Crimea Crisis Gives New Life to NATO

April 4 is the anniversary of the founding of an organization which has gained new life and significantly increased in importance in the wake of the recent crisis in Crimea. Sixty-five years ago, on April 4, 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was chartered in Washington, D.C. When WWII ended, and the nations of Western Europe faced a new threat on their borders – the Soviet Union – they realized the need for a new, more comprehensive treaty to stave off the new threat, a treaty that would span the Atlantic and bring in the United States.

The organization was created as a defensive structure against the Soviet Union, as well as a means for fostering military cooperation amongst like-minded free nations and for encouraging member nations to keep their armaments adequately built up enough to stave off any Russian aggression. NATO nations standardized military terminology and procedures in order to ease cooperation, and often held joint exercises between their militaries.

Ironically enough, the very nation the bloc was formed to defend against, asked to be admitted as a member, as well. NATO ultimately determined that this would weaken the alliance. In response to the inclusion of West Germany into NATO, in 1955, the Soviets formed the Warsaw Pact, consisting of the USSR and several allied Eastern European states that were under communist rule. The Pact was formally disbanded in 1991 at the end of the Cold War.

The treaty was apparently an effective deterrent, for the “Evil Empire” never militarily engaged any NATO nation. The all-important Article 5 of the treaty (guaranteeing that member states will come to each other’s aid if any other NATO nation were attacked) was never invoked during the Cold War, nor did it ever conduct any joint military operations.

The breakup of the Soviet Union in ’89-’91 meant NATO had to adapt, and either cease to exist or find a new mission. The temporary dissolution of the enemy the organization had been created to deter actually resulted in an organizational expansion as the Alliance sought a new role in the world. 

It expanded to humanitarian causes, and to conflicts not directly impacting NATO states, such as when it intervened in Bosnia and then in Kosovo during the 1990s. Article 5 was invoked for the first and only time in 2001, not from a Russian attack, but after the terrorist attacks of September 11, and NATO assisted in the war in Afghanistan. The organization expanded its membership, bringing in many former Warsaw Pact members, plus the recent additions of Albania and Croatia in 2009.

Despite new found missions, many had wondered if NATO had a place in today’s geopolitical environment. With the main international threat having shifted to fighting terrorism and rogue states, with the United States and Russia trying to “reset” relations, and the two nations cooperating on the handling of Syria, the idea of having a bloc of nations structured around defense against Russia seemed a bit obsolete.

Yet the recent Russian annexation of Crimea has given new life to NATO, and caused debate about whether the Cold War is returning. With its skirmishes with Georgia in 2008 and now Ukraine, Russia has sought to reclaim lost territories that were formerly part of the USSR.

Article 4 of NATO – which calls for consultation with other allied states – was invoked this year by Poland, following the annexation of Crimea. It wasn’t the first time this article had been invoked, but it may be the incident most reminiscent of the original purpose of the organization. In the popular mind, Russia seemed merely a potential threat, and certainly different from Cold War USSR.

This last incident has made many worry that the old conflict is back, and has doubtless removed any question about the usefulness of continuing this historic and strategic alliance.