• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
LebanonIran
{
  "authors": [
    "Gregory Dubinsky"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "russia",
  "programs": [
    "Russia and Eurasia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "Caucasus",
    "Russia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

In The Media

Is Bigger Really Better?

Washington's strategic confusion on the logic of NATO expansion to Georgia and Ukraine split the alliance, undermined democratic reforms abroad, and helped bring out the worst in Moscow's relations with the West. Washington should convince skeptics of its sincerity on the importance of democratic reforms by setting stringent political standards for potential members.

Link Copied
By Gregory Dubinsky
Published on May 7, 2008

Source: Transitions Online

Gregory Dubinsky argues that Washington's strategic confusion on the logic of NATO expansion to Georgia and Ukraine split the alliance, undermined democratic reforms abroad, and helped bring out the worst in Moscow's relations with the West. Washington should convince skeptics of its sincerity on the importance of democratic reforms by setting stringent political standards for potential members. If it does so, Washington will regain credibility among NATO allies and advance stability and security in the region.

Click here to see the full article on the Transitions Online website.

About the Author

Gregory Dubinsky

Former Junior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program

Gregory Dubinsky
Former Junior Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Program
Political ReformDemocracyForeign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesCaucasusRussia

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 Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Shockwaves Across the Gulf

    The countries in the region are managing the fallout from Iranian strikes in a paradoxical way.

      • Angie Omar

      Angie Omar

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    The U.S. Risks Much, but Gains Little, with Iran

    In an interview, Hassan Mneimneh discusses the ongoing conflict and the myriad miscalculations characterizing it.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    The Greatest Dangers May Lie Ahead

    In an interview, Nicole Grajewski discusses the military dimension of the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Firepower Against Willpower

    In an interview, Naysan Rafati assesses the first week that followed the U.S. and Israeli attack on Iran.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    What Is Israel’s Plan in Lebanon?

    At heart, to impose unconditional surrender on Hezbollah and uproot the party among its coreligionists.

      Yezid Sayigh

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.