Abstract
Working with other multinational security organizations has become an important aspect of NATO’s vocation. Changes in the international security environment since the end of the Cold War as well as since 9/11, and the operations the Alliance has conducted have been among the core drivers of recent attempts to strengthen links with other organizations. During the Cold War, NATO faced an existential threat in the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact which had territory, actors and intentions that could be analysed and capabilities that could be matched or surpassed. Since the end of this block confrontation, security challenges have increasingly become characterized by their diffuse, less than existential nature, by the multitude of actors involved ranging from state to non-state and by their transnational deterritorialized nature. This trend predates 9/11, but, nonetheless, the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and the response they provoked are the clearest illustration of the new environment and hence can be considered a catalyst of existing trends. 9/11 was an asymmetric attack on a powerful country, carried out over great distance by non-state actors using an international network of supporters and a safe haven in a failed state. Even though the combination of factors enabling the 9/11 attack to be successful will remain rare, fighting the perpetrators and trying to create conditions to prevent a similar attack has demonstrated beyond doubt the need to bring together all available instruments of security policy, ranging from military and civilian to political, economic and even cultural means. Because it would be unrealistic to expect a single organization to combine all necessary tools, for every actor in this policy arena, including NATO, the need to work with others has increased as a result.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
David C. Gompert, ‘For a Capability to Protect: Mass Killing, the African Union and NATO’, Survival, Vol.48(1), 2006, pp. 7–18, p. 7.
See, for example
Richard G. Whitmann, ‘NATO, the EU and ESDP: An Emerging Division of Labour?’, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 25 (3), 2004, pp. 430–451.
Alexandru Balas, Creating Global Synergies: Inter-Organizational Cooperation in Peace Operations (Dissertation: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2011).
Markus Derblom, Eva Hagström Frisell, Jennifer Schmidt (2008). UN-EU-AU Coordination in Peace Operations in Africa. Swedish Defence Agency User Report FOI-R-2602-SE, p. 39.
This table is based on Balas, Creating Global Synergies, 24–30 Rafael Biermann, ‘Inter-Organizationalism in Theory and Practice’, Studia Diplomatica, Vol. 62 (3), 2009, pp. 7–12.
David S. Yost (2007), ‘NATO and International Organizations. Forum Paper No. 3’. NATO Defence College, Rome, p. 41–42.
Michael F. Harsch and Johannes Varwick, ‘NATO and the UN’, Survival, Vol.51(2), 2009, pp. 5–12, p. 7.
Brooke A. Smith-Windsor, ‘Misery Makes for Strange Bedfellows: The Future of the UN–NATO Strategic Partnership’, in Brooke A. Smith-Windsor (eds.), The UN and NATO: Forward from the Joint Declaration (Rome: NATO Defence College, 2011), pp. 15–52, p. 17.
Alexis Vahlas, ‘Dispelling Misperceptions for a Renewed Strategy Between the United Nations and the Atlantic Alliance’, in Brooke A. Smith-Windsor (eds.), The UN and NATO: Forward from the Joint Declaration (Rome: NATO Defence College, 2011) pp. 53–75, p. 54.
Steven Haines, ‘The Influence of Operation Allied Force on the Development of the Jus ad Bellum’, International Affairs, Vol. 85 (3), 2009, pp. 477–490.
See, for example, Ivo V. Daalder and Michael E. O’Hanlon, ‘Global NATO’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 85 (5), 2006, pp. 105–113. For the worries such ideas create within the UN, see Vahlas, ‘Dispelling Misperceptions for a Renewed Strategy Between the United Nations and the Atlantic Alliance’, 56.
Thomas S. Mowle and David H. Sacko, ‘Global NATO: Bandwagoning in a Unipolar World’, Contemporary Security Studies, Vol. 28 (3), 2007, pp. 597–618.
James Sperling and Mark Webber, ‘NATO: From Kosovo to Kabul’, International Affairs, Vol. 85 (3), 2009, pp. 491–511.
Lothar Gutjahr (1994). German Foreign and Defence Policy after Unification. Pinter: London.
Claas D. Knoop, ‘Die strategische Partnerschaft zwischen der Afrikanischen Union und Europa’, Denkwürdigkeiten, (78), 2012, pp. 1–7.
Touko Piiparinen, ‘The Lessons of Darfur for the Future of Humanitarian Intervention’, Global Governance, Vol. 13, 2007, pp. 365–390.
African Research Bulletin, ‘AU–EU NATO Support’, Vol.42(6), 2005, pp. 16261–16262.
Simon Duke, ‘The Future of EU–NATO Relations: A Case of Mutual Irrelevance Through Competition?’, European Integration, Vol. 30 (1), 2008, pp. 27–43.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2013 Bastian Giegerich
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Giegerich, B. (2013). NATO and Interorganizational Cooperation. In: Hallams, E., Ratti, L., Zyla, B. (eds) NATO beyond 9/11. New Security Challenges. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230391222_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230391222_15
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-35152-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-39122-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)