Skip to main content

The Uncoordinated NATO-EU “Double Enlargement”: Toward the Isolation of Russia?

  • Chapter
  • 106 Accesses

Abstract

The founders of the post-World War II U.S. “containment” strategy, George Kennan and Paul Nitze, had both opposed NATO enlargement into central and eastern Europe following the Soviet collapse. In February 1997, Kennan asserted that NATO enlargement “would be the most fatal error of U.S. policy in the entire post-Cold era.”1 On the surface, this statement appears to have been overtaken by the colossal strategic blunder of U.S. intervention in Iraq. (See Chapter 3.) Yet, the global ramifications of U.S. military expansion and NATO enlargement have begun to reveal themselves: Russian leaders have begun to more forthrightly denounce U.S. National Missile Defense (NMD) policy, NATO enlargement, and the 1990 Conventional Force in Europe (CFE) treaty (adapted in 1999).2 On July 14, 2007, Russia stated that it would suspend its participation in the CFE until NATO ratified the treaty.

Keywords

  • Ballistic Missile
  • Double Enlargement
  • Missile Defense
  • Christian Democratic Union
  • NATO Member

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

eBook
USD   24.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-0-230-10871-4
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   34.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. George Kennan, “NATO Expansion Would Be a Fateful Blunder,” International Herald Tribune, February 6, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  2. See Hall Gardner, Dangerous Crossroads (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1997), 135.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dario Cristiani, “Russia’s New Initiatives in the Persian Gulf,” Power and Interest News Report (PIRN), March 1, 2007, http://www.pinr.com.

    Google Scholar 

  4. See Hall Gardner, “The Genesis of NATO Enlargement and the War ‘over’ Kosovo,” in Central and Southeastern Europe in Transition, ed. Hall Gardner (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Andrei S. Grachev, “La Russie à la recherche d’une politique étrangère,” Relations internationales: les Etudes de la Documentation Francaise La Russie 1995–1996 (Paris: la Documentation Francaise, 1996)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Andrei S. Grachev, Histoire Vraie de la Fin de l’URSS (Paris: Editions du Rocher, 1992), 88–92.

    Google Scholar 

  7. See also Susan Eisenhower in Ted Galen Carpenter and Barbara Conry, eds., NATO Enlargement: Illusions and Reality (Washington, DC.: Cato Institute, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cited in Stephen Blank, “The NATO-Russia Partnership: A Marriage of Convenience Or a Troubled Partnership?,” Strategic Studies Institute, 2005, http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB73 4.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cited in Stephen Blank, “The NATO-Russia Partnership: A Marriage of Convenience Or a Troubled Partnership?,” Strategic Studies Institute, 2005,

    Google Scholar 

  10. Thom Shanker, “U.S. Tries to Ease Concerns in Russia on Antimissile Plan,” New York Times, February 22, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Richard Weitz, “Revitalizing US-Russian Security Cooperation,” RFE/RL Newsline 11:33, Part I, February 21, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jennifer Loven, “Bush Wins Polish Nod for Missile Defense,” The Guardian (June 8, 2007) http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0„-6695301,00.html; http:// www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/06/9e494269–29d1–4e66-b950 -ac846e7e9c2a.html; “Intelligence Brief: Russia-Western Dialogue on B.M.D. Remains Difficult,” PINR, http://www.pinr.com.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Paul T. Mitchell, “Network Centric Warfare: Coalition Operations in the Age of U.S. Military Primacy,” Adelphi Paper No. 385 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Richard Weitz, Revitalizing US-Russian Security Cooperation (London: Adelphi Papers, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Daryl G. Kimball, “START Over,” Arms Control Today, June 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  16. For analysis, see Jeronim Perovic and Robert Orttung, “Russia’s Energy Policy: Should Europe Worry?,” Russian Analytical Digest 18 (April 3, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  17. See James Sherr, “Ukraine: The Pursuit of Defence Reform in an Unfavourable Context,” Conflict Studies Research Centre Central & Eastern Europe Series 04/08 (June 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  18. On the domestic crisis in Ukraine, see James Sherr, “Ukraine: Prospects and Risks,” Conflict Studies Research Centre Central & Eastern Europe Series Research Centre 06/52 (October 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  19. See Jacques Rupnick, “In Search of East-Central Europe,” in Central and Southeastern Europe in Transition, ed. Hall Gardner (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Cornelius Ochmann, “Polish-Russian Relations in the Context of the EU’s New Eastern Policy,” Russian Analytical Digest 15 (February 20, 2007). http://se2.isn.ch/ serviceengine/FileContent?servicel D=PublishingHouse&fileid=C68F7FA1-F640-A2CF-DA36–42E321D7EF5A&lng=en.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cornelius Ochmann, “Polish-Russian Relations in the Context of the EU’s New Eastern Policy,” Russian Analytical Digest 15 (February 20, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dimitrios Triantaphyllou, “The Black Sea Region and Its Growing Influence,” Athens, BSEC Day (July 18, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Marcel de Haas, “Current Geostrategy in the South Caucasus,” PINR, December 15, 2006, http://www.pinr.com/report.php?ac=view_report&report_id=595&language id=1.

    Google Scholar 

  24. For background to the frozen conflicts, see Charles King in Grasping the Nettle, eds. Crocker, Hampson, and Aall (Washington, DC: United States Institute of Peace Press, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Federico Bordonaro, “Georgia: NATO by way of BMD” ISN Security Watch (29 May 2007) http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?id=17669.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Eugene B. Rumer and Jeffrey Simon, “Toward a Euro-Atlantic Strategy for the Black Sea Region,” Institute for National Strategic Studies Occasional Paper 3, Washington, DC.: National Defense University Press, April 2006, http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Occassional_Papers/OCP3.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Jeffrey Simon, Black Sea Regional Security Cooperation: Building Bridges and Barriers (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nicholas Wood, “EU to Reduce Force in Bosnia,” International Herald Tribune, February 28, 2007, http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/01/europe/web.0301bosnia.php.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Thomas Friedman, International Herald Tribune, February 15, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  30. A possible, if not the most likely, successor to Putin, Sergei Ivanov, has stated that U.S. acceptance of Russia’s BMD proposals “will quantitatively change Russian-U.S. relations. A new space for mutual trust will emerge. We may establish a real strategic partnership.” Cited in Edward Lozansky, “Is George Bush Boosting the Russian Military-Industrial Complex?” The Washington Times (July 10, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Abrahm Lustgarten, “How Shell Lost Control of Sakhalin,” Fortune, CNN (February 5, 2007), http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/02/05/8399125/index.htm.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 2007 Hall Gardner

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gardner, H. (2007). The Uncoordinated NATO-EU “Double Enlargement”: Toward the Isolation of Russia?. In: Averting Global War. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230608733_3

Download citation