Abstract
By NATO’s own modest goals, its 28–29 June summit was not a failure. But nor did it surge with institutional confidence. NATO leaders may have given up arguing publicly over Iraq, but they hardly furnished the US with the kind of support it once hoped for. Meanwhile, although members reaffirmed their commitment to Afghanistan, pessimism abounds about saving that country from another descent into state failure. It is notable, to be sure, that the whole ‘out of area’ debate of the l990s – that is, whether NATO had a role beyond the physical territory of its member states – has been relegated to historical theology. Still, the abiding question is whether NATO as an institution will be important and effective in the critical strategic theatres of the 21st century.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
