Commentary
Fabrice Pothier
{
"authors": [
"Fabrice Pothier"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie Europe"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Europe",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"Europe"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
NATO Must Adapt to New Challenges
Two decades after the end of the Cold War, NATO must demonstrate that it can adapt to the security challenges of the 21st century, including nuclear weapons proliferation, terrorism and cyber-warfare.
Published on Mar 3, 2010
Source: Global Europe
The predicament NATO faces in the coming decade boils down to one simple truth: it is not enough to share values; you must share the will to fight for and defend those values. Two decades after the end of the Cold War, the moment of truth has finally arrived for NATO: it must demonstrate that it can adapt to the security challenges of the 21st century.
The alliance must begin by identifying these challenges, and defining the role it can play in tackling them. From the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation to terrorism and cyber-warfare, NATO needs to pick its issues. It is only then, when the alliance faces the task of shaping its capabilities according to these threats, that the real work will begin.
NATO members are ill-equipped to deal with the emerging threats of the 21st century. The United States, for example, is wholly unprepared to respond to cyber-threats, while Europe can barely deploy 30 percent of its troops, few of whom are equipped or trained for modern warfare and training missions.
Finally, a 21st century NATO must be prepared to reach out to other regional and multilateral organizations. This would necessarily involve other organizations, such as the United Nations, improving their own effectiveness, but would make interventions in complex theatres like Afghanistan as comprehensive and legitimate as possible. Ultimately, the early 21st century is a time when NATO needs to fight for both effectiveness and relevance.
This article first appeared in Global Europe.
About the Author
Fabrice Pothier
Former Director, Carnegie Europe
Pothier, director of Carnegie Europe, is a noted commentator on European policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, transatlantic issues, and global drug policy.
- Can Macron Reload the Minsk Process?
- Where's Europe?Q&A
Fabrice Pothier
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Europe
- Europe Should Not Let Nuclear Nonproliferation DieCommentary
Amid uncertainty caused by the Iran war, the global drive for nonproliferation has stalled. With Europe diplomatically marginalized and countries reassessing their nuclear options, efforts to curb the spread of nuclear weapons risk becoming irrelevant.
Jane Darby Menton
- Can Europe Compete with the United States and China?Commentary
Between the United States’ market-driven approach and China's state-led industrial strategy, Europe is reckoning with how it can remain competitive in the global economy. But is Europe in danger of becoming a U.S. or China colony?
Noah Barkin, Anu Bradford
- EU Enlargement Forgets EuropeansCommentary
Preparing candidate countries for EU membership is no longer enough. As the enlargement process becomes a reality, the union must also prepare its own societies.
Iliriana Gjoni
- Taking the Pulse: Was it Right to Boycott Eurovision?Commentary
Five countries staged the biggest political boycott in Eurovision history over Israel’s participation. With the FIFA World Cup and other sporting or cultural touchstones on the horizon, are boycotts effective?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Trump Turns NATO into a Tool of CoercionCommentary
The full list of humiliations Europe has endured since Donald Trump returned to the White House makes for grim reading. But Washington’s adversarial approach to its allies undermines its own power base.
Rym Momtaz
