Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Land rush: American grand strategy, NATO enlargement, and European fragmentation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Politics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article argues that NATO enlargement, while stabilizing Central and Eastern Europe, still undermined other aspects of European security over the long term. Throughout the 1990s and 2000s, US administrations pursued three ambitious policies: they expanded NATO, but also its geographic scope, and they ensured that no alternative European security architectures could compete with NATO. Through interviews with US officials, the article shows a preoccupation with instability in Europe and elsewhere, an institutional predisposition to maintaining the centrality of NATO, and a lack of constraints on US policies by Russia or Europe. In the end, these contradictory policies diluted European strategic cohesion and overburdened European militaries, while expanding the commitments inherent to the alliance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. When the issue of NATO enlargement was first raised publicly, commentators warned that expansion could needlessly undermine relations with Russia (Brown 1995; MccGwire 1998; Russett and Stam 1998; Waltz 2000). As Kimberly Marten shows in her contribution to this issue, enlargement was arguably only one of several causes of Russian estrangement from the USA and Europe.

  2. Commentators at the time argued that, whatever the future role of Russia, the United States should continue its role as the protector and pacifier of Europe (Krauthammer 1990; Nye 1990; Mearsheimer 1990; Glaser 1993; Mastanduno 1997).

  3. In 1995, Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke referred to the United States as a European power, not just a power in Europe. This view permeates throughout the crucial post-Cold War decades.

  4. See, for example, European Commission president Jacques Delors’s March 1991 speech on European security autonomy.

  5. ‘[Secretary] Baker kept saying that there were no losers at the end of the Cold War, only winners. Everybody was a winner. The efforts George H.W. Bush went through to try and avoid humiliating Russia, to avoid suggesting this was a defeat of Russia, were considerable’ (Hadley 2018).

References

  • Albright, M. 1998. The Right Balance Will Secure NATO’s Future. Financial Times, 7 Dec 1998.

  • Baker, M. 2003. US: Rumsfeld’s “Old” and “New” Europe Touches on Uneasy Divide. RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty, 24 Jan 2003. https://www.rferl.org/a/1102012.html.

  • Barnes, J., and H. Cooper. 2019. Trump Discussed Pulling US from NATO, Aides Say amid New Concerns over Russia. New York Times, 14 Jan 2019.

  • Binnendijk, H. 2013. Interview with the author. Binnendijk was (a.o.) Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Defense Policy and Arms Control, National Security Council (1999–2001), Principal Deputy Director and Acting Director of the Policy Planning Staff, State Department (1993–1994).

  • Biscop, S. 2018. European Defence: Give PESCO a Chance. Survival 60(3): 161–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brimmer, E. 2016. Interview with the author. Brimmer was Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs (2009–2013), member of the Office of Policy Planning, State Department (1999–2001), and Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (1993–1995).

  • Brooks, S.G., and W.C. Wohlforth. 2008. World Out of Balance: International Relations and the Challenge of American Primacy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M.E. 1995. The Flawed Logic of NATO Expansion. Survival 37(1): 34–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brzezinski, I. 2018. Interview with the author. Brzezinski was Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Europe and NATO Policy (2001–2005), adviser to the government of Ukraine (1993–1994), and a member of the Policy Planning Staff in the Defense Department (1991–1993).

  • Burt, R. 2016. Interview with the author. Burt was chief negotiator, START I (1989–1991), US ambassador to Germany (1985–1989), Assistant Secretary of State for European and Canadian Affairs (1983–1985), and Director of Politico-Military Affairs, State Department (1981–1983).

  • Bush, G.H.W. 1989. A Europe Whole and Free. Speech given in Mainz, Germany, May 1989. https://usa.usembassy.de/etexts/ga6-890531.htm.

  • Chalmers, M. 2019. The 2% Target: Spending Increases and the Russian Threat. London: Royal United Services Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinton administration State Department official. 2019. Interview with the author.

  • Clinton administration State Department official #2. 2016. Interview with the author.

  • Cohen, E. 2016. Interview with the author. Cohen was Counselor of the State Department (2007–2009).

  • Cohen, W.S. 2000. Speech of Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen, Willard Hotel. Washington, DC, 28 June 2000.

  • Croft, S., J. Redmond, M. Webber, and G.W. Rees. 1999. The Enlargement of Europe. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • D’Aboville, B. 2019. Beyond NATO Enlargement to Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary: A French Reappraisal. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 519–548.

  • De France, O., and N. Witney. 2013. Europe’s Strategic Cacophony. London: European Council on Foreign Relations.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delors, J. 1991. European Integration and Security. Survival 33(2): 99–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of State. 1997. Report to the Congress on the Enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Washington, DC: Department of State.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobbins, J. 2016. Interview with the author. Dobbins was (a.o.) Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan (2013–2014), Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs (2001), US ambassador to the European Union (1991–1993), and special adviser to the president and secretary of state for the Balkans.

  • Donfried, K. 2016. Interview with the author. Donfried was (a.o.) Special Assistant to the President and, as the Director of European Affairs, National Security Council, was National Intelligence Officer for Europe (2010–2014). She also served on the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff (2003–2005).

  • Drozdiak, W. 1998. European Allies Balk at Expanded Role for NATO. Washington Post, 22 Feb 1998.

  • Dueck, C. 2008. Reluctant Crusaders: Power, Culture, and Change in American Grand Strategy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Economist. 2003. Is Poland America’s Donkey or Could It Become NATO’s Horse? 8 May 2003. https://www.economist.com/europe/2003/05/08/is-poland-americas-donkey-or-could-it-become-natos-horse.

  • Economist. 2019. Emmanuel Macron in His Own Words (English). 7 Nov 2019. https://www.economist.com/europe/2019/11/07/emmanuel-macron-in-his-own-words-english.

  • Edelman, E.S. 2019. Interview with author. Edelman was Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (2005–2009), US ambassador to Turkey (2003–2005), Principal Deputy Assistant to the Vice President for National Security Affairs (2001–2003), US ambassador to Finland (1998–2001), Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Soviet and East European Affairs (1990–1993), Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs (1989–1990), and Director of Soviet Policies at the Office of Soviet Affairs (1984–1986).

  • Farrell, T., and S. Rynning. 2010. NATO’s Transformation Gaps: Transatlantic Differences and the War in Afghanistan. Journal of Strategic Studies 33(5): 673–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federal Ministry of Defence, Germany. 1994. White Paper on the Security of the Federal Republic of Germany and the Situation and Future of the Bundeswehr. Bonn: Federal Ministry of Defence on behalf of the Federal Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fettweis, C. 2018. Psychology of a Superpower: Security and Dominance in US Foreign Policy. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Flournoy, M. 2018. Interview with the author. Flournoy was (a.o.) Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (2009–2012), and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy and Threat Reduction and Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy (1994–2000).

  • Foucher, M. 2019. Interview with the author. Foucher was (a.o.) an adviser to Foreign Minister Hubert Védrine (1998–2002), director of future foresight at French Ministry of Foreign Affairs (1999–2002), and French ambassador to Latvia (2002–2006).

  • Gallis, P.E. 1996. NATO: Congress Addresses Expansion of the Alliance. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallis, P.E. 2005. The NATO Summit at Prague, 2002 Paul E. Gallis. Report RS21354. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

  • Gates, R. 2011. The Security and Defense Agenda (Future of NATO). Washington, DC: Department of Defense.

    Google Scholar 

  • German Marshall Fund of the United States. 2014. Transatlantic Trends Key Findings. Washington, DC: German Marshall Fund of the United States.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gherghisan, M. 2003. Vilnius 10 Sign Letter on Iraq. eurobserver, 6 Feb 2003. https://euobserver.com/enlargement/9269.

  • Glaser, C.L. 1993. Why NATO Is Still Best: Future Security Arrangements for Europe. International Security 18(1): 5–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, J. 2016. The Obama Doctrine. Atlantic 316(3): 70–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldgeier, J.M. 2010. Not Whether but When: The US Decision to Enlarge NATO. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goure, D. 2014. NATO’s Last Chance: Invest Its Scarce Resources Wisely or Accept Strategic Irrelevance. Arlington, VA: Lexington Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadley, S.J. 2018. Interview with the author. Hadley was (a.o.) National Security Adviser (2005–2009), Deputy National Security Adviser (2001–2005), Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy (1989–1993), and a member of the National Security Council staff (1974–1977).

  • Haglund, D. 1993. Who’s Afraid of Franco-German Military Cooperation? European Security 2(4): 612–630. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839308407147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, D. 2019a. Interview with the author. Hamilton was (a.o.) Deputy Assistant Secretary for European Affairs, Special Coordinator for Southeast European Stabilization, Associate Director of the Policy Planning Staff, State Department, Director for Policy in the Bureau of European Affairs, and Senior Policy Adviser to the US ambassador and US embassy in Germany.

  • Hamilton, D. 2019b. New Members, New Missions: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Architecture in the Second Clinton Administration. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 339–384.

  • Hamilton, D. 2019c. Piece of the Puzzle: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Architecture after the Cold War. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 3–57.

  • Hamilton, D.S., and K. Spohr (eds.). 2019. Open Door: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Security after the Cold War. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy Institute/Henry Kissinger Center for Global Affairs, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holbrooke, R. 1995. America, a European Power. Foreign Affairs 74(2): 38–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/20047041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopf, T. 2018. Change in International Practices. European Journal of International Relations 24(3): 687–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horovitz, L. 2019. The George H.W. Bush Administration’s Policies Vis-à-Vis Central Europe: From Cautious Encouragement to Cracking Open NATO’s Door. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 71–92.

  • Horovitz, L. 2018. Guns, Butter, and Votes: A Theory of American Military Primacy. Ph.D. dissertation, ETH Zurich.

  • Howorth, J., and J.T.S. Keeler (eds.). 2003a. Defending Europe: The EU, NATO and the Quest for European Autonomy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howorth, J., and J.T.S. Keeler, eds. 2003b. The EU, NATO and the Quest for European Autonomy. In Howorth and Keeler 2003a, 3–21.

  • Hunter, R.E. 2002. The European Security and Defense Policy: NATO’s Companion—Or Competitor?. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, R.E. 2019. Toward NATO Enlargement: The Role of USNATO. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 297–338.

  • International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). 2013. Chapter Four: Europe. Military Balance 113(1): 89–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/04597222.2013.756999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). 2014. Chapter Four: Europe. Military Balance 114(1): 59–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/04597222.2014.871877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakobsen, J. 2018. Is European NATO Really Free-Riding? Patterns of Material and Non-Material Burden-Sharing after the Cold War. European Security 27(4): 490–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krauthammer, C. 1990. The Unipolar Moment. Foreign Affairs 70(1): 23–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kupchan, C. 2018. Interview with the author. Kupchan was Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for European Affairs (2014–2017), Director for European Affairs, National Security Council (1993–1994), and a member of the Policy Planning Staff, State Department (1992).

  • Layne, C. 2006. The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepgold, J. 1998. NATO’s Post-Cold War Collective Action Problem. International Security 23(1): 78–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesser, I. 2016. Interview with the author. Lesser was a member of the Policy Planning Staff, State Department (1994–1995).

  • Lindley-French, J. 2003. Dilemmas of NATO Enlargement. In Howorth and Keeler 2003a, 181–202.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Long, M.B. 2016. Interview with the author. Long was (a.o.) Assistant Secretary of Defense (2007–2009), Chair of NATO's High Level Group (HLG), and operations officer, CIA (1986–1999).

  • Lugar, R. 1993. Speech Senator Richard Lugar at the Overseas Writers Club. Washington, DC, June 1993.

  • Mastanduno, M. 1997. Preserving the Unipolar Moment: Realist Theories and US Grand Strategy after the Cold War. International Security 21(4): 49–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MccGwire, M. 1998. NATO Expansion: “A Policy Error of Historic Importance”. Review of International Studies 24(1): 23–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mearsheimer, J.J. 1990. Back to the Future: Instability in Europe after the Cold War. International Security 15(1): 5–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mearsheimer, J.J., and S.M. Walt. 2016. The Case for Offshore Balancing: A Superior US Grand Strategy. Foreign Affairs 95(4): 70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meijer, H., and M. Wyss. 2019. Upside Down: Reframing European Defence Studies. Cooperation and Conflict 54(3): 378–406. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836718790606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michel, L. 2016. Interview with the author. Michel was (a.o.) Director for NATO Policy, Director for Non-Nuclear Arms Control, Deputy Representative to the US-Russia Bilateral Consultative Commission, and Deputy Director, Verification Policy (1986–2002).

  • Miller, F.C. 2018. Interview with the author. Miller was (a.o.) Special Assistant to President George W. Bush, Senior Director for Defense Policy and Arms Control on the National Security Council staff (2001–2005), Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Strategy and Threat Reduction (1997–2000), Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (International Security Policy) (1993–1996), and Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control Policy (1989–1993).

  • NATO. 1990. NATO Ministerial Committee London. https://www.nato.int/docu/comm/49-95/c900706a.htm.

  • NATO. 1995. The Alliance’s Strategic Concept. In NATO Handbook, 40–42. Brussels: NATO.

  • NATO. 1999. The Alliance’s Strategic Concept Approved by the Heads of State and Government Participating in the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Washington, DC. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_27433.htm.

  • NATO. 2006. Comprehensive Political Guidance Endorsed by NATO Heads of State and Government. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_56425.htm.

  • NATO. 2019. Defence Expenditure of NATO Countries (2012–2019). Press communique. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_167080.htm.

  • NATO and EU defense officialNATO and EU defense official. 2019. Interview with the author. Official was high-ranking official NATO, the EU, and national ministry of defense.

  • New York Times. 2018. NATO Summit Live Updates: Trump Pushes Allies to Increase Spending. 11 July 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/11/world/europe/trump-nato-live-updates.html.

  • Nuland, V. 2008. United States Permanent Representative to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Speech to Presse Club and AmCham. Paris, 22 Feb 2008.

  • Nye, J.S. 1990. Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obama administration National Security Council (NSC), Defense Department official. 2016. Interview with the author.

  • Obama administration State Department official. 2016. Interview with the author.

  • Obama administration State Department official #2. 2016. Interview with the author.

  • Ochmanek, D. 2018. Interview with the author. Ochmanek was Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Force Development (2009–2014), Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy (1993–1995), member of the Foreign Service (1980–1985).

  • Porter, P. 2018. Why America’s Grand Strategy Has Not Changed: Power, Habit, and the US Foreign Policy Establishment. International Security 42(4): 9–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posen, B.R. 2014. Restraint: A New Foundation for US Grand Strategy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posen, B.R. 2019. Trump Aside, What’s the US Role in NATO? New York Times, 10 Mar 2019. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/10/opinion/trump-aside-whats-the-us-role-in-nato.html.

  • Power, S. 2015. Remarks by Ambassador Samantha Power on Peacekeeping in Brussels. 9 Mar 2015. https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/remarks-ambassador-samantha-power-peacekeeping-brussels.

  • Rifkind, M. 2019. NATO Enlargement 20 Years On. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 501–518.

  • Ringsmose, J. 2010. NATO Burden-Sharing Redux: Continuity and Change after the Cold War. Contemporary Security Policy 31(2): 319–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodman, P. 2003. USDP Dep Sec I-03/001420. Note to SecDef Rumsfeld, RE: France and Iraq, Rumsfeld Library, 4 Feb 2003.

  • Russett, B., and A.C. Stam. 1998. Courting Disaster: An Expanded NATO vs. Russia and China. Political Science Quarterly 113(3): 361–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandler, T., and K. Hartley. 2001. Economics of Alliances: The Lessons for Collective Action. Journal of Economic Literature 39(3): 869–896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarotte, M.E. 2014. A Broken Promise: What the West Really Told Moscow about NATO Expansion. Foreign Affairs 93(5): 90–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarotte, M.E. 2019. How to Enlarge NATO: The Debate inside the Clinton Administration, 1993–95. International Security 44(1): 7–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarotte, M.E. 2010. Not One Inch Eastward? Bush, Baker, Kohl, Genscher, Gorbachev, and the Origin of Russian Resentment toward NATO Enlargement in February 1990. Diplomatic History 34(1): 119–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayle, T.A. 2019. Enduring Alliance: A History of NATO and the Postwar Global Order. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schake, K. 1998. NATO after the Cold War, 1991–1995: Institutional Competition and the Collapse of the French Alternative. Contemporary European History 7(3): 379–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schilde, K. 2017. European Military Capabilities: Enablers and Constraints on EU Power? JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies 55(1): 37–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shifrinson, J.R.I. 2018. Rising Titans, Falling Giants: How Great Powers Exploit Power Shifts. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shurkin, M. 2017. The Abilities of the British, French, and German Armies to Generate and Sustain Armored Brigades in the Baltics. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. 2018. Interview with the author. Smith was Deputy National Security Adviser to the Vice President (2012–2013), and Principal Director Europe/NATO Policy (2009–2012).

  • Talbott, S. 1999. America’s Stake in a Strong Europe. Speech to Royal Institute of International Affairs, London, 7 Oct 1999.

  • Talbott, S. 2019. Bill, Boris, and NATO. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 405–424.

  • Townsend, J. 2018. Interview with the author. Townsend was Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO Policy (2009–2016), Principal Director of European and NATO Policy (2003–2006), Director of NATO Policy (2002–2003), Director of the Defense Plans Division at the US Mission to NATO in Brussels (1998–2002), and Deputy Director of European Policy (1990–1998).

  • Trubowitz, P. 2011. Politics and Strategy: Partisan Ambition and American Statecraft. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vershbow, A. 2019. Present at the Transformation: An Insider’s Reflection on NATO Enlargement, NATO-Russia Relations, and Where We Go from Here. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 425–448.

  • Voigt, K.D. 2019. NATO Enlargement: Perspective of a German Politician. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 235–262.

  • Volker, K. 2013. Interview with the author. Volker was (a.o.) US ambassador to NATO (2008–2009), Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs (2005–2008), Director for European and Eurasian affairs, National Security Council (2001–2005), Member of the Office of Deputy Director of NATO (1999–2001), First Secretary to US mission to NATO (1998), Foreign Service officer (1988–1997).

  • Walt, S.M. 2018. The Hell of Good Intentions: America’s Foreign Policy Elite and the Decline of US Primacy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waltz, K.N. 2000. NATO Expansion: A Realist’s View. Contemporary Security Policy 21(2): 23–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webber, M. 2003. NATO Enlargement and European Defense Autonomy. In Howorth and Keeler 2003a, 157–180.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Witney, N. 2016. Interview with the author. Witney was Director-General of International Security Policy at the Ministry of Defence (UK), and head of the European Defence Agency.

  • Wormuth, C. 2018. Interview with the author. Wormuth was (a.o.) Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (2014–2016), Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Force Development (2012–2014), Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Defense Policy and Strategy on the National Security Staff, Special Assistant to the Under Secretary for Policy (2000–2001), and served in the Policy Office of the Secretary of Defense (1996–2002).

  • Zakheim, D. 2016. Interview with the author. Zakheim was Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) (2001–2004), and Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Planning and Resources (1985–1987).

  • Zięba, R. 2019. The 20th Anniversary of Poland’s Accession to NATO. In Hamilton and Spohr 2019, 197–216.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Security Studies Program (SSP), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), 1 Amherst street, E40-478, Muckley Bldg., Cambridge, MA, 02139-4307, USA

    Paul van Hooft

Authors
  1. Paul van Hooft
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul van Hooft.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

van Hooft, P. Land rush: American grand strategy, NATO enlargement, and European fragmentation. Int Polit 57, 530–553 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-020-00227-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-020-00227-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation