NATO Enlargement Research Articles

Rhetorical action in a liberal international order in crisis: theorising EU and NATO enlargements post-2022

ABSTRACT The Russian invasion of Ukraine has thrust the issue of European Union and NATO enlargement back into the political spotlight. However, it remains uncertain whether established theoretical frameworks are still applicable in today’s rapidly changing world. In response to this uncertainty, this debate section brings together five short reflection pieces, with a response from Frank Schimmelfennig, to assess the relevance of the theory of ‘rhetorical action’ in light of recent developments in European and international politics. How effectively does rhetorical action explain current EU and NATO enlargement processes, as well as broader forms of international cooperation? The authors find strong overall support for the theory’s continued validity. However, they caution that the increasing politicisation of issues, the rising competition from populist, non-liberal forces, and the broader crisis of the Liberal International Order require more careful reflection and specification of the scope conditions that define the theory’s limits.

Türkiye’s Relations with/within NATO: The Ontological Security Dilemmas of Türkiye’s Transatlantic Identity

Since 1952, Türkiye’s Transatlantic identity has been largely shaped by its NATO membership and interactions with the Allies. During the Cold War, Türkiye aligned its national interests and security concerns with NATO, making its membership a central element of its identity. However, starting in the 2000s, Türkiye shifted toward a more independent foreign policy, influenced by its new activism and regional ambitions, particularly in the Middle East. This shift has caused tensions with NATO, especially considering Türkiye’s military interventions in Syria, its purchase of the S-400 missile defense system from Russia, and its reactions to the latest enlargement of NATO. This paper examines Türkiye’s evolving Transatlantic identity through the lens of ontological security, according to which states act in order to provide continuity in their identities (Türkiye’s Transatlantic identity) and to prevent any instabilities to feel ontologically secure, which then might create security dilemmas between the protective security cocoons (Türkiye’s NATO membership) and the crises with other actors (Türkiye’s clashes with/within NATO). In other words, this paper aims to understand how Türkiye’s Transatlantic identity is still valued, desired, and reconstructed, despite the security dilemmas of Türkiye’s contentions with/within the NATO Alliance, from the ontological security perspective.

The Geopolitical Implications of NATO’s Enlargement in The Nordic Region: The Accession of Finland and Sweden 2022 A Case Study

Objectives: This study aims to examine and analyse the geopolitical implications of NATO's enlargement in the Nordic region through the accession of Finland and Sweden. Methods: Utilising the case study method, this study describes analyses and attempts to predict the phenomenon of NATO’s enlargement through the membership of Finland and the prospected accession of Sweden to NATO. This method enables the researchers to provide an in-depth investigation and understanding of the correlation between different variables and dynamics that influenced NATO's enlargement in the Nordic region and the geopolitical implications of this enlargement. Results: The accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO carries significant geopolitical implications, which establishes NATO's preponderance in the Nordic region and encircles Russia's vital sphere. This turning point represents an extensive strategic challenge for Russia, as it doubles the common borders to approximately 2,500 km. Conclusion: This study concludes that Finland and Sweden's accession to NATO marked a turning point in the geopolitical, security and balance of power landscape in the Nordic region. Furthermore, the enlargement of the common borders between NATO and Russia will lead to a new interaction pattern, with increased chances of unintentional military skirmishes. Moreover, despite the democratic policies held by Finland and Sweden, the Realpolitik approach in foreign affairs remains most appropriate for security and survival. Eventually, the study emphasises the importance of classical geopolitical assumptions and the significance of the Realism paradigm in interpreting international relations and issues.

Expansion of NATO and Czech Republic

Expansion of NATO and Czech Republic

The Impact of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict on Global Economic Stability and Political Security

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has emerged as a significant geopolitical tension, with far-reaching implications for global stability and security. This paper intends to study the impact of the war on the worlds and regional economic development and political stability, and achieve some findings that may trigger further policy considerations in mitigating challenges and issues imposed by the war. Through literature reviews and comparison analysis, the findings reveal economic, political, and security consequences of the conflict. The disruption of trade flows, economic sanctions, and uncertainty have impacted both Russia and Ukraine, as well as the wider region and the world. Energy security concerns and shifts in military alliances have added to the complexity of the conflict. The expansion of NATO and increased rivalries between Russia and Western countries have further heightened tensions. Based on the findings, the paper concludes that the Russia-Ukraine conflict poses a significant threat to global economic stability and political security. It emphasizes the need for a multilateral approach to address the conflict and promote peace and stability in the region. Ceasefire agreements, humanitarian assistance, and reconstruction efforts are crucial steps towards long-term peace and development. The paper highlights the importance of prioritizing diplomatic solutions over short-term gains from the conflict. In summary, this paper intends to explore the implications of the Russia-Ukraine conflict on global stability and security, with findings that underscore the need for international cooperation and concerted efforts to mitigate the consequences of the conflict and foster a peaceful resolution.

Evolution of the Arctic Strategy of the USA and its Influence on the Foreign Policy Strategy of Russia in the Arctic

"Arctic" is translated from Greek as "northern" or as "bear", which is often associated with Russia and its efforts to develop this region. This is a single physical and geographical region of the Earth adjacent to the North Pole and including the margins of the continents of Eurasia and North America, almost the entire Arctic Ocean with islands (except for the coastal islands of Norway), as well as adjacent parts of the Atlantic and Pacifi c Oceans. The southern border of the Arctic coincides with the northern border of the tundra zone. Now the actions of the United States and NATO in the Arctic region have acquired a clearly anti- Russian character, which was especially manifested in the latest edition of the Arctic Doctrine of the United States. NATO's expansion into the region continues, the scale of the alliance's military exercises conducted there is increasing, which actively involve non-Arctic member countries of the bloc, which does not exclude the emergence of an armed conflict with Russia in the Far North.

Conspiratorial Narratives and Ideological Constructs in the Russia–Ukraine Conflict: From the New World Order to the Golden Billion Theories

This article explores the pervasive influence of conspiracy theories, specifically the New World Order (NWO) and Golden Billion theories, within the context of the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. These theories form key narrative frameworks in Russian state media and global conspiracy communities, shaping perceptions of geopolitical events. This study dissects four pivotal episodes within the Russia–Ukraine conflict to illustrate how conspiracy theories shape public perception and policy direction, further entrenching ideological divides. In the first episode of the 2022 full-scale invasion, narratives of the Golden Billion were utilised to justify the attack, presenting Russia as a bastion against the Western elite’s plans to dominate the global economy and resources. The second episode examines the attack on Mariupol in 2022, framed by Russian propaganda as a necessary act to thwart the supposed expansion of NATO and the EU, underpinned by the NWO agenda aiming to dilute Russian influence in Eastern Europe. The third episode analyses the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage in 2022, interpreted by some conspiracy theorists as an act by the NWO to destabilise Europe’s energy security, thus consolidating control over energy routes and resources. The fourth episode delves into the 2024 Moscow terrorist attacks, which were seen by some as either a false flag operation conducted by Western powers or as a legitimate repercussion of Western encroachment orchestrated to weaken Russia’s resolve and international standing. Each episode is contextualised within a broader conspiratorial framework, highlighting the dualistic nature of the NWO and Golden Billion theories that paint the conflict not merely as territorial disputes but as a clash between fundamentally opposing worldviews and global orders. This narrative analysis not only underscores the role of conspiracy theories in shaping geopolitical discourse but also demonstrates their utility in mobilising domestic support, framing international criticism, and justifying military actions. Our findings suggest that these conspiratorial narratives provide a resilient, albeit misleading, lens through which supporters of the Kremlin’s policies can rationalise the war, attributing complex sociopolitical dynamics to the malevolent machinations of a global elite. This study contributes to understanding how modern conflicts are interpreted through ancient conspiratorial lenses, impacting national and international policy and public opinion.

The History of Russian Diplomatic Opposition to NATO Expansion into the Baltics, Ukraine, and Georgia

Abstract While Russia may have been less perturbed by certain other NATO expansions, and accordingly may have expressed less concern about them, it has continuously and emphatically communicated that NATO expansion to the Baltics, Ukraine, and/or Georgia would gravely impinge upon Russia’s interests, and thus that Moscow was/is strongly opposed to such expansion. These communications began in the early 1990s, but the US dismissed and rejected this opposition – in some cases, quite consciously and deliberately. Drawing on official US and Russian sources, this article demonstrates that Russia’s public stance on NATO’s Baltic/Ukrainian/Georgian expansion was/is clear – it simply was not accommodated.

The forgotten NATO enlargement dove in the Kremlin

Has Vladimir Putin always stood against NATO’s eastward enlargement? Detractors claim that Moscow has invariably objected to the transatlantic organisation moving towards its borders. This article challenges the prevailing orthodoxy by demonstrating that at the turn of the century, the Russian head of state was quite comfortable with NATO ‘setting up shop’ in Eastern Europe. Drawing upon declassified US diplomatic cables and other historical sources, the presented material speaks to selective forgetfulness on the part of the Russian leadership. The first years of ‘Putinism’ were not marked by assertions that NATO’s eastward expansion complicated relations with the West. On the contrary, his public remarks suggested that Russia was not opposed to this process. Simply put, Putin’s own words at that time refute his present-day arguments and display of grievances.

Theoretical Premises of Support of and Opposition to NATO Enlargement

This article analyses the theoretical premises behind policy conclusion on NATO’s enlargement. The analysis proceeds through three phases: 1. Machine-generated elaboration of premises that could predict prescriptions on NATO enlargement. 2. Qualitative investigation to reveal the plausible logics from these premises to geopolitical prescriptions on NATO expansion. 3. Correlation tests to assess how systematically these premises lead to their expected prescriptions. The three differences that best predict whether an argument ends up supporting or opposing NATO enlargement are as follows: 1. Focus of analysis: Should we analyse international relations by focusing on agents or relationships? 2. Level of analysis: Is it morally or ontologically meaningful to consider intrastate realities, such as the level of democracy, when analysing international relations? 3. Role of power: Should the analysis focus on security methods based on changing the behaviour of others with power, or can security be built by neutral or power-negative (self-restrained) methods?

The Transformation of NATO-Russia Relations under the Context of NATO Expansion: From Post-Cold War to the 2014 Crimea Crisis

This paper will examine the transformation of NATO-Russia relations from the post-Cold War stage to the 2014 Crimea crisis. It will specify how NATO's several eastward expansions contributed to the shift of Russia's foreign policy and their bilateral relationship. The analysis will begin with the optimism the Russian side held after the Cold War and the establishment of bilateral cooperation acts such as the Basic Act and the Partnership for Peace. The paper will also analyze the color revolutions that occurred in Ukraine and Georgia, as well as the subsequent 2008 Russo-Georgian War, to examine how Russia's foreign policy has shifted during the 2000s. The paper will then shed light on the Ukrainian crisis in 2014, which ultimately ended the cooperation between Russia and NATO. Through case studies, this paper will examine the shift of Russias foreign policy in the context of NATO's eastward expansion, which has reshaped the geopolitical landscape of Eastern Europe in the past decades.

Security Concerns of the Russian Federation and Türkiye's Position Within the Scope of Georgia Intervention to South Ossetia in 2008

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the geopolitical landscape in the South Caucasus, focusing on Russia's strategic interests, NATO and EU expansion efforts, and Turkey's role as a regional actor. It begins by examining Russia's "Near Environment" doctrine, emphasizing Moscow's perceived security threats and its proactive measures to maintain influence in its immediate surroundings. The 2008 conflict between Russia and Georgia serves as a focal point, illustrating the complex interplay of historical, ethnic, and political factors in the region. The article explores the origins of the Georgian-Ossetian crisis, the escalation into the "Five-Day War," and the subsequent recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia by Russia. It also examines Turkey's stance on the conflict, balancing support for Georgia's territorial integrity with economic and strategic interests in the region that advocates respect for Georgia's territorial integrity and sovereignty in the context of international law, but at the same time does not ignore its security concerns of Russia and aims to maintain a policy of balance in the Black Sea Basin and the Caucasus in the context of regional peacekeeping. Furthermore, the analysis highlights the international community's response to the conflict and its implications for regional stability. The conclusion underscores the significance of the South Caucasus in global geopolitics, particularly in shaping the balance of power in the Black Sea region. Overall, this article offers valuable insights into the complex dynamics of conflict and cooperation in a strategically vital area of Eurasia.

The EU at War: After Two Years

The paper explores the role of the European Union (EU) in the war in Ukraine, from the run-up of the war to its impact on the EU’s future structure and functions, within Europe and globally. It begins with an account of the condition of the EU before the war, which it describes as overextended and stagnant with respect to the EU’s proclaimed finalité, the “ever closer union of the peoples of Europe.” Next, it recounts the use of the EU in early American attempts to include Ukraine in the East European enlargement of NATO, with EU membership as a reward for Ukrainian Westernization. To the EU leadership, this presented an opportunity to revive older, by then largely failed attempts at supranational unification and centralization, by offering to the United States to serve as its transatlantic base for its Ukrainian strategy. Following this, the paper explores the consequences for the EU and its stronger member states of the impending American withdrawal from the Ukrainian war theater, as the US turns to its conflict with China. The final section discusses the conditions under which Europe, the European states, and the EU can hope for some kind of strategic and political autonomy in the emerging new New World Order.

A nearly perfect marathon: the United States and the Baltic states’ accession to NATO

ABSTRACT Ron Asmus, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, liked to say that the Baltic states had to run a marathon to join NATO but could rely on the support of their American ‘coaches.’ Estonian diplomats have used the word ‘babysitter’ to describe their American colleagues. While it is true that the result of NATO enlargement was never inevitable, the uncertainties of the process were diminished by cooperation between candidate countries and the forces inside the US who pushed for enlargement. Without delving into their motives, this article traces the role of the US as ‘coaches’ and ‘babysitters’ in making the Baltic states’ ‘run’ toward NATO a nearly perfect marathon, despite all the pitfalls and doubts along the way.

Российско-американские отношения конца XX – первой четверти XXI века: тенденции и перспективы

The article studies the relations between Russia and the USA in the late 20th – first decades of the 21st centuries as a central problem of modern international relations. The analysis is performed in the historicalpolitical retrospect, from the 1990s to the present day. When it comes to the 1990s, viewed as a time of friendship and partnership, the reasons for the rapprochement between the two countries are described, as well as the events of the late 1990s – eastward NATO expansion and the NATO bombing of Belgrade – which were the turning point for the decline in Russia–US relations. Talking about the 2000s – 2010s, the author indicates the contradictions in the development of the bilateral relations, namely, a trend towards both improvement (establishment of the NATO–Russia Council following the attacks of September 11, 2001 and the “reset” policy in the late 2000s) and deterioration (as a result of the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, Russo-Georgian conflict in August 2008, Syrian civil war, Ukrainian political crisis and the accession of Crimea to Russia in 2014). According to the author, Russian-American relations over the past decade (2014–2024) could be described as hostile, which eliminates the possibility for their normalization through direct contacts between the two parties. The downward trend in Russia– US relations, which emerged in the late 1990s and continued to grow during the 2000s – 2020s, can be explained by the two countries’ irreconcilable positions on the system of international relations. The United States seek to create a unipolar – Americentric – world, while Russia insists on multipolarity. According to the author, the only way to improve relations between Russia and the USA is to stabilize the system of international relations. This problem is discussed in the final part of the article.

NATO enlargement to the East and the war in Ukraine from the American perspective

The aim of the article is to analyze the legitimacy of justifying the outbreak of war in Ukraine by expanding NATO to the East after the Cold War. The study was conducted from the American perspective. The main research problem is the question of whether, from the point of view of American scholars and experts, post-Cold War NATO expansion to the East was a strategic mistake and was responsible for the current war in Ukraine. There is no consensus among them whether NATO enlargement after the Cold War was an error and led to Russian aggression in Ukraine. Most of them, however, dispute such a statement, rejecting Moscow’s accusations that the United States and the West are accountable for the current situation in Ukraine.

JOHN MEARSHEIMER’S REALISM AND THE UKRAINIAN CRISIS

The paper sheds light on the ongoing debate around the Ukrainian war in American and Western scholarship, the focus is especially on John Mearsheimer’s views on the Western perception and attitudes towards Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine. An in-depth critical analysis of Mearsheimer’s essay titled “Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault” published in the aftermath of the Russian annexation of Crimea in 2014 and his other works have shown that putting the blame on Putin and demonization of Russia for the Ukrainian crisis is a dominant and prevailing discourse in the West. In this ongoing debate, John Mearsheimer seeks to change such narratives viewing them as one-sided and biased, forcefully and persuasive ly arguing that the Western nations led by the United States are to blame for this international crisis that has led to military conflict in Ukraine. The prime cause of the Ukrainian conflict according to Mearsheimer, lies in the eastward expansion of NATO since the 1990s, which is seen by Russia as a grave threat to its national security. Another reason of why there is a bitter tension between the West and Russia is that the American and European leaders’ beliefs of international politics are shaped and guided by a flawed view in which they tend to trivialize realis m, contemporaneously subscribing to liberalism, a school in international relations theory that dominates the discourse about the Transatlantic security. Although Mearsheimer’s realist stance and views about the Ukrainian war and European security do not constitute mainstream discours e in the West, they contribute to a proper understanding of this international crisis from the perspectives of realism.

Corrigendum to “NATO Expansion after 1989: An Argument from the Catholic Social Tradition”

Corrigendum to “NATO Expansion after 1989: An Argument from the Catholic Social Tradition”

Irreconcilable Differences? NATO's Response to Russian Aggression Against Ukraine

With Russia's full-spectrum war in Ukraine, NATO is rethinking its force posture and responding in ways that are consistent with its norms and identity as an alliance. While the war has been framed by some as a vindication of structural realism, we instead revisit constructivist arguments about security communities. This literature, which foregrounds learning and socialization processes, advanced scholarly and policy debates from NATO enlargement to defence sector reform. By contrast, how security communities engage with adversaries has received less attention. Noting the obvious balancing dynamics on display, we emphasize how threats take on particular meanings, which shape the types of military options considered. We also provide an explanation for NATO's resilience in the face of this external shock. Alliance disunity notwithstanding, we argue that collective defence is being redefined in real time, through dynamics that are not exclusively bound by a narrow focus on the military threat posed by Russia.

The Impact of NATO in the Current International Political Landscape in the Russia-Ukraine War

The Russia-Ukraine war has resulted in a severe humanitarian catastrophe and posed a significant threat to the stability of geopolitical relations. It has also been one of the most tough incidents between Russia and NATO. This paper aims to illustrate the role of NATO in the Russia-Ukraine war by examining the historical interconnectedness between NATO and Russia, the ideological differences between these two entities, and the specific actions of NATO during the war. After closely reviewing previous literature, reports, and official announcements, the paper argues that NATO has provided significant financial aid in security assistance and humanitarian interventions in Ukraine. In addition, it concludes that Russia has long seen the enlargement of NATO as an escalating security concern. In a nutshell, the outbreak of the war was due to a series of long-accumulated clashes. Eventually, Moscow has strategically chosen to initiate military intervention in Ukraine to disentangle it from the association with NATO, guaranteeing Russia’s regional security and sphere of influence. However, this study also demonstrates that to achieve the maximal mutual benefits, the war must be ended before it causes further casualties and all other means of loss; it would be beneficial for participants of the Russia-Ukraine war to seek more peaceful and sustainable solutions.