Do We Still Need NATO?

Ahead of the upcoming summit of the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance, more than 800 demonstrators gathered in Strasbourg, France, site of summit, ahead of the arrival of twenty-eight world leaders for the summit. Riot police used tear gas and rubber bullets to repel the anti-NATO protesters as the city in eastern France prepared to host alliance’s 60th anniversary summit.

Tens of thousands of demonstrators have descended on Strasbourg and two southwest German towns to protest the cross-border summit of members of the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance, prompting France temporarily increase border security. In Strasbourg, many shops and small businesses have shut down during the summit.

At one point during the demonstrations, protesters set fire in the middle of a street to building materials they had scooped up from a nearby construction site. There were no reports of injuries although there were dozens of arrests.

German authorities estimated that up to 25,000 protesters will take part in several demonstrations in the German cities of Baden-Baden and Kehl, which will be co-hosting the summit and French authorities believe that anywhere between 30,000 and 40,000 more demonstrators will show up in Strasbourg during the summit.

Intense demonstrations during NATO summits are quite common, particularly in France, which withdrew from NATO military alliance in the late-1960’s, though it continues to play a role in the alliance’s political and diplomatic affairs.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization was originally formed in 1949 to repel the growing threat represented by the Soviet Union’s desire to spread communism throughout Europe. The main thesis of the alliance was that a Soviet strike against any member of the alliance would constitute an act of war against all members.

Since the disintegration of the Eastern Bloc and the subsequent break-up of the Soviet Union, more and more Europeans have come to regard NATO as a useless Cold War relic and demonstrations against the alliance have intensified every year since the elimination of the Soviet threat. Many perceive the alliance’s continued existence as further proof of the United States’ desire to continue to exercise great influence in European affairs.

It should be noted, however, that anti-NATO sentiment is confined mostly to the western European countries that would’ve relied heavily on U.S. military might to repel any attack by the Soviet Bloc. An opposite view would be found in many of the eastern European members of NATO. One must keep in mind that most countries of the former Soviet Bloc were forcefully coerced into accepting communism as a way of life. In fact, both Hungary and Czechoslavakia once tried to do away with their communist regimes, only to be stopped by Soviet tanks. So, many of these countries see NATO membership as protection against future desire by Russia to reclaim its lost influence, and the empire that went with it, in the region. Most quickly point to Russia’s recent military intrusion into the former Soviet republic of Georgia, which has already tried to join NATO and Russia’s recent lightly veiled threat of military action against Poland if it accepts the basing of a U.S. missile defense system as proof that Russia still poses a serious threat. Ukrainians, who probably suffered the worst during the Soviet years, still continue to look to Russia with suspicious eyes.

But, looking back at the point of view held by a growing number of Western Europeans, Russia no doubt feels threatened by an expanding NATO, which most of the world sees as just another term for U.S. Although the lives of most ordinary Russians have greatly improved under a (somewhat) democratic government, many Russian political officials who also held high positions during the Soviet remain badly psychologically scarred by the Soviet Union’s breakup and Russia’s subsequent loss of influence in Europe. NATO’s rapid expansion towards Russia’s borders only constitutes a greater blow to their self-esteem. Many feel that the continued existence of NATO will ultimately lead Russia to take pre-emptive measures to ensure that NATO remains a more acceptable distance away from Moscow – measures quite similar to those it took in setting up Soviet satellite governments in Eastern Europe to ensure that its real borders will never be threatened again.

But, then again, such an act by Russia will only support the argument that we still need NATO. It’s a tricky topic.