Senior Researcher at the Dnipropetrovsk Branch of the National Institute of Strategic Studies
* * *
The famous formula of NATO's First Secretary-General Lord Ismay concerning the goals of this Alliance in Europe "keep the Americans in, the Russians out and the Germans down" in the first half of 2002 completely disappeared from political analysis. Instead, there is another expression which belongs to Douglas Faith, the Deputy of the US Defense Secretary: keep the myth alive! Such change in emphases and sentiments in the Western nations took place on the eve of the decision of the Council of the National Security and Defense of Ukraine as to the strategic course towards NATO membership. The low-key reaction of the European countries, indifference of Russia, as well as political tensions around Ukraine's participation in the Prague Summit, compel to think over the issue: does NATO membership remain politically important for our country and is such a membership politically and economically feasible?
NATO Strategic Prospects
Strengthening of euro as compared to US dollar, which can be seen in Ukraine in recent time, fosters the point of you that NATO is losing its relevance so far as the Alliance's primary economic function is military guaranteeing of US dollar. According to this view euro has its own military guarantor, namely, European Rapid Reaction Corps (ERRC) created by the EU. Yet, one may prov that even if NATO and ERRC have such economic functions, the only real military guarantor of euro is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
It is clear that without common European defense budget, the establishment of any "European defense community" that would be independent from NATO is impossible. Until it happens (and it will not happen for a long time) the Alliance's military monopoly in Europe will remain steadfast. Agreements on military cooperation between NATO and EU reached in the end of 2002 suggest that the two organizations are ready for interlocking, but ... Читать далее