The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is among the most important organization whose role has been instrumental in maintaining international democracy and peace, as well as protecting human rights. Formed in 1949, the organization has deterred and defended its members against external threats ( Wallander, 2018) . Moreover, it has played a crucial role in advancing liberal democratic governance principles. As Wallander notes, NATO is facing a number of challenges. However, the most detrimental challenge is poised by the alliance’s new and early members.
According to Wallander, the initial challenge which NATO faced and still continues to face is backsliding of new members. Once they meet the organization’s admission standards, the new members relapse after their admission to the alliance. Most of these members, for instance, Hungary, make political reform policies that they have no plans of fulfilling. In so doing, they not only take advantage of NATO’s long-standing members, but also harms the organization’s credibility as well as distracts the alliance from its ability to propagate liberal values. Wallander attributes this lope-hole to the absence of consequences for violating the alliance’s liberal democratic standards. While backsliding is a significant threat to NATO’s coherence, Wallander notes that the greatest threat to the alliance’s unity and effectiveness comes from the declining commitment to democratic governance from its new as well as longstanding members such as Turkey, France, Germany, and the United States. The future of the organization greatly depends on these countries and as Wallander argues, the organization is as good as dead without the support of nations like United States.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Considering that the threat is now within NATO, the organization needs to develop new policies to mitigate the risk of backsliding of its members. Wallander proposes three key policies in this regard. First, she prescribes NATO’s adoption of European Union’s “Qualified Majority” rule for its internal governance ( Wallander, 2018) . In so doing, NATO empower a number of defined supermajority members to halt or withdraw the decision or voting rights of any member that backslides. Secondly, Wallander proposes that NATO should appoint among its senior officials, one individual to monitor ad report on liberal democratic credentials of both new and long-standing allies ( Wallander, 2018) . In so doing, the organization’s institutional leadership will be more in holding its members accountable to NATO’s standards. Thirdly, she prescribes NATO’s increased collaboration with the European Union ( Wallander, 2018) . Since the two organizations have shared focus on democracy, citizens’ rights, as well as, good governance, then they can reinforce one another’s strength, which would boost NATO’s capacity to hold its members accountable to the alliance’s good governance standards.
In regard to NATO’s sideling or working around crucial long-standing allies such as France, Germany, and the United States, Wallander proposes that citizens from individual states to hold elected leaders accountable, moreso, the Americans as NATO cannot survive with a failed liberal democracy in United States. Citizens with interest in protecting the liberal democracy’s laws and practices as well as institutions must hold the leaders accountable as it is not just an issue of domestic politics, but a national security matter as well.
Theoretical Approach
Wallander critically used realism theory in addressing the challenges and risks facing NATO’s credibility and effectiveness as well as its future. Her analysis contains key elements of realism theory that are elaborated using specific illustration. Firstly, all the nations in the alliance are unitary and rational actors that are after their national interests and goals ( Collins, 2016) . For example, despite objections from other NATO members such as France and Germany, the United States proceeded to invade Iraq in 2003 citing that Iraq’s pursuit of weapons of mass destruction threatened global security. Secondly, the different members interact in an anarchy system devoid of enforcement or higher authority ( Collins, 2016) . Wallander writes, “…there is no price for violating NATO’s liberal democratic standards…” (2018). She cites these lack of repercussion of violating the alliance’s standards on good governance as the lope-hole that both new and long-standing members are exploiting to backslide. In recognition of what threat this possess to the unity and effectiveness of NATO, Wallander, proposes the creation of a higher authority and an enforcement in the organization’s governance to ensure the members adhere to its standards. Thirdly, the states survive by accumulating power ( Collins, 2016) . For instance, Russia continues to use any means to gain influence over other members in the alliance. Wallander states, “Russian influence today, on the other hand, operates through shadowy financial flows, corrupt relationships, bribes, kickbacks, and blackmail” (2018).
Finally, power accumulation with NATO’s is a zero-sum association. Even though the possibility of war is driven the member states into war, it has driven them into both economic and military competition resulting in some states gaining more power at the expense of others. For instance, Wallander writes, “Every time European sanctions against Russia have come up for renewal, the United States and other core allies have had to scramble to prevent these countries from breaking with NATO…” (2018). Russia growing power and influence have, therefore, weakened other allies to the extent that they cannot take any effective action against it.
Alternative Approach: Liberal Institutionalism
Liberal institutionalism theory stipulates that domestic as well as international institutions are integral in facilitating cooperation and peace among states. The theory perceives high potential in sustained institutional cooperation. It assumes that states can overcome competition and conflict as well as war by establishing like-minded groups and cement the bond via domestic and international institutions ( Collins, 2016) . Liberal institutionalism has three interrelated prescriptions; first: domestically, all the states must have a republic government. Second: internationally, the republican states must come together and renounce war waging rights against other members. Third: universally, the citizens of these republican states should enjoy commercial liberalism indiscriminately.
The current backsliding in NATO is grounded in its universalist principles that are not shared universally ( Collins, 2016) . As one of the liberal institutions, the alliance’s members or the in-group are expected to expand as more states ascend to the organizations ‘universalist’ values that dictate how members should be treated. However, not all states have been able to reciprocate the same universalist values, which has created two factions; the in-group and the out-group. Moreover, to majority of backsliding states such as Hungry, Turkey, Poland, and Russia, the West has an edge as it wrote most of NATO’s regulations. Moreover, some states have historical resentments against the West that cannot be erased by the alliance. As long as these out-group outcry exists despite adopting the alliance’s standards and institutions, then NATO should expect more backsliding of early members.
In-group pain as well as blame has also contributed to backsliding of the NETO members ( Collins, 2016) . The in-group’s encompassing of states that are not accustomed or devoted to international reciprocity such as Hungary, has resulted in two key issues in NATO. Firstly, long-standing members feel exploited as it is the case with the United States which has repeatedly grumbled about free riders in NATO. Secondly, the new members feel cheated as most of the regulation appear to be foisted on them and do not serve their national interest. Hence, while the new members are defying NATO’s regulations, long-standing members such as United States want to leave the institution to avoid the burden of the free-riders. As such, NATO’s future and its unity as well as its effectiveness is at risk due to the declining commitment to institutional liberalism at both domestic and international level by its new and longstanding members.
Conclusion
NATO’s contribution cannot be underestimated. The organization has been instrumental in averting conflict and war among its members as well as promoting peace and democracy all over the world. However, the increasing decline of commitment of its members to democratic governance and institutional liberalism from its new and longstanding members greatly undermines its unity and effectiveness. To avert its decline, the institution needs to introduce some censorship it its governance and establish a system to hold members accountable to its standards of good governance. It also needs to work with other bodies such as European Union as they share common focus in essential issues such as good governance, citizen rights, and democracy.
References
Collins, A. (Ed.). (2016). Contemporary security studies . Oxford university press.
Wallander, C. (2018). NATO’s Enemies Within. Retrieved from https://www.realcleardefense.com/2018/06/22/natorsquos_enemies_within_302740.html
