1. REPURPOSING AND REINVENTING
NATO
Keshav Prasad Bhattarai
Amid debates over the relevancy of Cold War period security alliance between North American and
European countries - the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has just concluded its 25th
formal Summit at Chicago, the home town of U.S. President Barrack Obama. The two days Summit
that was the largest in its 63 years old history was focused mainly on building the alliance's
capacity to address twenty-first century threats and expand its partnership in regions - mainly on
Asia- Pacific and Middle East not covered by NATO‟s geography. Besides, the Summit formalized
its troop‟s withdrawal plan from Afghanistan by 2014 and spelt out its decision to enhance the
capacity of 350,000 Afghan security forces - a formidable job of meeting the challenge of nation
building, state building and security building of the world‟s most troubled country.
When NATO treaty was signed on April 4, 1949, it was meant for collective defense frame work for
its 12 member countries mainly bound by the famous Article 5 of the treaty that states, “The
Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall
be considered an attack against them all; and consequently they . . . . will assist the Party or Parties
so attacked by . . . . the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North
Atlantic area”.
NATO was later followed by another treaty called Baghdad Pact that came into existence on
February 4, 1955. Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey and United Kingdom were its member countries and
United States had joined it as an associated member. But after the Iraqi revolution that
overthrew monarchy in July 1958, Iraq withdrew from the Baghdad Pact in March 1959. And
resultantly the pact was renamed as Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) with continuation of
other member countries.
CENTO worked as a part of NATO on the Southern border of former Soviet Union. Both NATO
and U.S. forces had rights to use the military bases and intelligence out posts stationed in those

2. countries. But after another revolution in another member country – Iran, CENTO became defunct
in 1979.
After NATO and CENTO, on May 14, 1955, a new collective defense pact came into existence under
the leadership of former Soviet Union named as Warsaw Treaty Organization (WTO), also known as
the Warsaw Pact. The prominent collective defense alliance after NATO was mainly meant for
consolidating Soviet control over the communist countries of Eastern Europe. But, along with the
pressures of anti Soviet and anti communist uprisings in Eastern Europe, first the military
structures of Warsaw Pact was abolished in February 1991 and later in July the same year its
remaining political structures were also demolished.
RUSSIA, CHINA, OCCUPY CHICAGO MOVEMENT AND NATO
In early May, there was another international conference on “Missile Defense Factor in Forming a
New Security Space” in Moscow where high ranking officials from Russia, NATO and delegations
from 50 countries had participated.
In the conference, according to a leading Russian news agency- RIA Novosti, Russian Defense
Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, strongly opposed U.S. led NATO missile shield to be stationed in
Eastern Europe and declared that Russia will take necessary military measures to respond
challenges and threats posed by them. According to Russian leaders although Washington and
NATO officials have repeatedly told them that the missile defense is not directed against Russia
but meant to meet the challenges posed by rogue states like Iran and some terrorist organizations
supported by them, NATO has failed to give legal guarantee that the missile defense system to be
deployed in Europe will not be used against Russia.
Russia is much concerned over the NATO‟s planned deployment of the third and fourth phases of
missiles defense in Europe that would be completed by 2018-20. This will have capability to
intercept part of Russia‟s intercontinental ballistic missiles and sub marine based missiles.
Several times, Russian military and political leaders have warned its western partners that if NATO
fails to take Russia in confidence in addressing its concerns, it may deploy its Iskander series short
range nuclear missiles next to that of NATO‟s.

3. On the other hand, back to Chicago, when NATO was busy with its unprecedented Summit,
thousands of peace activists led by some 20 veterans of Iraq War, thronged at down town area of
the city where 51 world leaders were busy with Summit deliberations.
The protests as reported by international media marked quite unusual while some “black block”
protesters - covered completely with black clothing pushed their ways to the venue where the
NATO Summit was being held. This forced both the police and protesters clash each other – police
with batons and protesters with plastic bottles and sticks. Prosecutors charge few persons with
terrorism related offences and some were even accused of manufacturing Molotov cocktails aiming
various targets in Chicago.
Likewise, voice against NATO was also heard naturally in China. The online edition of People‟s Daily
(May 23, 2012) has raised question on the relevancy of NATO regarding its legality. How an
organization established during Cold War can explain its justification when the adversary to whom
the defense pact was aimed does exist no more, was its main point.
The second point People‟s Daily raised was the unprecedented debt crisis of NATO‟s European
alleys – that stands as “the biggest security threat” to their survival- that ultimately is making
NATO obsolete. And the third according to the Chinese daily is that the two sides of the Atlantic “
have an increasing divergence of views on the orientation of NATO, that will inhibit the defense
alliance go stronger, but go marginalized in the long run, however at short term Europeans will
continue to take NATO as their symbol of strength.
People‟s Daily further suggests that in an era of globalization “NATO must change its mentality” of
the military alliance of the Cold War period and reorient itself not striving in maintaining the
“unsustainable life” of western alliance while “exaggerating others‟ military threats, pulling new
members into it and establishing expansive missile defense systems”.
REPURPOSING AND REINVENTING NATO
After the fall of Berlin Wall, many former Warsaw Pact countries joined NATO. Countries like
Australia, Japan and South Korea and other non NATO European countries have also developed a
very strong partnership with the alliance. For all practical purposes, even India a prominent founder
of Nonaligned Movement and a long time opponent of military alliances, has extended an exceptional
relationship with NATO under its Civil Nuclear program. And even the more confronting Russia and
NATO have a formal mechanism to discuss and find solutions on security challenges and threats

4. they face commonly. In UN Security Council both China and Russia directly or indirectly had
supported NATO led military operation in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.
Today the entire strategic environment and the grounds that governed NATO when created 63
years ago, has gone astray - both in meaning and in substance. Similarly, at a time when any attack
upon any NATO member country in Europe and America by any regular army of the world is most
unlikely, then how can NATO justify its existence, is a most crucial question of the day. Is NATO
gaining its existence only to satisfy the ego of some western powers or only to serve the purpose of
some big military- industrial establishment?
Question are many and there are more questions that are pricking the mind of world community
about the dangerously diffusive challenges from intense ethnic rivalry – never experienced in
human history to terrorism, including nuclear terrorism , piracy in major sea lanes, cyber attacks
and the disruption of major routes of global fuel supply.
Indubitably, globalization has made ideology irrelevant in relations among nations. Besides, global
economic integration has left no space for major or minor powers to confront with each other, but
find ways to live and prosper together in spite of their political differences. And there are spaces
in NATO that may help it gain global acceptance even among major countries like China, Russia,
India and Brazil.
In a multi-polar world, former director of policy planning in the US State Department - Anne-Marie
Slaughter - in Project Syndicate says “the actors that matter are not single states but groups of
states that are more or less densely connected”. Working as a “multi-hub security network, in which
the hubs are regional organizations of different sizes and strengths” NATO can prove its
justification in a new and completely changed scenario than at the time it was established. Similarly,
Ms. Slaughter has referred former National Security Advisor General Brent Scowcroft who has
also envisioned NATO in changed context as “a standing military force to enforce Security Council
resolutions”.
Therefore, if NATO wants to maintain its relevancy it must draw its legitimacy from among all the
major countries of the World including United Nations and must develop a complete but mutually
guaranteed security framework for giving NATO a new global role, that in the words of a Turkish

5. academician - Memduh Karakullukcu , is “the protection of global commons, the preemption of global
threats and the management of global calamities” effectlively.
kpbnepal@gmail.com
„The Reporter „weekly, May 28- June 3, 2012