& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Perspectives

Nato trying to redefine itself

M Abdul hafiz
THE Nato, the world's most credible military alliance was created in 1949 as a bulwark against possible Soviet thrust into Western Europe after the Second World War. By queer turn and twist of history its elite forces are now engaged in odd police duties to maintain order in post-Taliban Afghanistan where they prove to be misfit in fighting odd gunmen, guerillas, bandits and at the best Taliban remnants. This development for the organisation is bizarre indeed, but not without reasons. Nato powers already sent 6,500 troops to Afghanistan where they are barely securing capital Kabul. Recently the organisation has decided to add 2,000 more soldiers in view of rising violence before the election scheduled in October next. To this election hinges the legitimacy of Karazai's puppet government already
installed by the Americans.
The whole exercise by Nato in far-off Afghanistan aims at remaining relevant in changing international strategic milieu. Ever since the end of the cold war when it lost its raison d'etre with the fall of communism and dissolution of soviet Union the alliance is desperately in search of a new relevance in the changed situation. Perhaps the same compulsion led it to undertake
the largest expansion in the alliance's history on 30 March last when it admitted seven former communist nations -- Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, slovakia and slovenia, thereby extending the reach of the alliance to the very border of mainland Russia.
Nato, it may be recalled, was established as a military alliance to counter the threat of soviet Union-led communism as the Cold War had been brewing up after the
Second World War. It was described by its founders as a defensive arrangement and an ideological alliance against the soviet Union and communism at least till the dissolution of soviet Union. The parties to Nato also decided to consider an armed attack against one as attack against them all, thereby deterring soviet Union's possible advances towards Western Europe. The main deterrent
was, of course, the Us pledge to defend Western Europe in the event of a soviet attack.
But in broader sense, the Nato had always been much more than simply a defensive arrangement or ideological alliance against the soviet Union. It incorporated in itself a vision of Europe not fully exposed. In the words of Lord Ismay, the Nato's first secretary general, the Nato was designed to keep the soviets out, Americans in and the Germans down "in what was consid-
ered the hub of the world affairs till the bipolarity of cold war era took shape. According to this criterion, after the dissolution of soviet Union and the unification of Germany the major focus of Nato is now supposed to be to prevent the Us from taking an isolationist stance and withdrawing its forces from Europe.
In fact, many predicted that with the Nato's raison d'etre gone with the demise of cold war it would
slowly but inevitably collapse. There have already been several rounds of troubles in trans-atlantic relationship in recent years. In spite of that far from collapsing the Nato seems to be gaining ground. It has undertaken two rounds of expansion, first in 1999 and recently in March 2004. In the meantime the Nato has been frantically trying to redefine itself. It is inevitable because the end of cold war means that both the Us and Europe have a lot of options,
free as they are from the rigid bipolarity of cold war period. The Us can now afford to took toward Asia or any other region while ignoring Europe. In the same way Europe can ignore the demands imposed by its relationship with the Us. It is in this context that the relative importance of the Nato in post cold war period needs to be evaluated.
On the sidelines of Nato affairs
there are interesting developments in Europe having profound impact on trans-atlantic relation. The growing economic clout of Europe has led to a rise in the politicalmilitary aspirations of its members. This has, already led to the European security and defence policy involving the creation of a European force with command structure and political direction formally independent of Nato. Obviously, the Us has not reacted positively to this development. It is not clear,
however, whether the European force can be any match to Nato's technological sophistication or it will ever be able to acquire the military muscle independent of the alliance of which Europe or its projected force is very much a part just now. Nato's present secretary General warns that Nato also is in danger of becoming irrelevant if reforms are not undertaken urgently. The Us has strongly argued in favour abandoning the idea of European security which is viewed by her as sheer duplication of capabilities. Either way a delicate balance is due to be struck.
Irrespective of how and when that balance will be struck the Nato has slowly but surely moved towards the path of reforms by participating at least in Afghanistan to fight global war on terror although the Us wants the Nato also to commit itself in Iraq after the transfer of power there. The recent expansion marks victory for the Us to whose foreign policy objectives the new members are more sympathetic. All the new members are active in Afghanistan's reconstruction while all except slovenia are also contributing to the war in Iraq. Driven away from its original plank the Nato seems to have successfully shifted to where it is now relevant.
Brig ( retd) Hafiz is former DG of BIISS.
***The Nato has slowly but surely moved towards the path of reforms by participating at least in Afghanistan to fight global war on terror although the US wants the Nato also to commit itself in iraq after the transfer of power there. its recent expansion marks victory for the US to whose foreign policy objectives the new members are more sympathetic. Driven away from its original plank the Nato seems to have successfully shifted to where it is now relevant.****