NATO at Fifty: Maximizing NATO: A Relevant Alliance Knows How to Reach
A special commemorative section on the alliance that won the Cold War and its search for identity in triumph's aftermath. Michael Howard takes a look back; Vojtech Mastny gives the view from the other side of the Iron Curtain; and Robert E. Hunter and Michael E. Brown offer dueling perspectives on NATO's future, in a section edited by Peter Grose and copy-edited by Alice H.G. Phillips.
Robert E. Hunter is Senior Adviser at RAND in Washington, D.C., and Vice President of the Atlantic Treaty Association. He was U.S. Ambassador to NATO from 1993 to 1998.
The NATO alliance proved its value in the first decade after the Cold War. But the hard work of building a lasting system of European security for the 21st century has just begun. Failure now to sustain practical success and political support would show NATO's recent renaissance to have been short-lived.
No other alliance in history has re-created itself for times as different as the Cold War and today's challenge to construct a Europe "whole and free." From the start of the 1990s, when NATO seemed to have outlived its usefulness, it has emerged indispensable once more to Europe's long-term security. The world has witnessed its progress from an outdated alliance looking for a mission to a set of new missions demanding an alliance to fulfill them. America's necessary and permanent strategic engagement on the continent has been confirmed; the virtues of collective defense have been validated, even in the absence of a palpable military threat; the newly free nations of central Europe have convinced the West that they must be fully engaged in all Euro-Atlantic institutions, including the premier military alliance; the allies have accepted the need for NATO to stop conflict in the Balkans; and they have understood that coherent effort within the alliance is essential for resolving the central conundrum of the future of Russia.
Democracies at peace are never easily motivated to forestall crisis and conflict. Although NATO's new design is largely done, building the edifice and buttressing it against future stresses will require time, effort, and resources.
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
Site of post-WW2 tensions, Berlin now finds itself relegated to the margin of political and economic change across Europe. Even the FRG is showing less and less interest in Berlin's future. Nevertheless, NATO should not ignore it, but include it in a new vision for FRG-GDR relations and the ending of the division of Europe.
The recent U.S. experiment in unilateralism has shown the limitations of "coalitions of the willing." Washington should reaffirm its commitment to the Atlantic alliance and act with others when it can, alone only when it must.
The West has triumphed over its adversaries, but all is not well in the realm. Its voters are unhappy, its politics adrift. Now is not the time to pursue ambitious plans that would simultaneously deepen and broaden existing institutions. The West must lock in and eventually extend the greatest achievement of the past century: the creation of a community of democratic states among which war is unthinkable. The mechanism would be a transatlantic union committed to a single market and collective security.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.