DOCSLIB.ORG

UNIVERZITA KARLOVA NATO and WMD: Evolution of the Threat

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UNIVERZITA KARLOVA NATO and WMD: Evolution of the Threat UNIVERZITA KARLOVA FAKULTA SOCIÁLNÍCH VĚD Institut politologických studií Bc. Lucie Hrdinová NATO and WMD: Evolution of the threat construction and Alliance’s response Diplomová práce Praha 2017 Autor práce: Bc. Lucie Hrdinová Vedoucí práce: Dagmar Rychnovská, LL.M., M.A., Ph.D. Rok obhajoby: 2017 Bibliografický záznam HRDINOVÁ, Lucie. NATO and WMD: Evolution of the threat construction and Alliance’s response. Praha, 2017. 95 s. Diplomová práce (Mgr.) Univerzita Karlova, Fakulta sociálních věd, Institut politologických studií. Katedra mezinárodních vztahů. Vedoucí diplomové práce Dagmar Rychnovská, LL.M., M.A., Ph.D. Abstrakt Diplomová práce s názvem „NATO and WMD: Evolution of the threat construction and Alliance’s response“ se zabývá vývojem chápání zbraní hromadného ničení v Severoatlantické alianci. Zbraněmi hromadného ničení (ZHN) se NATO zabývá již od počátku své existence, nicméně důraz byl až do skončení studené války kladen převážně na jednu z kategorií, a to jaderné zbraně. Avšak od počátku 90. let je patrné, že se Aliance zaměřuje na ZHN jako zastřešující pojem pro biologické, chemické, jaderné a od teroristických útoků z 11. září 2001 i radiologické zbraně. Přestože se jedná o významný koncept, není vymezení zbraní hromadného ničení zcela jednoznačné. Avšak to, jak aktéři ZHN chápou, je velmi důležité. Z tohoto důvodu je zkoumán oficiální diskurz NATO jako indikátor chápání ZHN v Alianci, přičemž tento postup také umožní splnit dva cíle této práce. Prvním cílem je analýza vývoje konstrukce a interpretace hrozby ZHN v NATO od roku 1991 až po současnost. Zadruhé chce práce zjistit jakým způsobem NATO odpovědělo na hrozby plynoucí ze zbraní hromadného ničení (tj. proliferace a terorismu) a identifikovat konkrétní opatření, jež byla přijata v rámci boje s rozvíjející se hrozbou ZHN. Tato diplomová práce vychází z teorie sekuritizace, jež umožňuje nahlížet na bezpečnost a hrozby jako na sociálně konstruované. Zbraně hromadného ničení jsou tak zde chápány ne jako fixní koncept, ale jako (relativně) flexibilní, politicky podmíněný konstrukt s významnými bezpečnostními implikacemi. Překvapivě málo prací se zabývá tím, jak jsou hrozby ZHN konstruovány a chápány v NATO, a proto by tato práce ráda přispěla k částečnému zaplnění této mezery. Klíčová slova Zbraně hromadného ničení (ZHN), NATO, obsahová analýza, terorismus, proliferace, sekuritizace, konstrukce hrozby Abstract This Diploma Thesis called “NATO and WMD: Evolution of the threat construction and Alliance’s response” deals with the evolution of understanding of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). WMD, especially the nuclear ones, have preoccupied NATO since its establishment. However, it was only after the end of the Cold War that NATO started to focus on WMD as a specific overarching category, consisting of chemical, biological and nuclear (since 9/11 also radiological) weapons. Despite the conspicuousness of the concept and increased use of the WMD term, the definition of weapons of mass destruction is not clear-cut. However, the way the actors understand WMD is very important. For this reason, NATO’s official discourse is studied as an indicator of how is WMD understood in the Alliance, which will allow to fulfill objectives of this thesis. First, the work intends to analyze how has the WMD threat been constructed and interpreted within the Alliance since the year 1991 until this day. Secondly, this thesis aims to find out what is NATO’s response to the dangers posed by the identified WMD threats (i.e. proliferation and terrorism) and identify the concrete measures the Allies undertook to tackle the evolving WMD threat. This thesis is based on securitization theory, which views security and threats as socially constructed. Accordingly, the WMD are treated in this thesis not as a fixed concept, but as a relatively flexible, politically conditioned, construction with important implications for international security. Since there is surprisingly little research done on how NATO constructs and interprets the WMD threat, this thesis would like to contribute to the yet under-researched topic of WMD threat construction within this Alliance. Keywords Weapons of mass destruction (WMD), NATO, content analysis, terrorism, proliferation, securitization, threat construction Extent of the study: 33 324 words, 215 277 characters Prohlášení 1. Prohlašuji, že jsem předkládanou práci zpracovala samostatně a použila jen uvedené prameny a literaturu. 2. Prohlašuji, že práce nebyla využita k získání jiného titulu. 3. Souhlasím s tím, aby práce byla zpřístupněna pro studijní a výzkumné účely. V Praze dne 20. 12. 2016 ……………………………. Lucie Hrdinová Poděkování Tímto bych chtěla poděkovat Dagmar Rychnovské, LL.M., M.A., Ph.D. za vloženou důvěru při výběru práce, milé vedení, neocenitelné rady a veškerý čas, který této práci věnovala. Ráda bych také poděkovala své rodině za jejich nepřetržitou podporu v průběhu mého studia. Contents INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 1. THE POLITICS AND THE MEANING OF THE WMD ............................................................... 7 1.1. ORIGINS OF THE TERM WMD ....................................................................................................... 7 1.2. INCONSISTENCY IN THE USE OF THE WMD TERM ........................................................................ 8 1.3. WMD AS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT ................................................................................................. 10 1.4. WMD AS A CATEGORY OF WEAPONS ......................................................................................... 13 1.4.1. Critique of WMD concept .................................................................................................. 13 1.4.2. Characteristics of Weapons of Mass Destruction ............................................................. 16 1.4.2.1. Chemical weapons ........................................................................................................................................ 17 1.4.2.2. Biological weapons ....................................................................................................................................... 18 1.4.2.3. Radiological weapons ................................................................................................................................... 18 1.4.2.4. Nuclear weapons ........................................................................................................................................... 19 2. THEORETICAL AND ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK ............................................................. 20 2.1. SECURITIZATION THEORY ........................................................................................................... 20 2.2. ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................................ 23 2.2.1. Methods .............................................................................................................................. 23 2.2.2. Operationalization ............................................................................................................. 25 2.2.3. Data ................................................................................................................................... 28 3. EVOLUTION OF NATO’S UNDERSTANDING OF WMD THREAT AND THE ALLIANCE’S RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................ 30 3.1. INTRODUCTION TO NATO AND WMD DURING THE COLD WAR ERA ........................................ 30 3.2. INCREASING AWARENESS OF WMD THREAT SINCE 1990/1991 ................................................. 31 3.3. ALLIANCE POLICY FRAMEWORK ON PROLIFERATION OF WMD IN 1994 AND A NEW COGNIZANCE OF WMD THREAT ............................................................................................................................ 33 3.4. IMPORTANT YEAR OF 1999 – STRATEGIC CONCEPT & WMD INITIATIVE ................................. 37 3.5. FROM 11 SEPTEMBER 2001 TO THE PRAGUE SUMMIT IN 2002 ................................................... 41 3.6. FROM IRAQ WAR TO THE ISTANBUL SUMMIT IN 2004 ............................................................... 45 3.7. FROM RIGA TO BUCHAREST – NEED FOR BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENCE ................................... 48 3.8. NATO’S 60TH ANNIVERSARY AND NEW WMD POLICY AFTER 15 YEARS ................................... 51 3.9. LISBON SUMMIT AND NEW STRATEGIC CONCEPT 2010 ............................................................. 54 3.10. CHICAGO SUMMIT AT A TIME OF COMPLEX SECURITY CHALLENGES ......................................... 56 3.11. WALES SUMMIT - “MOST IMPORTANT ONE SINCE THE FALL OF THE BERLIN WALL” ................ 58 3.12. WARSAW SUMMIT AS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT NATO SUMMIT SINCE THE COLD WAR ............ 60 4. DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS .......................................................... 63 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................................... 74 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................ 80 BIBLIOGRAPHY .....................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Nato Enlargement
    Committee Reports POLITICAL SUB-COMMITTEE ON CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE REPORT NATO ENLARGEMENT Bert Koenders (Netherlands) International Secretariat Rapporteur October 2001 CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION: NATO ENLARGEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR THE ALLIANCE II. NATO'S LAST ENLARGEMENT ROUND - LESSONS LEARNED A. CONTRIBUTION OF NEW MEMBERS TO EUROPEAN SECURITY B. THE MEMBERSHIP ACTION PLAN (MAP) III. STATUS OF PREPARATIONS OF THE NINE APPLICANT COUNTRIES A. ALBANIA B. BULGARIA C. ESTONIA D. LATVIA E. LITHUANIA F. THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA G. ROMANIA H. SLOVAKIA I. SLOVENIA IV. FURTHER NATO ENLARGEMENT AND SECURITY IN THE EURO- ATLANTIC AREA A. RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA B. RELATIONS WITH UKRAINE V. NATO ENLARGEMENT AND EU ENLARGEMENT VI. CONCLUSIONS VII. APPENDIX I. INTRODUCTION: NATO ENLARGEMENT AND PRIORITIES FOR THE ALLIANCE 1. The security landscape in Europe has been radically altered since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the "velvet revolutions" of 1989 and 1990. Though the risk of an all-out confrontation between the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact and NATO no longer exists, pockets of instability, including military conflict, remain on the European continent. The debate on NATO enlargement has to be seen principally in the context of the transformation of NATO from a defence alliance into an organisation additionally charged with providing, or at least contributing to, comprehensive security. 2. NATO's adaptation to the changing security environment is mirrored in its opening up to the countries in Central and Eastern Europe. This has been reflected in the updating of the Strategic Concept, but also in a process that consists of developing and intensifying dialogue and co-operation with the members of the former Warsaw Pact.
    [Show full text]
  • 7.1 Defense Spending During the Cold War (1947-1991)
    Influencing NATO Shaping NATO Through U.S. Foreign Policy Justin Sing Masteroppgave Forsvarets høgskole Spring 2020 II *The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the the United States Marine Corps, Department of the Navy, or the Department of Defense. Summary An assessment of the influence of United States foreign policy impact on the decision of NATO members to formally accept policies which align with U.S. strategic goals. The assessment looks at the National Security Strategy and Defense Strategic documents of each United States Presidential Administration following the end of the Cold War to determine changes to U.S. commitment to NATO and the resultant changes to Alliance force posture and defense spending agreements. The paper also assesses the impacts of U.S. Administration changes in rhetoric, and of U.S. direct military action in specific NATO-led operations against the resultant decision of NATO members to accede to U.S. demands for increased defense spending. III *The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the position of the the United States Marine Corps, Department of the Navy, or the Department of Defense. Table of Contents 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 2 Method ............................................................................................................................ 3 3 United States Historical Perspective of the
    [Show full text]
  • The Nato-Russia Council and Changes in Russia's Policy
    THE NATO-RUSSIA COUNCIL AND CHANGES IN RUSSIA’S POLICY TOWARDS NATO A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY BEISHENBEK TOKTOGULOV IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS SEPTEMBER 2015 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof. Dr. Meliha Altunışık Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Bağcı Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prof. Dr. Oktay F. Tanrısever Supervisor Examining Committee Members Prof. Dr. Meliha Altunışık (METU,IR) Prof. Dr. Oktay F. Tanrısever (METU,IR) Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Bağcı (METU,IR) Prof. Dr. Fırat Purtaş (GU,IR) Assist. Prof. Dr. Taylan Özgür Kaya (NEU,IR) ii PLAGIARISM I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name : Beishenbek Toktogulov Signature : iii ABSTRACT THE NATO-RUSSIA COUNCIL AND CHANGES IN RUSSIA’S POLICY TOWARDS NATO Toktogulov, Beishenbek Ph.D., Department of International Relations Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Oktay F. Tanrısever September 2015, 298 pages The objective of this thesis is to explain the changes in Russia’s policy towards NATO after the creation of the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) in 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • The Prague Summit and Nato's Transformation
    THE PRAGUE SUMMIT AND NATO’S TRANSFORMATION NATO PUBLIC DIPLOMACY DIVISION 1110 Brussels - Belgium Web site: www.nato.int E-mail: [email protected] A READER’S GUIDE THE PRAGUE SUMMIT AND NATO’S TRANSFORMATION SUMMIT AND NATO’S THE PRAGUE PRARGENG0403 A READER’S GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE 3 I THE SUMMIT DECISIONS 9 II KEY ISSUES 19 New members: Expanding the zone of security 20 New capabilities: Adapting to modern challenges 26 New relationships: Practical cooperation and dialogue 34 After Prague: The road ahead 67 © NATO 2003 NATO INVITEES Country* Capital Population GDP Defence Active Troop *Data based on (million) (billion expenditures Strength national sources Euros) (million Euros) Bulgaria (25) Sofia 7.8 16.9 494 (2.9% GDP) 52 630 Estonia (27) Tallin 1.4 6.8 130 (1.9% GDP) 4 783 Latvia (33) Riga 2.3 8.8 156 (1.8% GDP) 9 526 Lithuania (34) Vilnius 3.5 14.5 290 (2.0% GDP) 17 474 Romania (36) Bucharest 22.3 47.9 1117 (2.3% GDP) 99 674 Slovakia (38) Bratislava 5.4 24.9 493 (2.0% GDP) 29 071 ★ Slovenia (39) Ljubljana 2.0 22.4 344 (1.5% GDP) 7 927 III DOCUMENTATION 71 Prague Summit Declaration – 21 November 2002 72 Prague Summit Statement on Iraq – 21 November 2002 78 Announcement on Enlargement – 21 November 2002 79 Report on the Comprehensive Review of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council and Partnership for Peace - 21 November 2002 80 Partnership Action Plan Against Terrorism - 21 November 2002 87 Chairman’s Summary of the Meeting of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council at Summit Level – 22 November 2002 94 Statement by NATO
    [Show full text]
  • Doubling NATO: Functional and Geographical Enlargement of the Alliance Ergodan Kurt Old Dominion University
    Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Graduate Program in International Studies Dissertations Spring 2010 Doubling NATO: Functional and Geographical Enlargement of the Alliance Ergodan Kurt Old Dominion University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds Part of the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Kurt, Ergodan. "Doubling NATO: Functional and Geographical Enlargement of the Alliance" (2010). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), dissertation, International Studies, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/4bgn-h798 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds/75 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Program in International Studies at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. DOUBLING NATO: FUNCTIONAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL ENLARGEMENT OF THE ALLIANCE by Erdogan Kurt B.A. August 1996, Turkish Military Academy M.A. July 2001, Naval Postgraduate School A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL STUDIES OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY May 2010 Approved by: ©2010 Erdogan Kurt. All rights reserved. ABSTRACT DOUBLING NATO: FUNCTIONAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL ENLARGEMENT OF THE ALLIANCE Erdogan Kurt Old Dominion University, 2010 Director: Dr. Regina Karp This dissertation studies NATO expansion as institutional adaptation. More specifically, it examines the interaction between NATO's functional and geographical enlargement. This study asserts that there is a close relationship between NATO's new functions and its enlargement.
    [Show full text]
  • 11 NATO and the Partnership for Peace
    11 NATO and the Partnership for Peace Frank Boland1 uring 1989 and 1990, as the hold of the Soviet Union and the authority of com- munist regimes evaporated across the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Allies attempted to make sense of Dthis new situation. There was unease that the old certainties of the Cold War era were being swept away without any guarantees that their replacements would be more comfortable to live with. There was disquiet that the security linkage with the United States, through NATO, might no longer be sustainable or, at least, might be substantially more difficult to sustain than it had been. The complete dissolution of the Soviet Union was barely conceiv- able at that time. Allies were also wrestling with the complexities of extremely challenging arms control agreements, while also trying to define the wider role of the Atlantic Alliance in a Europe where the Conference on Security Cooperation in Europe and, subsequently, the European Union would also be significant political players.2 As they contemplated these uncertainties, the idea began to take hold that the Alliance had to provide practical assis- tance and institutional structures to support emerging democratic institutions and states in resisting the almost inevitable pressures that could emerge and drag them back toward the authoritarian practices to which they had been accustomed for a generation, or more. In July 1990, in their London Summit Declaration, NATO Heads of State and Government extended the “hand of friendship” to the countries of the East that had been their adversaries in the Cold War.3 They also noted that NATO would adapt and could “help build the structures of a more united continent, supporting security and stability with the strength of our shared faith in democracy, the rights of the individual, and the peaceful resolution of disputes.”4 They also proposed that the countries of the former Warsaw Pact establish regular diplomatic liaison with the Atlantic Alliance.
    [Show full text]
  • Nato Enlargement: Qualifications and Contributions—Parts I–Iv Hearings
    S. HRG. 108–180 NATO ENLARGEMENT: QUALIFICATIONS AND CONTRIBUTIONS—PARTS I–IV HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MARCH 27, AND APRIL 1, 3 AND 8, 2003 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 90–325 PDF WASHINGTON : 2003 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:42 Nov 12, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 90325 SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana, Chairman CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware LINCOLN CHAFEE, Rhode Island PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland GEORGE ALLEN, Virginia CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio BARBARA BOXER, California LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee BILL NELSON, Florida NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey KENNETH A. MYERS, JR., Staff Director ANTONY J. BLINKEN, Democratic Staff Director (II) VerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:42 Nov 12, 2003 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 90325 SFORELA1 PsN: SFORELA1 CONTENTS Thursday, March 27, 2003—Part I Page Allen, Hon. George, U.S. Senator from Virginia, opening statement .................
    [Show full text]
  • 'One In, All In?' NATO's Next Enlargement
    ‘One in, all in?’ NATO’s next enlargement TERRY TERRIFF, STUART CROFT, ELKE KRAHMANN, MARK WEBBER AND JOLYON HOWORTH In the wake of the war in Kosovo, and the subsequent downfall of President Milosevic, it was easy to see NATO as the most powerful military organization in the world. A large number of states that are geographically close to the alliance share this assessment and therefore quite naturally seek to benefit from NATO membership. Managing this persistent demand to enlarge, however, has confronted the alliance with a number of difficult political and strategic issues. At NATO’s Madrid summit in 1997, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland (the so-called Visegrad Three) were invited to join, and they formally acceded to the alliance shortly before the 1999 Washington summit.1 The alliance also noted at Washington that it would consider further enlargement at its summit º meeting in Prague in November 2002. The NATO secretary-general, Lord Robertson, reiterated this claim in June 2001, saying that ‘NATO hopes and expects, based on current and anticipated progress by the aspiring members, to continue the process of enlargement at the forthcoming Prague summit. In other words, the so-called “zero option” is off the table.’2 There are currently ten official applicants for membership—Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Mace- donia, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia (the so-called Vilnius Nine), plus Croatia— and there is a very real possibility that other states, such as Ukraine,3 might follow in the not too distant future. The question is not whether NATO will invite more states to become members at the Prague summit, but how many it will invite.
    [Show full text]
  • THE NATO PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY from 1955-2005.Pdf
    NATO Parliamentary Assembly 1955-2005 NATO Parliamentary Assembly 1955-2005 This book was produced with the generous assistance of the 50 Years parliaments of Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Slovenia, and Turkey. of Parliamentary Diplomacy Editor’s Note n 2004 the Assembly’s Standing Committee decided to There may be slight inconsistencies between articles. I commemorate the Assembly’s 50th anniversary. It was However, as we have aimed for articles based on personal rec- decided to hold a special plenary sitting during the 50th annual ollections, we have not attempted to reconcile occasional dif- session. To that end, during that session, which took place in ferences or discrepancies. Our goal was to retain the original Venice, a special meeting was held involving, for the first time, spontaneity of the authors’ perceptions and memories. the permanent representatives to the North Atlantic Council. This was an outstanding success, as a record number of session As with so many projects of this kind, the book has evolved participants – over a thousand – clearly showed. and become more substantial than was first envisaged. Contributions were generally longer than anticipated and as The Standing Committee also decided that the Assembly we began to see a whole picture of the project emerging, it should produce a commemorative book as an enduring way of became clear that it would merit a more visually appealing marking this important milestone in the Assembly’s history. and enduring format than was foreseen at the outset. This The volume should cover the entire span of the Assembly’s exis- had obvious financial implications, but several delegations tence, but focus specifically on the Assembly’s role from the end came forward with generous offers of assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • MICROCOMP Output File
    S. HRG. 106±144 NATO'S 50TH ANNIVERSARY SUMMIT HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION APRIL 21, 1999 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 58±335 CC WASHINGTON : 1999 VerDate 11-SEP-98 14:44 Sep 20, 1999 Jkt 549297 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 58335 SFRELA1 PsN: SFRELA1 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS JESSE HELMS, North Carolina, Chairman RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware PAUL COVERDELL, Georgia PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland CHUCK HAGEL, Nebraska CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut GORDON H. SMITH, Oregon JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts ROD GRAMS, Minnesota RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming BARBARA BOXER, California JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey BILL FRIST, Tennessee JAMES W. NANCE, Staff Director EDWIN K. HALL, Minority Staff Director (II) VerDate 11-SEP-98 14:44 Sep 20, 1999 Jkt 549297 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 58335 SFRELA1 PsN: SFRELA1 CONTENTS Page Cambone, Dr. Stephen A., research director, Institute for National Security Studies, National Defense University, Washington, DC .................................. 32 Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 45 Grossman, Hon. Marc, Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs ......... 14 Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 50 Hadley, Hon. Stephen, partner, Shea and Gardner, Washington, DC ................ 31 Kramer, Hon. Franklin D., Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs .................................................................................................... 19 Prepared statement of ...................................................................................... 53 Kyl, Hon. Jon, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Central European University the Limits of Rhetorical
    CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY THE LIMITS OF RHETORICAL ENTRAPMENT: NATO ENLARGEMENT IN SOUTHEAST EUROPE BY LIDIJA LEVKOVSKA SUBMITTED TO CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND EUROPEAN STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND EUROPEAN STUDIES SUPERVISOR: PROFESSOR ERIN JENNE CEU eTD Collection BUDAPEST, HUNGARY 5 JUNE 2008 16 000 WORDS Abstract NATO enlargement has been recognized as the most successful policy the Alliance has embarked on since the end of the Cold War. The enlargement has been subject to many theoretical explanations aiming to explain the driving force behind the decision to expand the Alliance and extend invitations to former adversaries. Rationalist and constructivists theories of international relations confirmed to be puzzled by NATO’s decision to pursue eastern enlargement. The following work employs the “rhetorical action” conceptual lens, which explains the enlargement puzzle for the first and the second round of NATO expansion. However, the third round of enlargement questions the relevance of the “rhetorical action” and places this theoretical framework in the same group of theories that fail to fully explain the enlargement policy of the Alliance. This thesis will first examine how the argumentative strategies employed by the proponents to enlarge to candidate countries at the 1997 Madrid Summit and the 2002 Prague Summit succeeded in persuading opponents of enlargement to uphold to their commitments. Secondly, this thesis shows how ‘rhetorical action’ failed to influence the enlargement decisions taken at the Bucharest Summit in 2008. The third round of enlargement and the outcome brings the debate back to rationalist conceptual lens where the rational preferences dominate accession decisions of the Alliance by placing the emphasis on CEU eTD Collection preserving Alliance unity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reader's Guide to the Nato Summit in Washington
    THE READER’S GUIDE TO THE NATO SUMMIT IN WASHINGTON 23 - 25 APRIL 1999 ISBN 92-845-0132-6 Contents 1 Introduction How to use this Guide 7 2 Summing up the Summit The Washington Declaration 11 Washington Summit Communiqué 13 Achievements of the Washington Summit 25 3 NATO in the Balkans Statement on Kosovo 29 Chairman’s Summary of the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council at the Level of Heads of State and Government with Countries in the Region of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia 31 Statement following the Meetings of Foreign and Defence Ministers 33 Extracts from the Washington Summit Communiqué on NATO’s Role in the Former Yugoslavia 35 NATO’s Role in Relation to Kosovo 37 NATO’s Role in Bosnia and Herzegovina 43 4 Strategy and Defence The Alliance’s Strategic Concept 47 Defence Capabilities Initiative 61 Background to the Strategic Concept 63 Development of the European Security and Defence Identity (ESDI) within NATO 65 The Combined Joint Task Forces Concept 67 Reform of NATO’s Integrated Military Command Structure 69 5 NATO’s Open Door Membership Action Plan 73 The Accession of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland 81 NATO’s Open Door Policy 83 6 NATO’s Partnership Activities Chairman’s Summary of the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council at Summit Level 87 Declaration of the Heads of State and Government Participating in the NATO-Ukraine Commission Summit 89 Further Development of the EAPC 91 Partnership for Peace - An Enhanced and More Operational Partnership 93 NATO and Russia 95 NATO and Ukraine 97 Mediterranean Dialogue 99 Civil
    [Show full text]