اردو(Urdu) English(English) عربي(Arabic) پښتو(Pashto) سنڌي(Sindhi) বাংলা(Bengali) Türkçe(Turkish) Русский(Russian) हिन्दी(Hindi) 中国人(Chinese) Deutsch(German)
Friday, February 14, 2025 13:45
Question of Palestine Eternal Wisdom: Iqbal Building Futures: Empowering Pakistan's Youth for Tomorrow Tourism: An Essential Element for Sustainable and Inclusive Growth Connecting Youth to Global Opportunities Algorithms: The Silent Architects of Warfare Pakistani Youth: The Driving Force for National Progress Investing in Future Generations: Pakistan Army Lost Voices: The Systematic Marginalization of Indian Muslims Parallel Struggles: Examining the Palestinian and Kashmiri Quests for Self-determination Emergence of BJP as a Hindutva Force The Fourth Industrial Revolution: Transforming Pakistan Building Sustainable Cities: Urban Search and Rescue Preparedness Simulation Exercise In the Pursuit of Happiness: Understanding Hedonia, Eudemonia, and Naikan COAS’ U.S. Visit: Strengthening Ties and Fostering Collaboration A Biological Marvel of Human Heart Educational Empowerment: FC Balochistan (North) Initiates Literacy Program for Soldiers Digital Pakistan Journey: Pioneering Towards a Connected Future Driving Digital Transformation: Pakistan CJCSC Calls on His Majesty King Abdullah II Ibn Al Hussain During His Visit to Jordan COAS' Peshawar Visit Highlights Security, Socioeconomic Development and National Unity Unity in Diversity: COAS Joins Christmas Celebrations with Christian Community in Rawalpindi Chief of the Naval Staff Attends Indian Ocean Naval Symposium in Bangkok Strengthening Bonds and Elevating Collaboration: Combat Commander Turkish Air Force Calls on Chief of the Air Staff Closing Ceremony of Multinational Special Forces Exercise Fajar Al Sharq-V Strengthens Counterterrorism Collaboration Off the Beaten Track: Exploring Jiwani's Coastal Marvels and Heritage Special Investment Facilitation Council: A Game Changer for the Economy of Pakistan Rising Stars: Pakistan’s Youth Shines Bright in 2023 Indian Supreme Court’s Decision and the International Law Challenges to Justice: The Indian Supreme Court’s Fallacy in IIOJK Belt and Road Initiative: Strengthening Global Ties with Unhindered Trade and Connectivity The Media Matrix: Unraveling How Technology Shapes Our Perception Decoding Human Interaction: The Comprehensive Guide to Reading Body Language The Magic of Moscow On the Same Wavelength: Suno FM's Impact on Community Empowerment, Diversity, and Social Progress in Pakistan The Journey of SAIL: A Beacon of Hope for Autism in Gilgit-Baltistan Pakistan National Youth Convention 2024: COAS Stresses Youth's Vital Role, Urges Unity, and National Strength Vice Foreign Minister of the People’s Republic of China Calls on COAS COAS Attends Inauguration Ceremony of the Second Chapter of NASTP Silicon PAF's Induction and Operationalization Ceremony Showcases Technological Advancements and Operational Excellence COAS Witnesses Firing of Different Air Defense Weapon Systems During Exercise Al-Bayza-III, 2024 COAS Visits POF Wah, Highlights Importance of Indigenous Defense Industry Exercise Sea Guard-24: Strengthening Maritime Security Al-Noor Special Children School and College Celebrates International Day of Persons with Disabilities 2023 in Multan Garrison Exercise BARRACUDA-XII: Strengthening Global Cooperation for Maritime Safety and Environmental Protection Pakistan-Qatar Joint Aerial Exercise "Zilzal-II" Held in Qatar From Breakthroughs to Global Leadership—The Next Chapter Keeping the Promise Alive: Self-Determination for the Kashmiris Pakistan in 2025: Challenges and Opportunities One Year of Unwavering Resolve: Performance of SIFC in 2024 Changing Global Dynamics and Pakistan Addressing Pakistan‘s Climate Crisis: A Security Perspective Subsurface Competition in the Indian Ocean Sands, Sea, and Stories: Why Pakistan’s Coastline Deserves the Spotlight Strategic Diplomacy, Tariffs, and Global Implications Obligations of the Parties to the Genocide Convention Empowering Future Generations: Education as a Catalyst for Progress in Pakistan’s Context Building a Sustainable Future Integrating ESD into Pakistan’s Education System Integration of Cultural Intelligence into Strategic Decisions for Export Promotion From Battlefields to Exhibits: The Story Behind the Army Museum Lahore The Forgotten Melodies: Legacies of Pakistan’s Musical Maestros CJCSC Visits Iraq to Strengthen Defense Ties COAS Visits Field Training Exercise Near Narowal and Sialkot 17th Chief of the Naval Staff Amateur Golf Cup 2024 Held at MGGC, Islamabad High Level Defense Delegation of Azerbaijan Calls on CAS International Day of Persons with Disabilities Celebrated at Al-Noor Special Children School, Multan 52nd National Athletics Championships-2024 Held at Ayub Stadium, Multan Garrison Counterterrorism Center Lehri Hosts Key Military Exercises Pak-China Joint Exercise Warrior-VIII Concludes Students and Faculty Experience a Day with Pakistan Army at Malir Garrison Al-Barq Punjab Hockey League Organized at Okara Garrison PNS Zulfiquar Enhances Regional Maritime Security through Humanitarian Assistance and Bilateral Exercises The Fifth Generation War and Propaganda Against the Armed Forces IIOJK: The Unbroken Cycle of Occupation and the Quest for Self-Determination The Cost of Silence: Global Implications of Ignoring Kashmir Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir: The Continuous Legacy of Imperial Boomerang The Need for Accountability: Indian Actions in Violation of International Law The Ideological Roots of India’s Political Shift: RSS, Hindutva, and Nationalism Public Value, Innovation, and the Digital Economy: Advancing National Development in Pakistan Foreigners Who Made Pakistan Their Home (Part I) The Sea of Opportunity: How Pakistan Can Leverage its Maritime Strength Cultural Connections: Enhancing Public Diplomacy Between Pakistan and Azerbaijan Gwadar‘s First Flight: A Gateway to Balochistan‘s Prosperity Through CPEC Strategic Vision: Jinnah‘s Global Knowledge and Its Role in Pakistan‘s Founding The Ordeal of Lieutenant Wain The Visionary Politician Who Helped Shape Pakistan‘s Destiny: Sir Sikandar Hayat Khan (Part I) The Collapse of Certainty: Fake News and the Erosion of Truth (Part I) Digital Shadows: The Hidden Threat of Disinformation Targeting Pakistan Defending the Digital Pakistan: Strengthening Cybersecurity in a Growing Online Ecosystem Armed Forces of New Uzbekistan: Strengthening National Security and Global Defense Readiness Guardians of the Seas: Pakistan Navy CJCSC Engages with Kuwait’s Leadership to Enhance Bilateral Defense Relations Chief of General Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces Calls on COAS Principal Staff Officer of the Armed Forces Division of Bangladesh Calls on COAS COAS Reaffirms Commitment to National Security, Praises LEAs’ Efforts in Counterterrorism Operations CNS’ Visit to Bahrain Focuses on Expanding Defense and Maritime Collaboration CNS’ Visit to Oman Reinforces Historic Defense and Naval Ties Defense Delegation of Bangladesh Calls on CAS Faculty and Students of Bahauddin Zakaria University Visit Multan Garrison Cochlear Implant Activation Ceremony Held for Children of Al-Noor Special Children School at Okara Garrison PNS MOAWIN Delivers Life-Changing Medical Aid to East African Nations PAF Contingent Joins 'Spears of Victory-2025' Exercise in Saudi Arabia Pakistan's Indigenous EO-1 Satellite Set to Revolutionize Agriculture, Urban Planning, and Disaster Management
Advertisements

Hilal English

NATO‘s Eastward Expansion and Security Dilemma

September 2024

Hume's idea of inherent national rivalry highlights the security dilemma in international relations, exemplified by NATO’s Cold War role against the USSR and its post-Cold War expansion. The ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict underscores the challenge of resolving core issues like NATO’s expansion through diplomacy and addressing security concerns.



The philosopher David Hume once remarked that nations by nature are each other's enemies. What he meant was that each nation is actuated to impose its will over the rest or, to put it differently, stave off being stampeded by others. The inherent will to power is bolstered by the absence of hierarchy (relationships of authority and subordination) and the presence of anarchy (no such relationships) in inter-state relations. Contrary to domestic affairs, in international relations, there’s no central authority whose commands are binding—both legally and in fact—leaving the states to fend for themselves. National security logically becomes of paramount importance in such a world. 
Relativity of Power and National Security Dilemma
National security imperative dictates that the states are more interested in the relativity of power than absolute power. Facing an unarmed man, a pistol is powerful enough. However, the same pistol will provide little safeguard against a tank. By the same token, a state’s defense capability may be greater than another’s but less than that of a third nation. The strength of others—especially of great powers—is always a threat in the absence of an international government to turn to. In a bipolar world, the rest of the states, especially those that feel threatened by either of the principal powers, will find it prudent, if not necessary, to align with one of them. On its part, each principal power will seek to balance the other internally by reallocating resources to national security and externally by forming alliances with like-minded states. 


National security imperative dictates that the states are more interested in the relativity of power than absolute power. Facing an unarmed man, a pistol is powerful enough. However, the same pistol will provide little safeguard against a tank. 


The alliances and counter-alliances give rise to security dilemmas. The security measures taken by one actor are seen by the other as a threat to its security, prompting it to take steps to shore up its security. Those steps are perceived by the first actor as threatening, necessitating a further increase in its security, and so on. Such circumstances fathered the rise of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Cold War and the Rise of NATO
NATO is one of the two flagship collective defense organizations of the Cold War era (1945-1989), based on the maxim, “One for all; all for one.” The Cold War era was characterized by intense rivalry between the United States (U.S.) and the USSR, representing not only the two leading world powers but also two mutually antagonistic systems, namely liberal capitalism and communism. Washington suspected that the USSR was committed and, in large measures, capable of conquering Europe and the world both for itself and for communism. Moscow nourished similar suspicions. Therefore, each side set about arming itself to the teeth to win a war it suspected the other to start.
Not surprisingly, the two prime expressions of the Cold War were the arms race between the U.S. and the USSR and security pacts on both sides of Germany, which itself was bifurcated into eastern (pro-USSR) and western (pro-U.S.) parts. NATO, the Western alliance to wage the Cold War, was set up in 1949. In the beginning, it comprised 12 members, including the U.S., Canada, and ten Western European countries, who declared that an armed attack on any one of them would be regarded as an invasion of all of them. Greece and Turkey joined the alliance in 1952 and the German Federal Republic (West Germany) in 1955. The alliance was a defensive initiative by the Western bloc founded on fear of USSR aggression. 
As late U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger once put it, Europe never fully recovered from world leadership after the catastrophe of the First World War. In fact, the American intervention tipped the scales in both World Wars. World War II left Germany, the biggest and the most powerful of Western European countries, in tatters, while it sucked almost dry the United Kingdom’s (UK's) conventional military might. Hence, for European countries, no anti-Moscow alliance was viable, or even conceivable, without Washington, given the military capability and ambitions of the USSR and its weaknesses.      
In 1955, Moscow created NATO’s counterpart, named the Warsaw Pact. Led by the USSR, it comprised Central and Eastern European socialist states. Earlier in 1949, the USSR exploded its first nuclear weapon, the biggest step in its efforts to achieve parity with the U.S. in military capability. The more powerful the Russians grew, the more dependent the European states became on the U.S. for their integrity, as dictated by the security dilemma.
NATO guaranteed European countries' independence and integrity against a Russian attack by institutionalizing American commitment to remain in Europe and act as a European power. The arrangement was thus a contrivance to utilize American air capability and nuclear weapons to prevent the use by Russia of its massive land power against European countries. Although on paper, NATO was a collective security pact, in reality, it was more like a protectorate treaty of earlier times when a major power would protect weaker territories. The European members accounted for 80 percent of the NATO forces deployed in Europe. Yet they remained wholly dependent on the U.S. shield, without which their contributions would be of no consequence. Not only that, the bulk of the finances were borne by Washington. 
The USSR's power reached its peak in the 1960s and then began to wane. By the mid-1980s, it no longer looked like a match for the U.S. Its empire in Central and Eastern Europe was unsustainable, and the gigantic country faced disintegration left, right, and center. In the following two years, the Soviet economy crumbled. The Cold War, which was already fizzling out, ended before the end of the decade. In 1991, the USSR broke into pieces; with that, the Warsaw Pact, which had already become irrelevant, ceased to exist. 
NATO Expansion and Moscow’s Concerns
For almost half a century, NATO remained a key Western instrument in the Cold War. Once the Cold War was over, the relevance of the anti-Soviet, anti-communist alliance came into question. However, the U.S., the architect of NATO, had a different plan: to enlarge the alliance without any defined limits, as the architecture of European security. But security against whom? Evidently, it was against Russia, the successor to the USSR, who had inherited most of its territorial power and defense, including nuclear capability. 


The U.S., the architect of NATO, had a different plan: to enlarge the alliance without any defined limits, as the architecture of European security. But security against whom? Evidently, it was against Russia, the successor to the USSR, who had inherited most of its territorial power and defense, including nuclear capability.


Washington’s plan struck at the core security interests as perceived by Russia. Being a European power, Moscow was keen to have considerable influence upon the continent’s security comparable to that of Washington, which seemed too much to ask for. It also wanted a security buffer in East and Central Europe, which had remained under the USSR sphere of influence during the Cold War. In particular, Russia insisted that no former constituent of the USSR should join NATO. However, it’s doubtful whether Russia was ever given any legally binding commitment to that effect. 
At any rate, as Moscow wasn’t a member of NATO and wasn’t likely to become one any soon, the enlargement of the alliance left it out of the European security system. Additionally, the eastward expansion of NATO meant that Moscow’s security buffer would diminish over time. The states that Russia wanted to constitute a security buffer would now have a NATO umbrella of protection against Russians. As a result, Russia was left with the perception that the alliance’s enlargement was meant to encircle it.
As dictated by the security dilemma, Moscow became increasingly distrustful of Washington and European capitals, hostile towards Eastern European NATO members, and inclined towards strengthening relations with Beijing, which accused the U.S. of trying to obstruct its economic rise and technological development and supporting Taiwan in violation of the One-China Policy to which Washington also subscribes, at least on paper. On the other hand, the U.S. became increasingly committed to defending countries across Europe, overstretching its military and financial powers. In 2014, pushed by Washington, NATO members agreed to allocate a minimum of 2.0 percent of their national gross domestic product (GDP) to defense. Defense expenditure is defined by NATO as “payments made by a national government (excluding regional, local, and municipal authorities) specifically to meet the needs of its armed forces, those of Allies or the Alliance.” However, most European members have been unable to fulfill this commitment—an act of omission for which Donald Trump would chide them from time-to-time. 
Article 10 of NATO’s Charter states that the alliance is open for membership to any European country which is in a position to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area. Not surprisingly, NATO membership increased from 15 during the Cold War era to 32. Except Finland and Sweden, which joined in 2023 and 2024, respectively, all the other post-Cold War era members are drawn from Central and Eastern Europe. In addition, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, and Ukraine are membership candidates. At the 2008 NATO summit, the alliance announced that Ukraine would become a member once the membership criteria were met, a commitment renewed occasionally. Since Ukraine's possible membership in NATO and Moscow's reaction to it has given rise to more turmoil in Europe than in the case of any other state, it’s to that country that we may turn to.
Russia-Ukraine Tensions and War
Ukraine was part of the former USSR. After the USSR’s demise, Ukraine became the largest country wholly situated in Europe. It is strategically important to be the conduit for more than 80 percent of the gas supplies from Russia to Western Europe. Not only that, Ukraine inherited a part of the nuclear weapons left behind by the USSR. These two factors prompted Moscow and Washington to seek a deeper engagement with Kyiv. Shunning Moscow-led blocs, such as the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and the Eurasian Economic Union, both of which include federating units of the deceased USSR, Ukraine made overtures to the West. Apart from being a NATO candidate, Ukraine, since 1992, has been a member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the largest security-related regional organization in the world comprising 57 member states from North America, Europe, and Asia including, among others, the U.S. and Russia, both being its founding members since 1973 (Russia as USSR). Ukraine also desires to join the 27-member European Union (EU), the world's largest and most successful economic bloc.
Tensions with Kyiv led Moscow to take control of Crimea in 2014, where the majority of the population speaks Russian, without a scrap of resistance Although Washington and European capitals imposed sanctions on Moscow, they did not formally challenge the move, which was described as one of the most significant East-West crises since the end of the Cold War. Partly encouraged by the West’s acquiescence to the Crimean situation and chiefly pushed by security concerns should Ukraine become a NATO member, Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. A year before the invasion, Moscow called upon NATO to suspend all activities in Eastern Europe and ban Ukraine and any other former USSR constituent republic from joining the alliance. Both the demands were predictably turned down by the West, together with the warning of stringent sanctions should Russian troops choose to cross its borders with Ukraine. 
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been described as the most serious conflict in Europe since the end of the Second World War. The U.S. and European countries clamped stringent sanctions on Russia to “degrading” the “Kremlin’s future ability to project power” and “threaten the peace and stability of Europe.” U.S., EU, and UK nationals were prohibited from doing business with the sanctioned financial institutions. The Russian central bank’s assets in these countries were frozen. Some Russian banks were ejected from the Brussels-based Society of Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (Swift) system, the most widely used channel by commercial banks for international transactions. The Western powers have also prohibited Russian aircraft from using their airspace. The sanctions also conveyed a discreet message to Beijing, whose relations with Moscow meanwhile have been on an upward trajectory, that should it try to take Taiwan by force—which it isn’t likely to do—it would have to face similar consequences. 
Reference may be made here to NATO’s 2022 Strategic Concept, which defines the challenges the alliance faces and the military and political tasks that it will carry out to address these challenges. It states, "Russia is the most significant and direct threat to Allies' security and to peace and stability in the Euro-Atlantic area. Russia wants to establish spheres of influence and control other countries through coercion, subversion, aggression, and annexation.” In the same vein, the Strategic Concept denies that NATO seeks confrontation with Moscow, poses a threat to it, or aims at encircling it, though it emphatically adds that the alliance will continue to beef up its deterrence and defense capability and would protect and defend every member. 
Despite the sanctions, the war in Ukraine continues. But would the sanctions be instrumental in causing a shift in Russia’s stance on NATO’s eastward expansion, which it sees as a ploy to encircle it and deter it from “threatening” peace and security in Europe—the issues at hand? 
Pakistan’s Principled Stance
Pakistan has maintained a principled stance on the Ukraine issue. Before the war, Pakistan had considerable defense ties with Ukraine. Islamabad also considers Moscow a potentially credible trade partner, particularly in the energy sector. Islamabad has maintained bilateral diplomatic engagements with both countries to secure an amicable settlement of the problem. Pakistan has strong relations with the U.S., the EU, and the UK—the first mentioned being Pakistan's single largest export destination. Islamabad called for respecting Ukraine’s sovereign integrity and sent humanitarian assistance to that country. Yet, seeing a bigger picture, Pakistan is also committed to working out a just and democratic world order, where no single country or bloc imposes its will on another and where issues are resolved through dialogue.          
The impression that the bigger powers are more interested in keeping Russia bogged down in Ukraine through a proxy war is gaining ground. To erase such an impression, the Western powers, instead of relying on sanctions, need to address the casus belli—Moscow's sense of insecurity over NATO’s eastward expansion. Only diplomacy, which considers both sides' legitimate interests, can do this.


The author contributes to national and international issues, with a special interest in the Chinese economy, governance, and development model.
E-mail: [email protected]