on implementing PFP and held extensive consultations on regional issues. At the Noordwijk NAC in May 1995, the Secretary of State presented U.S. initiatives to "intensify the relationship between NATO and its partners," including on ensuring democratic and civilian control of the military, widening the Partnership's focus, and working more closely together on exercise planning.

The 1996 work plan, adopted by ministers at the December 6,1995, NACC Ministerial in Brussels, continues and expands NACC/PFP work on peace-keeping and other topics.

In its fifth year, NACC already has established itself as an important element in post-Cold War Europe's security architecture. It will continue to develop as a complement to other European and trans-Atlantic organizations forging the links of a peaceful, democratic, and prosperous Euro-Atlantic community of nations.

NATO ADAPTATION/ENLARGEMENT

Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia joined NATO on March 29, 2004 in Washington, DC. Secretary of State Colin Powell accepted ratification documents known as instruments of accession from the prime ministers of the seven nations, making their countries formally eligible to join the 55-year-old alliance. The United States is the depositary nation for the North Atlantic Treaty, which means that new members must submit their accession documents to a U.S. official.

Significance

The event marked an important step forward toward President Bush's goal of a Europe "whole, free, and at peace." With the addition of the seven nations, nearly 40% of NATO's membership is comprised of former communist countries.

Invitation to Membership

In November 2002, at the Prague Summit, NATO leaders invited the seven nations to join the Alliance. The nations then were required to demonstrate that they could take on the new responsibilities and commitments of NATO membership.

In May 2003, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution ratifying the NATO invitation and by February 2004, all 19 NATO allies had ratified similar resolutions.

Qualifying for Membership

The seven countries committed themselves to the shared values of freedom and democracy that are the foundation of the Alliance. The seven countries pursued rigorous political, economic and defense reforms. They already have contributed to NATO operations in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan.

The U.S. and its NATO Allies decided at the Prague Summit that the invitees were ready to join based on their individual accomplishments under NATO's Membership Action Plan (MAP) and their contributions to the Global War on Terrorism. The MAP was created in April 1999 to help candidate countries to prepare themselves for membership in the Alliance. Under MAP, aspirants adopt an Annual National Program (ANP) that sets objectives and specific benchmarks for reform that will strengthen their country's candidacy. The ANP reforms encompass a broad range of issues, including anti-corruption measures, protections for classified information, and establishment of coherent National Military Strategies. Aspirants receive practical and technical support from NATO, which regularly assesses their progress.

The total cost for the last enlargement is estimated at $1.5 billion over ten years; of this, the U.S. share is $400 million. The present round of enlargement is expected to carry similar costs, with greater benefits, as the previous round in 1999. That round of enlargement reduced the U.S. share of NATO's budget and the costs of its Balkan operations. Through their strong and unwavering support for the anti-terrorism coalition and assistance in bringing stability to Bosnia and Kosovo, current aspirants have already shown that they can make positive contributions to NATO operations. They have clearly demonstrated their willingness and ability to participate in the work of the Alliance. The three newest allies have sent troops to the Balkans, Afghanistan, and other peacekeeping operations. They have also made excellent progress in building their capabilities and thus their contribution to common defense.

NATO is committed to an open door policy: any European democracy that is willing and able to contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area can become a member of the Alliance. Enlargement is not a new phenomenon but an ongoing process, as illustrated by previous successful rounds of enlargement: Turkey and Greece in 1952, Germany in 1955, Spain in 1982, and the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland in 1999. Those countries not selected will continue to participate in MAP and work towards future membership.

Adding to NATO's Security Capabilities

• Bulgaria: engineers and minesweepers;
• Romania: unmanned aerial vehicles and mountain troops;
• Slovakia: nuclear, biological and chemical defense units;
• Slovenia: mountain warfare troops;
• Estonia: military divers and mine countermeasures;
• Latvia: explosive ordnance disposal;
• Lithuania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Slovakia, and Slovenia will provide special operations forces.

NATO PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE

A U.S. initiative, Partnership for Peace (PFP) was launched by the January 1994 NATO summit to establish strong links between NATO, its new democratic partners in the former Soviet bloc, and some of Europe's traditionally neutral countries to enhance European security.

It provides a framework for enhanced political and military cooperation for joint multilateral activities, such as humanitarian assistance, peacekeeping, and crisis management and enables Partners to improve their interoperability with NATO.

It enables PFP members to consult with NATO when faced with a direct threat to its security but does not extend NATO security guarantees. Participation in PFP does not guarantee entry into NATO, but it is the best preparation for states interested in becoming NATO members.

PFP's utility has been demonstrated by the success of the NATO peace-keeping operations in Bosnia (IFOR and SFOR), in which 13 PFP Partners have worked side by side with NATO Allies.

Twenty-seven countries: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.

Once a country has joined the PFP, it submits a Presentation Document to NATO explaining what resources it will contribute to PFP activities and the steps that it will take to meet PFP political goals, such as democratic control of the military. To date, all PFP countries except Switzerland have submitted Presentation Documents.

A unique Individual Partnership Program (IPP), is then agreed to with the alliance. IPPs set forth shared objectives, (for instance, establishing democratic control over military forces; developing transparency in defense planning and budgetary processes; developing interoperability with NATO forces) and list activities planned to meet those objectives.

NATO has reached agreement on IPPs with all PFP Partners except Switzerland and Uzbekistan. Many Partners have submitted revised IPPs.

Partners can assign personnel on a full-time basis to NATO Headquarters in Brussels and to the Partnership Coordination Cell (PCC) at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium. Legislation which would enable Partners to accredit ambassadors to NATO is pending in Brussels.

Partners may participate in an optional Defense Planning and Review Process (PARP) designed to evaluate and enhance a partner nation's interoperability with NATO. Participating states work with NATO to develop interoperability objectives, which can be used to help refine IPPs. As of February 1997, 15 partners—Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, and Ukraine—are participating in PARP.

PFP Joint Military Exercises

1994. Three joint military exercises were held, including "Cooperative Bridge" in Poland marking the first time NATO forces had joined with former adversaries on the territory of a former Warsaw Pact state.

1995. Ten major field, maritime, search and rescue, and command post exercises were held.

1996. More than 14 major PFP exercises in the areas of search and rescue, humanitarian assistance, and peacekeeping were held. Numerous seminars, workshops, and bilateral "in the spirit of PFP" exercises also were held.

1997. More than 25 major and "in the spirit of PFP" exercises are planned. NATO is considering expanding the scope of PFP activities to include peace enforcement and Partner participation in the new Combined Joint Task Force concept.

CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE (CFE) TREATY

The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (or CFE Treaty), signed in Paris on November 19, 1990, by the 22 members of NATO and the former Warsaw Pact, is a landmark arms control agreement that established parity in major conventional forces/armaments between East and West from the Atlantic to the Urals. It provides an unprecedented basis for lasting European security and stability. The original CFE Treaty (which is of unlimited duration) entered into force in 1992. Following the demise of the Warsaw Pact and the enlargement of NATO in the 1990s, the then 30 CFE States Parties signed the Adaptation Agreement at the Istanbul OSCE Summit on 19 November 1999, to amend the CFE Treaty to take account of the evolving European geo-strategic environment.

The CFE Treaty covers the entire land territory of the States Parties in Europe from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains (ATTU). It thus excludes much of the territory of Russia and all the territory of the U.S. and Canada - all signatories of the original and Adapted Treaty. The conventional forces of all three countries that are stationed in Europe are subject to CFE limits. The 30 CFE States Parties are: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Luxembourg, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and United States.

The original CFE Treaty set equal limits for East and West in the ATTU on key conventional armaments essential for conducting surprise attacks or initiating large-scale offensive operations. Those armaments/equipment include: battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, and artillery pieces, as well as combat aircraft (except for naval air) and attack helicopters. In addition to limitations on the number of armaments in each category, the Treaty also provides for central zonal limits to prevent destabilizing force concentrations in Europe and for regional ("flank") limits, which were modified by the Flank Agreement of May 1996. Whereas the original CFE Treaty established an East-West group structure for limiting NATO and Warsaw Pact conventional armaments, the Adapted Treaty provides for a system of national and territorial ceilings (the former limits the number of armaments each state may possess, while the latter limits the total number of Treaty-limited equipment present within a State Party's borders); an accession mechanism for new States Parties; enhanced verification and transparency regimes; and honoring current Treaty commitments pending entry into force of the Adapted Treaty. The Adapted Treaty will facilitate NATO enlargement and reinforce the territorial sovereignty of individual States Parties.

The principal accomplishment of the CFE Treaty has been the large-scale reduction or destruction of conventional military equipment in the ATTU during the first 5 years the Treaty was in effect. By the end of the Treaty's reduction period in 1995, when equipment limits took effect, the 30 States Parties completed and verified by inspection the destruction or conversion of over 52,000 battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, artillery pieces, combat aircraft and attack helicopters. In addition, they have conducted/accepted over 4000 intrusive on-site inspections of military units/installations, and of specified areas.

Ratification by NATO Allies of the Adapted Treaty is awaiting Russia's compliance with adapted CFE flank provisions and continued fulfillment of its Istanbul summit commitments regarding withdrawals of Russian forces from Georgia and Moldova. The Adapted Treaty will enter into force 10 days after instruments of ratification have been deposited by all States Parties.

ADRIATIC CHARTER

Secretary of State Colin Powell, together with his colleagues, Foreign Ministers Meta, Picula and Mitreva, signed the Adriatic Charter in Tirana, Albania, May 2, 2003. The Adriatic Charter, an initiative in the spirit of the 1998 U.S.-Baltic Charter, was proposed jointly by the Presidents of Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia to President Bush at the NATO Prague Summit in November 2002. President Bush welcomed the Adriatic initiative as a strong contribution toward his vision of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. The Charter builds on the achievements of the NATO Prague Summit by reinforcing continued U.S. support for the Alliance's "Open Door," underscoring the goal of Albania's, Croatia's, and Macedonia's eventual full integration into NATO and other Euro-Atlantic institutions.

The Charter:

• Underlines Albania's, Croatia's, and Macedonia's dedication to strengthening their individual and cooperative efforts to intensify and hasten domestic reforms that enhance the security, prosperity and stability of the region.
• Notes the tremendous accomplishments already achieved by Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia on the path of Euro-Atlantic integration, outlines areas of continuing focus, and reiterates the intention of the United States to continue assisting the countries in implementing necessary reforms. Notes also that each aspirant country will be judged individually on its progress toward meeting standards for membership in Euro-Atlantic bodies.
• Reaffirms the parties' shared political commitment to strengthen democratic institutions, civil society, rule of law, market economies, and NATO-compatible militaries; to fight corruption and crime; and to protect human rights and civil liberties for all individuals in Albania, Croatia, Macedonia and the other countries of southeast Europe.
• Emphasizes close bilateral, regional and multilateral political, defense, and economic cooperation between the partners, and with their neighbors, as benefiting all the countries of southeast Europe by enhancing stability and accelerating the region's integration into European and transatlantic institutions.

The Adriatic Charter members most recently met in Brijuni Croatia in November 2004, along with representatives from Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and seven neighboring NATO countries to discuss regional cooperation. The Adriatic Charter members are currently in the planning stage to send a joint medical team to ISAF in Afghanistan in 2005.

SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS

Afghanistan

Operating under a mandate from the United Nations Security Council, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) has been engaged in Afghanistan since August 2003.

Working alongside Afghan security forces, ISAF currently commands security and stabilization operations in the northern and western provinces, and plans to assume command of security and stabilization operations in the southern region in 2006.

ISAF's mandate is to assist the Afghan government in maintaining security so that Afghan authorities, as well as the personnel of the United Nations and other international civilian agencies engaged in reconstruction and humanitarian efforts, can operate in a secure environment, and to provide security assistance for the performance of other reconstruction tasks.

Over 9,000 troops from 36 nations participate in ISAF. Among their assignments, these troops have responsibility for nine Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs): Mazar-e Sharif (led by the United Kingdom), Maimana (Norway), Konduz and Feyzabad (Germany), Pol-e Khumri (the Netherlands), Herat (Italy), Qal-eh ye Now (Spain), Chaghcharan (Lithuania) and Farah (United States).

For the 2004 Presidential election and the 2005 National Assembly and Provincial Council elections, ISAF cooperated with Afghan and Coalition forces deployed for Operation Enduring Freedom to provide security for the elections. ISAF also supports training of the Afghan National Army and police, as well as counternarcotics efforts. It has provided emergency humanitarian and disaster assistance in Afghanistan.

As a member of NATO the United States assigns troops to support ISAF, in addition to Operation Enduring Freedom Coalition operations.

Russia

NATO-Russia relations opened a new chapter with the establishment of the NATO-Russia Council at the NATO-Russia Summit on May 28, 2002 in Rome. This ground-breaking new body brings together the 19 Allies and Russia to identify and pursue opportunities for joint action "at 20." Building on enhanced NATO-Russia cooperation following the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and the start of the War on Terrorism, the Council has successfully provided a venue for Russia and the Allies to work together as equal partners in areas of mutual interest, and to stand together against common threats and risks to security.

Ukraine

The development of a strong, enduring relationship between NATO and Ukraine is an important aspect of the emerging European security architecture. The maintenance of Ukraine's independence, territorial integrity, sovereignty and integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions is a crucial factor for stability and security in Central Europe and the continent as a whole. The signing of a NATO-Ukraine Charter represented an important step towards the goal of an undivided Europe.

The Charter provides a framework for an open-ended NATO-Ukraine relationship through consultation and cooperation on issues of common interest. Ukraine has been an active participant in NATO's Partnership for Peace, as reflected in its willingness to host and participate in a range of PFP exercises and activities. The Charter seeks to build on the achievements, strength and breadth of NATO-Ukraine cooperation, supporting important initiatives such as the Poland-Ukraine Battalion, the creation of a crisis consultation mechanism and ensuring the full development of the EAPC and enhanced PFP.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

On December 2, 2004, the nine-year NATO-led Stabilization Force (SFOR) mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina concluded successfully. NATO's intervention in the Bosnia conflict—using force for the first time in Alliance history—led to the Dayton Accords and put an end to a costly and destructive conflict in the heart of Europe.

In the nine years that followed the intervention, over 500,000 servicemen and women from 43 nations and every continent, including 90,000 Americans, served in Bosnia and Herzegovina without losing a single soldier to hostile action.

The people of Bosnia have welcomed a continued international security presence as they take the remaining steps on the path toward integration into a Europe whole, free, and at peace. The European Union (EU) has established a military mission, Operation ALTHEA, to provide this support.

Initially, the EU will have 7,000 soldiers, the same size as SFOR at its conclusion, and 80% of the soldiers will be the same as in SFOR. Most of the roughly 1,000 American troops recently in SFOR have returned home. Some will remain behind to form the core contribution to the new NATO Headquarters in Sarajevo, which is headed by an American.

The end of SFOR is a demonstration of the progress Bosnia has made in the nine years since Dayton and a concrete example of cooperation between NATO and the EU. It provides the first significant use of Berlin Plus arrangements, which gives the EU access to NATO planning and assets.

The United States and NATO are not leaving Bosnia. NATO Headquarters Sarajevo will operate in close cooperation with the EU, taking up the challenge of defense reform, continuing efforts to locate and apprehend indicted war criminals, and working with local authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina to combat terrorism. The United States remains committed to the security and stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including through a significant contribution to the NATO Headquarters and a continued presence at Camp Eagle in Tuzla.

During its time, SFOR facilitated the transfer of 53 war crimes indictees to The Hague to stand trial. The NATO Headquarters will continue that work. However, Bosnia and Herzegovina retains the obligation, and primary responsibility, under the Dayton Accords and UN Security Council Resolutions to apprehend all fugitive indictees.

NATO's intervention proved the Alliance is capable of meeting the new array of security challenges facing the post-Cold War world. Today, NATO forces are benefiting from their experience in Bosnia as they carry out their missions in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

NATO

Last Updated March 2005

Official Name:
North Atlantic Treaty Organization

Editor's Note: The information in this article was compiled and edited from 1997, 2002–2005 Fact Sheets made available through the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs of the U.S. Department of State.

BACKGROUND

NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is an international security alliance designed to ensure the peace and security of the North Atlantic region. It was created on April 4, 1949, with the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty, NATO's founding document. NATO currently has 19 members in Europe and North America, including the United States.

NATO was founded in order to provide a security structure against the threat of the Soviet Union for its 12 founding members; Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, United Kingdom, and the United States. In addition, NATO's European members wanted to ensure that the United States remained involved in European security. Over the past 53 years, NATO has enlarged four times. Greece and Turkey joined in 1952; the Federal Republic of Germany joined in 1955; Spain joined in 1982; and Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joined in 1999. Seven nations were invited to join NATO at the Prague Summit in November, 2002, and their formal accession is pending ratification by the 19 current NATO members.

NATO is based on the principle of "collective defense," which means that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all members. The North Atlantic Treaty also provides for formal consultations among all members if any one feels that its "territorial integrity, political independence or security" is threatened.

Decisions in NATO are made by consensus, meaning that every decision is mutually agreed among all of its members and represents the expression of their collective will. Consensus is reached through regular consultations and coordination of Alliance members. Since every member preserves its full independence and sovereignty, no decision may be made by NATO against the will of one of its members. However, NATO cannot prevent one of its members from taking individual action.

The main decision-making body in NATO is the North Atlantic Council (NAC), which meets at least once a week and is comprised of the permanent representatives (Ambassadors) from each of its members. The current U.S. Ambassador to NATO is R. Nicholas Burns, a career diplomat in the U.S. Foreign Service.

In addition, the NAC also meets at different levels - with Heads of Government, Foreign Ministers, or Defense Ministers. The NAC establishes subsidiary groups and committees that provide advice on military policy and strategy to NATO's political leaders.

NATO's first major peacekeeping activity began in late 1995 when it led the Implementation Force (IFOR) to secure the Dayton Peace Agreement, thereby ending five years of civil war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The current Stabilization Force (SFOR) succeeded IFOR on December 20, 1996.

NATO's most significant military operation to date took place in Kosovo. On March 24, 1999, NATO began a 78-day air campaign against the military forces of former Yugoslavia's Slobodan Milosevic. Following the campaign, the Kosovo Force (KFOR), a NATO-led international peace-enforcement force, entered Kosovo. KFOR's objectives are to maintain security in Kosovo, monitor and enforce compliance with the agreements that ended the conflict, and support the UN Mission in Kosovo.

U.S.-NATO RELATIONS

On September 12, 2001, NATO took the historic action of invoking - for the first time - Article 5 of the NATO treaty. This Article embodies the principle of collective defense - that an attack on one member is an attack on all. The Alliance backed up this action by sending five AWACs aircraft and a detachment of 200 personnel to the United States in October 2001. These aircraft logged 3,000 hours patrolling American skies and protecting North American airspace. In addition, NATO ships patrolled the Eastern Mediterranean to keep terrorists from infiltrating into Europe. All NATO Allies have participated in either Operation Enduring Freedom, the military campaign against al Qaeda and the former Taliban regime, or in the current International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan.

U.S. security today requires us to look closely at NATO, which is already the strongest security Alliance in history, and find ways to make it even stronger. To confront and eliminate such global threats as terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, we must ally with countries that share our values and act effectively with us. Since the end of the Cold War, Europe's newest democracies have proven themselves as able partners, whether securing stability in the Balkans or fighting terrorism in Afghanistan. The enlargement of NATO will cement these benefits for the United States and its Allies, making the whole of NATO much stronger than the sum of the capabilities of individual members. NATO enlargement will help to enhance the political and economic stability for all countries in the Euro-Atlantic area. By helping Europe's newer democracies as they strengthen good governance, rule of law, and human rights, NATO will also facilitate a better long-term environment for American trade and investment.

NATO STRUCTURE

North Atlantic Council

The NAC is the principal forum for consultation and cooperation between NATO member governments on all issues affecting their common security. Its decisions are based on consensus, with each member having an equal right to express its views. The NATO Secretary General is chair. The NAC meets at least twice a year in ministerial session. It also meets weekly at the level of Permanent Representatives, who hold ambassadorial rank.

North Atlantic Council/Defense Ministers (NAC/D)

The NAC/D deals with overall issues of defense and meets twice yearly when member countries are represented by their Defense Ministers.

Defense Planning Committee (DPC)

The DPC deals with defense planning and other issues related to NATO's integrated military structure. It is composed of all countries except France (which withdrew from NATO's integrated military structure in 1966). Like the NAC, it meets regularly at ambassadorial level and twice yearly with Defense Ministers, normally in conjunction with the NAC/D.

Nuclear Planning Group

This group has authority for nuclear matters. All countries except France participate. Iceland participates as an observer.

Military Committee

The highest military authority in the alliance; is composed of the chiefs of staff of each country. Iceland, which has no military forces, is represented by a civilian member. The Military Committee advises the NAC and the DPC on military measures necessary for the common defense and provides guidance to the NATO commanders.

Regional Commands

The strategic area covered by the North Atlantic Treaty is divided into two regional commands: Allied Command Europe and Allied Command Atlantic, with a regional planning group for North America. With the exception of France and Iceland, all countries assign forces to the integrated military command structure. The NATO Defense area covers the territories of member nations in North America, in the Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer, and in Europe, including Turkey. However, events occurring outside the area which affect the preservation of peace and security in the treaty area also may be considered by the NAC.

NORTH ATLANTIC COOPERATION COUNCIL

The North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) was established in November 1991 to conduct NATO's outreach program to the former Warsaw Pact states.

The North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC) joins the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies and the newly free and independent states of Central and Eastern Europe, the Baltics, and the former Soviet Union in a program of political security dialogue, partnership, and cooperation. Subjects discussed in regular meetings between allies and partner states include defense planning and budgeting, democratic concepts of civil-military relations, defense conversion, and scientific and environmental topics. Members also discuss current political issues of common concern. In this way, the NACC complements the Organization on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), NATO, the European Union, and the Council of Europe in building a Euro-Atlantic community of stable, democratic, and market-oriented societies from Vancouver to Vladivostok.

As the advent of glasnost and perestroika in the Soviet Union and the crumbling of communist control in Eastern Europe changed the nature of the European security challenge, NATO turned from a posture of confrontation with the East to one of dialogue and cooperation. The June 1990 Turnberry North Atlantic Council ministerial and July 1990 London NATO summit extended the hand of friendship to NATO's former adversaries and called for the alliance to institute a liaison program with the Warsaw Pact states. The June 1991 Copenhagen North Atlantic Council ministerial developed this theme in its statement on "Partnership with the Countries of Central and Eastern Europe."

In their October 3,1991, joint statement, Secretary of State Baker and German Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher proposed the institutionalization of the NATO liaison program in a North Atlantic Cooperation Council. The following month, the Rome NATO summit formally established the NACC as a forum in which allies could offer their experience and expertise to partner countries on security and related issues.

In its first year, NACC developed a solid basis of cooperation and dialogue. The first NACC ministerial, held on December 20,1991, in Brussels, brought together representatives of the 16 NATO allies, the Baltic states, the U.S.S.R., Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania. Participants pledged to uphold CSCE principles, support arms control efforts, and work together in building a Europe whole and free.

The second NACC ministerial held on March 10,1992, in Brussels, admitted all the states of the former Soviet Union except Georgia (which joined the following month). Ministers adopted the first NACC work plan, which spelled out a program of intensified consultations and cooperative activities focused on security and related issues, including political, military, economic, scientific, and environmental subjects. Specific topics for cooperation included defense planning, conceptual approaches to arms control, democratic concepts of civilian-military relations, civil-military coordination of air-traffic management, defense conversion, and enhanced participation in NATO's "Third Dimension" scientific and environmental programs. Ministers also pledged to cooperate in disseminating information about NATO in the partner countries and gave their support to the NACC's ad hoc High Level Group charged with facilitating entry-into-force of the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty.

With the admission of Albania in June 1992 and the Czech-Slovak split in January 1993, membership in the NACC now stands at 38. Finland, Slovenia, and Sweden have attended recent ministerial meetings as observers.

A major step forward in NACC cooperation came at the December 1992 ministerial in Brussels. Ministers adopted a work plan for 1993 that included for the first time a provision for joint planning and training for peace-keeping Subsequently, the NACC established an Ad Hoc Group on Cooperation in Peace-keeping to coordinate activities in this area The NACC has welcomed the participation in Ad Hoc Group deliberations of three non-NACC states with extensive peace-keeping experience-Finland, Sweden, and Austria A representative from the OSCE also attends.

Building on the momentum of cooperation created by the NACC, NATO established in January 1994 a program within the framework of NACC called the Partnership for Peace (PFP). PFP activities complement other activities undertaken in the framework of the NACC and are designed to intensify political and military cooperation between the Alliance and members of the Partnership. The PFP is open to states participating in NACC and other OSCE states able and willing to contribute to the Partnership.

At their meeting in Brussels in December 1994, ministers reviewed progress on implementing PFP and held extensive consultations on regional issues. At the Noordwijk NAC in May 1995, the Secretary of State presented U.S. initiatives to "intensify the relationship between NATO and its partners," including on ensuring democratic and civilian control of the military, widening the Partnership's focus, and working more closely together on exercise planning.

The 1996 work plan, adopted by ministers at the December 6,1995, NACC Ministerial in Brussels, continues and expands NACC/PFP work on peace-keeping and other topics.

In its fifth year, NACC already has established itself as an important element in post-Cold War Europe's security architecture. It will continue to develop as a complement to other European and trans-Atlantic organizations forging the links of a peaceful, democratic, and prosperous Euro-Atlantic community of nations.

NATO ADAPTATION/ENLARGEMENT

NATO Allies decided at their November 21-22, 2002 Summit in Prague to invite seven countries to join: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia.

Assuming these seven countries and the 19 current members of NATO approve, all seven countries should be fully participating in NATO by May 2004. The membership process requires each invitee country to confirm their willingness and ability to respect the political and military obligations of NATO membership and to contribute to the Alliance's common-funded budgets and programs. Additionally, the U.S. and the 18 other current Allies must ratify the membership of each invitee.

The U.S. and its NATO Allies decided at the Prague Summit that the invitees were ready to join based on their individual accomplishments under NATO's Membership Action Plan (MAP) and their contributions to the Global War on Terrorism. The MAP was created in April 1999 to help candidate countries to prepare themselves for membership in the Alliance. Under MAP, aspirants adopt an Annual National Program (ANP) that sets objectives and specific benchmarks for reform that will strengthen their country's candidacy. The ANP reforms encompass a broad range of issues, including anti-corruption measures, protections for classified information, and establishment of coherent National Military Strategies. Aspirants receive practical and technical support from NATO, which regularly assesses their progress.

The total cost for the last enlargement is estimated at $1.5 billion over ten years; of this, the U.S. share is $400 million. The present round of enlargement is expected to carry similar costs, with greater benefits, as the previous round in 1999. That round of enlargement reduced the U.S. share of NATO's budget and the costs of its Balkan operations.

Through their strong and unwavering support for the anti-terrorism coalition and assistance in bringing stability to Bosnia and Kosovo, current aspirants have already shown that they can make positive contributions to NATO operations. They have clearly demonstrated their willingness and ability to participate in the work of the Alliance. The three newest allies have sent troops to the Balkans, Afghanistan, and other peacekeeping operations. They have also made excellent progress in building their capabilities and thus their contribution to common defense.

NATO is committed to an open door policy: any European democracy that is willing and able to contribute to security in the Euro-Atlantic area can become a member of the Alliance. Enlargement is not a new phenomenon but an ongoing process, as illustrated by previous successful rounds of enlargement: Turkey and Greece in 1952, Germany in 1955, Spain in 1982, and the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland in 1999. Those countries not selected will continue to participate in MAP and work towards future membership.

NATO PARTNERSHIP FOR PEACE

A U.S. initiative, Partnership for Peace (PFP) was launched by the January 1994 NATO summit to establish strong links between NATO, its new democratic partners in the former Soviet bloc, and some of Europe's traditionally neutral countries to enhance European security.

It provides a framework for enhanced political and military cooperation for joint multilateral activities, such as humanitarian assistance, peacekeeping, and crisis management and enables Partners to improve their interoperability with NATO.

It enables PFP members to consult with NATO when faced with a direct threat to its security but does not extend NATO security guarantees. Participation in PFP does not guarantee entry into NATO, but it is the best preparation for states interested in becoming NATO members.

PFP's utility has been demonstrated by the success of the NATO peace-keeping operations in Bosnia (IFOR and SFOR), in which 13 PFP Partners have worked side by side with NATO Allies.

Twenty-seven countries: Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Georgia, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, Poland, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.

Once a country has joined the PFP, it submits a Presentation Document to NATO explaining what resources it will contribute to PFP activities and the steps that it will take to meet PFP political goals, such as democratic control of the military. To date, all PFP countries except Switzerland have submitted Presentation Documents.

A unique Individual Partnership Program (IPP), is then agreed to with the alliance. IPPs set forth shared objectives, (for instance, establishing democratic control over military forces; developing transparency in defense planning and budgetary processes; developing interoperability with NATO forces) and list activities planned to meet those objectives.

NATO has reached agreement on IPPs with all PFP Partners except Switzerland and Uzbekistan. Many Partners have submitted revised IPPs.

Partners can assign personnel on a full-time basis to NATO Headquarters in Brussels and to the Partnership Coordination Cell (PCC) at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) in Mons, Belgium. Legislation which would enable Partners to accredit ambassadors to NATO is pending in Brussels.

Partners may participate in an optional Defense Planning and Review Process (PARP) designed to evaluate and enhance a partner nation's interoperability with NATO. Participating states work with NATO to develop interoperability objectives, which can be used to help refine IPPs. As of February 1997, 15 partners—Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, and Ukraine—are participating in PARP.

PFP Joint Military Exercises

1994. Three joint military exercises were held, including "Cooperative Bridge" in Poland marking the first time NATO forces had joined with former adversaries on the territory of a former Warsaw Pact state.

1995. Ten major field, maritime, search and rescue, and command post exercises were held.

1996. More than 14 major PFP exercises in the areas of search and rescue, humanitarian assistance, and peacekeeping were held. Numerous seminars, workshops, and bilateral "in the spirit of PFP" exercises also were held.

1997. More than 25 major and "in the spirit of PFP" exercises are planned. NATO is considering expanding the scope of PFP activities to include peace enforcement and Partner participation in the new Combined Joint Task Force concept.

CONVENTIONAL ARMED FORCES IN EUROPE (CFE) TREATY

The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (or CFE Treaty), signed in Paris on November 19, 1990, by the 22 members of NATO and the former Warsaw Pact, is a landmark arms control agreement that established parity in major conventional forces/armaments between East and West from the Atlantic to the Urals. It provides an unprecedented basis for lasting European security and stability. The original CFE Treaty (which is of unlimited duration) entered into force in 1992. Following the demise of the Warsaw Pact and the enlargement of NATO in the 1990s, the then 30 CFE States Parties signed the Adaptation Agreement at the Istanbul OSCE Summit on 19 November 1999, to amend the CFE Treaty to take account of the evolving European geo-strategic environment.

The CFE Treaty covers the entire land territory of the States Parties in Europe from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains (ATTU). It thus excludes much of the territory of Russia and all the territory of the U.S. and Canada - all signatories of the original and Adapted Treaty. The conventional forces of all three countries that are stationed in Europe are subject to CFE limits. The 30 CFE States Parties are: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Luxembourg, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovak Republic, Spain, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and United States.

The original CFE Treaty set equal limits for East and West in the ATTU on key conventional armaments essential for conducting surprise attacks or initiating large-scale offensive operations. Those armaments/equipment include: battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, and artillery pieces, as well as combat aircraft (except for naval air) and attack helicopters. In addition to limitations on the number of armaments in each category, the Treaty also provides for central zonal limits to prevent destabilizing force concentrations in Europe and for regional ("flank") limits, which were modified by the Flank Agreement of May 1996. Whereas the original CFE Treaty established an East-West group structure for limiting NATO and Warsaw Pact conventional armaments, the Adapted Treaty provides for a system of national and territorial ceilings (the former limits the number of armaments each state may possess, while the latter limits the total number of Treaty-limited equipment present within a State Party's borders); an accession mechanism for new States Parties; enhanced verification and transparency regimes; and honoring current Treaty commitments pending entry into force of the Adapted Treaty. The Adapted Treaty will facilitate NATO enlargement and reinforce the territorial sovereignty of individual States Parties.

The principal accomplishment of the CFE Treaty has been the large-scale reduction or destruction of conventional military equipment in the ATTU during the first 5 years the Treaty was in effect. By the end of the Treaty's reduction period in 1995, when equipment limits took effect, the 30 States Parties completed and verified by inspection the destruction or conversion of over 52,000 battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, artillery pieces, combat aircraft and attack helicopters. In addition, they have conducted/accepted over 4000 intrusive on-site inspections of military units/installations, and of specified areas.

Ratification by NATO Allies of the Adapted Treaty is awaiting Russia's compliance with adapted CFE flank provisions and continued fulfillment of its Istanbul summit commitments regarding withdrawals of Russian forces from Georgia and Moldova. The Adapted Treaty will enter into force 10 days after instruments of ratification have been deposited by all States Parties.

ADRIATIC CHARTER

Secretary of State Colin Powell, together with his colleagues, Foreign Ministers Meta, Picula and Mitreva, signed the Adriatic Charter in Tirana, Albania, May 2, 2003. The Adriatic Charter, an initiative in the spirit of the 1998 U.S.-Baltic Charter, was proposed jointly by the Presidents of Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia to President Bush at the NATO Prague Summit in November 2002. President Bush welcomed the Adriatic initiative as a strong contribution toward his vision of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. The Charter builds on the achievements of the NATO Prague Summit by reinforcing continued U.S. support for the Alliance's "Open Door," underscoring the goal of Albania's, Croatia's, and Macedonia's eventual full integration into NATO and other Euro-Atlantic institutions.

The Charter:

• Underlines Albania's, Croatia's, and Macedonia's dedication to strengthening their individual and cooperative efforts to intensify and hasten domestic reforms that enhance the security, prosperity and stability of the region.
• Notes the tremendous accomplishments already achieved by Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia on the path of Euro-Atlantic integration, outlines areas of continuing focus, and reiterates the intention of the United States to continue assisting the countries in implementing necessary reforms. Notes also that each aspirant country will be judged individually on its progress toward meeting standards for membership in Euro-Atlantic bodies.
• Reaffirms the parties' shared political commitment to strengthen democratic institutions, civil society, rule of law, market economies, and NATO-compatible militaries; to fight corruption and crime; and to protect human rights and civil liberties for all individuals in Albania, Croatia, Macedonia and the other countries of southeast Europe.
• Emphasizes close bilateral, regional and multilateral political, defense, and economic cooperation between the partners, and with their neighbors, as benefiting all the countries of southeast Europe by enhancing stability and accelerating the region's integration into European and transatlantic institutions.

The Adriatic Charter members most recently met in Brijuni Croatia in November 2004, along with representatives from Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and seven neighboring NATO countries to discuss regional cooperation. The Adriatic Charter members are currently in the planning stage to send a joint medical team to ISAF in Afghanistan in 2005.

SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPS

Afghanistan

In August 2003, NATO took over command of ISAF, the international force responsible for providing security in and around the Afghan capital, Kabul. In January 2004, the Alliance expanded its role by taking on security tasks also beyond the capital, in the area of Kunduz. This is the first stage of the planned expansion of the mission to other parts of the country.

Acting UN Special Representative in Afghanistan, Jean-François Arnault, described the recent positive developments, particularly the adoption of the constitution by the loya jirga, as having created "a new momentum" for peace in the country. He called for the further expansion of the Provincial Reconstruction Teams, saying that this was one of the best ways of bolstering the authority of the government. Security would be a particularly crucial factor as preparations for the upcoming elections begin, he added. Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said that Afghanistan remains "the no. 1 priority for the Alliance", and that the plan for the expansion of the mission is now being finalized.

Russia

NATO-Russia relations opened a new chapter with the establishment of the NATO-Russia Council at the NATO-Russia Summit on May 28, 2002 in Rome. This ground-breaking new body brings together the 19 Allies and Russia to identify and pursue opportunities for joint action "at 20." Building on enhanced NATO-Russia cooperation following the tragic events of September 11, 2001 and the start of the War on Terrorism, the Council has successfully provided a venue for Russia and the Allies to work together as equal partners in areas of mutual interest, and to stand together against common threats and risks to security.

Ukraine

The development of a strong, enduring relationship between NATO and Ukraine is an important aspect of the emerging European security architecture. The maintenance of Ukraine's independence, territorial integrity, sovereignty and integration into Euro-Atlantic institutions is a crucial factor for stability and security in Central Europe and the continent as a whole. The signing of a NATO-Ukraine Charter represented an important step towards the goal of an undivided Europe.

The Charter provides a framework for an open-ended NATO-Ukraine relationship through consultation and cooperation on issues of common interest. Ukraine has been an active participant in NATO's Partnership for Peace, as reflected in its willingness to host and participate in a range of PFP exercises and activities. The Charter seeks to build on the achievements, strength and breadth of NATO-Ukraine cooperation, supporting important initiatives such as the Poland-Ukraine Battalion, the creation of a crisis consultation mechanism and ensuring the full development of the EAPC and enhanced PFP.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

On December 2, 2004, the nine-year NATO-led Stabilization Force (SFOR) mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina concluded successfully. NATO's intervention in the Bosnia conflict—using force for the first time in Alliance history—led to the Dayton Accords and put an end to a costly and destructive conflict in the heart of Europe.

In the nine years that followed the intervention, over 500,000 servicemen and women from 43 nations and every continent, including 90,000 Americans, served in Bosnia and Herzegovina without losing a single soldier to hostile action.

The people of Bosnia have welcomed a continued international security presence as they take the remaining steps on the path toward integration into a Europe whole, free, and at peace. The European Union (EU) has established a military mission, Operation ALTHEA, to provide this support.

Initially, the EU will have 7,000 soldiers, the same size as SFOR at its conclusion, and 80% of the soldiers will be the same as in SFOR. Most of the roughly 1,000 American troops recently in SFOR have returned home. Some will remain behind to form the core contribution to the new NATO Headquarters in Sarajevo, which is headed by an American.

The end of SFOR is a demonstration of the progress Bosnia has made in the nine years since Dayton and a concrete example of cooperation between NATO and the EU. It provides the first significant use of Berlin Plus arrangements, which gives the EU access to NATO planning and assets.

The United States and NATO are not leaving Bosnia. NATO Headquarters Sarajevo will operate in close cooperation with the EU, taking up the challenge of defense reform, continuing efforts to locate and apprehend indicted war criminals, and working with local authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina to combat terrorism. The United States remains committed to the security and stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including through a significant contribution to the NATO Headquarters and a continued presence at Camp Eagle in Tuzla.

During its time, SFOR facilitated the transfer of 53 war crimes indictees to The Hague to stand trial. The NATO Headquarters will continue that work. However, Bosnia and Herzegovina retains the obligation, and primary responsibility, under the Dayton Accords and UN Security Council Resolutions to apprehend all fugitive indictees.

NATO's intervention proved the Alliance is capable of meeting the new array of security challenges facing the post-Cold War world. Today, NATO forces are benefiting from their experience in Bosnia as they carry out their missions in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq.

NATO.

A creation of the early Cold War, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has surprised many commentators by outlasting the conflict that produced it.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NATO

NATO was established by the North Atlantic Treaty in Washington, D.C., on 4 April 1949, after over a year's negotiations. Although the treaty referred to cultural and political cooperation (Article 2), the operative clause was Article 5. In it, the twelve signatories—the United States, Canada, Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, Great Britain, Portugal, and Italy—pledged that an attack on one was an attack on all and would lead to them taking whatever measures they deemed necessary, including armed action.

In the minds of those whose initiatives led to the establishment of NATO—most especially British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin—the major problem that faced Western Europe in 1948–1949 was not an immediate invasion by the Soviet army as such, but the possibility that fear of Soviet power would hinder recovery from the traumas of the war period, bringing economic stagnation and poor morale and reducing resistance to the subversive methods that the Soviets were believed to prefer. Bevin argued to the Americans that Europeans needed a sense of security if they were to complete the economic recovery that was the aim of the U.S. Marshall Plan begun in 1947. There are revisionist historians, indeed, who have argued that the establishment of NATO was mainly to provide the necessary preconditions for the Marshall Plan to succeed and for American markets in Western Europe to be revived. Certainly, in its first year or so, NATO had little capacity to actually defend its European members; what it had done, however, was effectively to place them under a guarantee of American nuclear protection. While military planners were initially skeptical of the defensive capabilities of the alliance, for the politicians the main point was to increase the Western European sense of security. Again, revisionists have argued that this may well have had the opposite effect: by provoking Soviet responses and making the Cold War into a more overtly military confrontation, it may well have institutionalized insecurity.

In any event, at the start the treaty was less like a collective defense arrangement between equals than a protectorate of the weak by the strong. The treaty formalized the American intention to remain engaged in European affairs, but the reality was that the U.S. Congress was clear that the U.S. contribution should be strategic air power while the European allies provided the foot-soldiers: no additional U.S. troops were initially assigned to Europe (and indeed U.S. strategic air forces themselves remained outside NATO command). Mutual resentments over "burden-sharing" were to plague NATO throughout its history.

NATO was transformed after the outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950. Elements of organization were put in place to focus it on defense—to move from a fairly loose alliance of like-minded nations (with a central core of Anglo-American strategic coordination) intended to provide a generalized "sense of security" into an integrated military alliance focused on defense against a specific threat. The Korean War moved the U.S. government firmly in the direction of rearmament—and because the communist attack in Korea seemed to suggest a Soviet grand design in which the next target would be Europe, much of this was directed toward strengthening the defensive capabilities of NATO and thereafter the defense function of the alliance was the most prominent—and for many, indeed, the sole reason for the organization's existence. Congress authorized nearly one billion dollars to upgrade NATO's capabilities. At the end of 1950, General Dwight Eisenhower was named first NATO Supreme Commander (SACEUR), followed in 1951 by the establishment of Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) at Roquencourt, near Paris. The high-profile appointment of Eisenhower was as clear a sign of American commitment as the concurrent dispatch of American ground forces and B-29 bombers to Europe. Greece and Turkey, which had been under NATO guarantees from the start, were admitted to membership in 1952 (underlining the anti-Soviet as opposed to "North Atlantic community" nature of the alliance). Permanent political and military structures were finalized on 25 February 1952.

However, with the growth of U.S. commitments elsewhere, especially in Asia, it was expected that European contributions to their own defense would increase—and to many Americans this had to involve the Germans, who were, after all, being accorded protection by the alliance. France was concerned to ensure that German economic recovery took place within a structure that prevented a resurgence of the German military threat. On the other hand, NATO's strategy was to fight on a defensive line as far east as possible—any other strategy would alienate key members such as Norway and the Netherlands. This meant fighting in Germany, and France shared the desire of its allies to find a way of bringing German military potential into the balance. The way forward had been suggested in the French Pleven Plan in the autumn of 1950. This proposed the establishment of a European army, in which the Germans would participate in small integrated units, which meant there would be no German General Staff or defense ministry. By May 1952, the plan had developed into the European Defense Community (EDC), and the proposed German contribution had been raised to regimental level. However, neither the British nor Americans would join the EDC, merely offering pledges of aid. The French army, heavily engaged outside Europe in the French Empire, was not itself keen on being submerged in the EDC, but also feared that with only the small nations as counterbalance, it would become dominated by the German military. As a consequence, the French Assembly rejected the European Defense Treaty in May 1954. However, the allies had become accustomed by now to think in terms of West German involvement, and under the initiative of British Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden, West Germany and Italy were brought into the Western Union that had been established by the Brussels Treaty (1948) by Britain, France, and the Benelux countries, with German troops to be wholly part of the forces of this renamed Western European Union (WEU). On this basis, France accepted West Germany as the fifteenth member of NATO (in the name of all Germany). West Germany was scheduled to contribute twelve divisions, under WEU command, though it pledged not to manufacture nuclear, chemical, or bacteriological weapons. The Soviets had long feared West German rearmament and responded by drawing its satellites together in the Warsaw Pact.

TENSIONS WITHIN THE ALLIANCE

Although NATO celebrated its tenth anniversary in style at its new headquarters in Porte Dauphiné, Paris, trouble was brewing. Charles de Gaulle had returned to power in France, and viewed NATO as an instrument of Anglo-American hegemony. At the same time, some in the United States believed that since Western Europe had now recovered so well and was taking steps toward integration, the Europeans should shoulder a greater share of their own defense, with a reduction of American commitments. These tensions came to a head with the American offer of Polaris nuclear missiles to the British in 1962—de Gaulle declined a similar offer and saw this as final proof that the British were too closely under U.S. influence to fit into his vision of Europe as a "third force" between the United States and the Soviet Union. This feeling was reinforced when President John Fitzgerald Kennedy acted during the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962 without coordinating with his NATO allies (except informal contacts with Britain). The Kennedy administration's rejection of the doctrine of massive nuclear retaliation in favor of "flexible response" also caused problems with America's allies, who feared the expense of competing with the Soviets in conventional forces, and worried that the American nuclear guarantee was being softened. Conversely, the U.S. desire to share the burden of NATO's defenses more equally led the Americans to press for European increases in conventional armaments. Some in the Kennedy administration favored a Multilateral Force as the means of achieving this, but this scheme foundered on unwillingness on both sides of the Atlantic to go far along the route of removing forces from national command and a preference to maintain NATO as essentially an intergovernmental alliance. The thaw in East-West relations that followed the Cuban crisis allowed many Europeans to be drawn to de Gaulle's concept. At the same time, U.S. actions in Vietnam were alienating many younger European voters. In addition, the direct nuclear threat to U.S. cities posed by Soviet intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) raised doubts whether the United States would actually risk destruction in the event of an attack on Western Europe by Soviet conventional forces. In 1966 de Gaulle withdrew the French from NATO's military command structures, protesting the dominance of American commanders. The military headquarters of NATO was moved to Mons and the political one to Brussels.

In response, an initiative by the smaller allies produced the Harmel Report, The Future Tasks of the Alliance (1967), which many have claimed redefined the nature of NATO in such a way that enabled it to survive the disappearance of the threat that brought it into being. There is a case, however, for arguing that Pierre Charles Harmel (Belgian foreign minister) was reiterating the security (as opposed to defense) motivations that were the driving force for those who founded it back in 1949. What the report did was to address the changed situation of the 1960s, which some Gaullists were claiming had made NATO redundant. While committing NATO to engage actively in the process of détente—reducing tensions with the Warsaw Pact—it also, most significantly in the long term, stated in firm terms the case for NATO to be seen as an organization serving the security needs of its members, rather than a purely defensive military alliance whose existence was dependent on a level of threat from a particular foe.

Under the impetus of the Harmel Report, NATO followed a twin-track policy of détente and modernization. Détente meant constructive dialogue with the Warsaw Pact, based on a recognition of their common interest in stability in Europe and restraint in the use of nuclear weapons. This in turn meant that NATO could consider reduction of forces and their adaptation to a wider range of uses in line with the flexible response at the heart of Harmel—even though NATO had but recently expressed its commitment to a strategy of first use of nuclear weapons as a defense against a conventional threat from Soviet forces. In 1970 it was announced that reduction in nuclear or conventional forces would only come if the Soviet Union reduced its forces; dialogue began on conventional forces reduction on 5 October 1971. Simultaneously, the Soviet Union and United States were discussing reduction of numbers of warheads and limitations to antiballistic missile systems in the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, and signed the SALT I Treaty on 26 May 1972. On 30 May the NATO Council agreed to participate in the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) in Helsinki, in which balanced force reductions were to be discussed with the Warsaw Pact. Despite the final act of the CSCE that called for force reductions and peaceful conflict resolution, and progress in slowing the nuclear arms race, in 1976 NATO reaffirmed its nuclear first use policy and rejected demands to restrict itself to a doctrine of nuclear usage only in response to nuclear aggression. Within NATO, some tensions remained: in 1974 Greece withdrew from the integrated military structures, citing a desire for military independence similar to that of the French. This was connected to the Cyprus crisis and Greek internal politics; with changes in the Greek government, Greece rejoined the military structures in 1980. A year later, NATO added its sixteenth member with the accession of Spain, which now had a democratic government.

By this time détente had given way to increased tension between the United States and the Soviet Union. SALT II was not ratified and U.S. presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan sought European cooperation in isolating the Soviet Union in punishment for its 1979 invasion of Afghanistan. While some European leaders, such as Britain's Margaret Thatcher, supported Reagan, others had reservations about the revival of Cold War attitudes. Some of the structures set up in the détente period therefore endured, though NATO's withdrawal of 1,400 nuclear warheads from Europe in October 1983 was overshadowed by the deployment of intermediate-range nuclear weapons that were not covered in the SALT agreement. Fears that Europe would be the battleground for a "limited" nuclear exchange of cruise missiles and Soviet SS-20s led to a revival of antinuclear protests in many Western European countries. The tension was eased after Reagan's reelection in November 1984 and the coming to power of Mikhail Gorbachev in the Soviet Union in March 1985. Talks on intermediate-range nuclear forces (INF) were restarted. The United States and Soviet Union agreed at Geneva in November 1985 to cuts of up to 50 percent in their nuclear arsenals. In this atmosphere, relations between NATO and the Warsaw Pact warmed once more and in 1986 the Conference on Disarmament in Europe agreed to mutual observation of military maneuvers, and in February 1987 talks on reducing conventional forces were resumed. In December the United States and Soviet Union agreed to eliminate all land-based INF missiles.

NATO was in a sense a passive observer of the dramatic changes that followed in Europe. The Soviet Union announced 15 percent force reductions in Europe in January 1989 and began a process of disengagement from its Eastern European satellites, which resulted in the rapid disappearance of their communist regimes, the destruction of the Berlin Wall, and in 1990 the reunification of Germany. At a stroke, NATO's frontiers were moved significantly eastward. In 1991, the Soviet Union itself ceased to exist.

NATO AFTER THE COLD WAR

These events posed a huge challenge to NATO. Many argued that with the disappearance of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union itself, NATO had won its struggle, and therefore had no reason to continue to exist. Isolationism returned to the political agenda in the United States, and U.S. congressmen once more raised the issue of burden sharing. As we have seen, however, NATO had already redefined itself as an organization designed to promote security through stability and collective action as much as a defensive alliance against a particular threat, and generally NATO leaders, faced with the uncertainties of these startling changes in Europe, clung to NATO as an element of stability—or at least as an instrument to manage change. NATO reiterated the role laid out by Harmel. In July 1990 at its London summit, NATO declared it would be a pillar of European and Transatlantic security, while also, by stating that it was extending the hand of friendship to Eastern European countries, attempting to show its concern with stability and the control of nuclear weapons in the context of the demise of the Warsaw Pact. At Rome in 1991 a new Strategic Concept was announced, declaring that the greatest threat to security was instability, often through the activities of nationalist or terrorist groups. It was recognized that the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (the former CSCE) had a role in bringing stability to Europe. The North Atlantic Cooperation Council was set up, with 16 NATO countries and 9 others, becoming in 1997 the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council with 40 members (46 by 2001). At Brussels in 1994, the Partnership for Peace was formed to promote defense cooperation.

However, while NATO made progress in defining a future for itself, the strains and tensions with the organization, which had always been present, were naturally increased as the common threat from the Soviet Union vanished. The first test of the reality of NATO's commitment to its new role was in the long crisis as Yugoslavia disintegrated. It was in Bosnia, in January 1996, that NATO troops fired their first shots in action. Deep divisions were revealed between the Europeans and Americans over the attitude to take toward the Serbs (the Americans wanted more forthright condemnation) and what action to take (the Europeans resented American reluctance to send troops as part of the peacekeeping mission). Many began to question NATO's future when it could not coordinate a policy toward events in the heart of Europe.

Finally, in 1997, the idea of the Partnership for Peace apparently offered progress on two of the most thorny questions for NATO as it approached its fiftieth birthday: could former Warsaw Pact countries become members (without damaging relations with Russia, which were already sensitive because of the Serbian situation), and what should NATO's relationship to United Nations (UN) peacekeeping efforts be? The Partnership provided for greater contributions to the latter, beginning with missions to the former Yugoslav republics. It also made possible the NATO-Russia Founding Act signed in Paris in 1997, establishing the NATO-Russia Permanent Joint Council (PJC). This reduced Russian hostility to the expansion of NATO eastward, which duly happened with the membership of Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic in 1999. Through the PJC, Russian troops took part in peacekeeping forces in Bosnia (Implementation Force [IFOR] and Stabilization Force [SFOR]). Tensions remained with the Russians, especially when the crisis flared up in Kosovo in 1999, but this was resolved eventually by the Russians joining the peacekeeping forces there (Kosovo Force [KFOR]).

There was a show of solidarity by NATO members after the September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, with Secretary-General George Robertson invoking Article 5, but this crumbled in the face of the determination of the George W. Bush administration to take whatever actions it felt necessary, regardless of the opinion of allies, in its "war on terror." While NATO was not directly involved as a body in the operations in Afghanistan, it became involved subsequently in the efforts to pacify the country in the wake of the overthrow of the Taliban, taking control in August 2003 of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), in its first major operation outside Europe. Germany and France, however, had deep misgivings about Bush's approach and opposed the attack on Iraq in 2003. This became a NATO issue when they vetoed American requests to strengthen Turkey in advance of the attack. To many observers, expecting it since 1990, NATO at last seemed to be coming apart at the seams. This has not, as of 2005, happened, and it may be that the habits of cooperation, and the level of integration of military forces, including intelligence (despite NATO's remaining essentially an intergovernmental organization), are strong enough to prevent an actual breakup. Some argue that NATO had more the appearance of an alliance than the reality by the turn of the twenty-first century, but it has proved itself an adaptable instrument for articulating and advancing the security interests of its members, and must in consequence be seen as one of the more enduring, and successful, alliances in history. Tensions remain, especially between the United States and Great Britain on one hand and Germany and France on the other, with moves to develop defense structures for the European Union seen by the Americans as threatening the integrity of the alliance. On the other hand, NATO has continued to expand, with seven new members joining formally in 2004—Bulgaria, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. NATO forces and command structures have been adapted to provide rapid reaction forces to be deployed anywhere in the world.

See alsoBevin, Ernest; Cold War; Eastern Bloc; Soviet Union; Warsaw Pact.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baylis, John. The Diplomacy of Pragmatism: Britain and the Formation of NATO, 1942–1949. Kent, Ohio, 1993.

Cyr, Arthur. U.S. Foreign Policy and European Security. London, 1987.

Duke, Simon. The Burdensharing Debate: A Reassessment. New York, 1993.

Haftendorn, Helga. NATO and the Nuclear Revolution: A Crisis of Credibility, 1966–1967. Oxford, U.K., 1996.

Ireland, Timothy P. Creating the Entangling Alliance. Westport, Conn., 1981.

Kaplan, Lawrence S. The Long Entanglement: NATO's First Fifty Years. Westport, Conn., 1999.

Kugler, Richard L. Commitment to Purpose: How Alliance Partnership Won the Cold War. Santa Monica, Calif., 1993.

Papacosma, S. Victor, Sean Kay, and Mark R. Rubin, eds, NATO After Fifty Years. Wilmington, Del., 2001.

Rudd, David, and Jim Hanson, eds. NATO at Fifty: Successes, Challenges, Prospects. Toronto, 1999.

Schmidt, Gustav, ed. A History of NATO: The First Fifty Years. 3 vols. Basingstoke, U.K., 2001.

Smith, Joseph, ed. The Origins of NATO. Exeter, U.K., 1990.

Smith, Martin A. NATO in the First Decade after the Cold War. Boston, 2000.

Martin H. Folly