استراتيجية التوسع المزدوج للحلف الأطلسي

الملخص EN

With the end of the cold war, some political scientists thought that the struggle over power and ideas in Europe had ended with the victory of democracy over communism, and that an American presence would no longer be necessary.

The West won the cold war without direct war.

Yet, the West was beyond a belief in shared values based on liberalism more than merely a powerful military alliance (NATO).

In this vein, the strength of the West should be understood not solely on military basic, but also on philosophical paradigm vision of “a free and undivided Europe” and “an integrated democratic Europe cooperating with the United States to keep the peace and promote prosperity.” We must seek to realize this vision by maintaining a strong NATO Alliance, while avoiding the creation of new dividing lines that could exacerbate security threats in Europe.

The United States led an initiative to enlarge NATO membership gradually to include some of the former soviet allies.

NATO has had the military engagement of members outside Europe.

By the way there were two requests: First, the new NATO must lead the discussion about how the United States and Europe can act together to combat threats outside the transatlantic threater in places such as Central Asia, the Middle East and even Africa.

Second, the alliance should establish mechanisms for discrete, small-scale operations that allow for joint consultations in the event that NATO countries need to be called into action.

The transatlantic alliance, which has provided the basis for the security of the West for the 50 years is facing a challenge with regard it.

This leads to another question: has the end of the cold war undermined the Euro- American strategic partnership? In the absence of the Soviet Union, would the “West” continue to hold together with or without a common threat? Should it? Or is the transatlantic cloak really a straightjacket binding North Americans and Europeans too tightly? The new security strategy called for major course corrections in America’s foreign policy.

Other changes have also startled the Europeans: - First: the announcement that “the mission would determine the coalition” which seemed to mean that permanent alliances, such as the Atlantic Alliance belonged to the past.

- Second: the notion that unilateral decisions supersede multilateral commitments and institutions when these challenge national interest.

- Third: the declared ambivalence towards Europe’s unification process, a divided Europe being may be preferable to a united Europe, if the latter stands in the way of U.S.

priorities.

President Clinton has declared U.S.

support for expanding the zone of stability through his