Abstract
NATO has proven its ability to manage the fundamental tasks determining European security. However, two common misperceptions have emerged that predict its demise. The most common fallacy, that NATO must have a clear‐cut mission to survive, ignores that even during the Cold War NATO served many functions beyond deterring Soviet aggression. Another widely held misconception is that NATO must formally expand its role to engage in out‐of‐area disputes if it is to protect European interests in the post‐Cold War era. Yet, IFOR shows that informal NATO coalitions have the flexibility to succeed where quasi‐automatic action in out‐of‐area disputes is bound to fail. Perennial strategic tasks, such as managing Russia, reconciling European integration with transatlantic security arrangements, promoting fairer burden sharing between the Allies, and maintaining U.S. engagement in Europe all continue to have relevance. Without NATO, these tasks could not be adequately handled.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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.
