Abstract
Following the end of the Cold War, it was not automatic that the United States would back NATO’s expansion into Central and Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, consistent support for NATO enlargement has become one of the central features of post-Cold War U.S. grand strategy for over three decades. What explains this trend, and what effects has it had for U.S. national security? Drawing from international relations (IR) theory and policy debates, this paper evaluates a series of hypotheses that might explain the United States’ sustained enthusiasm for NATO’s eastward march. Finding each argument wanting, it develops a synthetic explanation emphasizing the influence of unipolarity on American international opportunities and the effects this had on the course and content of post-Cold War U.S. foreign policy. It then assesses the mixed impact of NATO enlargement on U.S. national security, before discussing implications for policy, historiography, and theory.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
As Secretary of State Madeleine Albright testified in 1997, the United States could not ‘dismiss the possibility that Russia could return to the patterns of the past’. Hence, enlarging NATO assisted in ‘closing the avenue to more destructive alternatives’ in Russia’s future. See US Senate (1998), 8. See also Talbott (2019), 412.
- 3.
For example, the 2003 Senate Foreign Relations Committee enlargement discussion coincided with the 2003 invasion of Iraq, leading senators to simultaneously discuss both NATO enlargement and plans for Iraqi reconstruction. See US Senate (2003). On the limited evaluation, compare the range of witnesses and length of testimony in 1998 to the 2008 discussion (US Senate 2008).
- 4.
Equally striking is the speed with which Finland and Sweden decided to pursue NATO membership after decades of formal neutrality. It may well be the case that Helsinki and Stockholm had tacitly used the prospect of abandoning neutrality as a kind of diplomatic deterrent against Russian aggression for much of the post-Cold War era; this would help explain the range of ties (despite formal Finnish and Swedish neutrality) between NATO and the two that emerged after the Soviet collapse. Regardless, the rapidity with which formal neutrality was cast side following the Russian invasion of Ukraine is notable.
- 5.
In this, I use a range of established IR theories to develop potential specific explanations for the enlargement consensus; on this approach, see Van Evera (1997), 40–43.
- 6.
Many opponents of NATO expansion expected that (1) new great powers might soon emerge—suggesting that expansion was strategically risky—just as (2) enlargement might encourage states to counterbalance. See Waltz (1993).
- 7.
- 8.
This dynamic may have created a related problem. Having decided to suppress alternatives, the United States exposed itself to a form of entrapment whereby hints that states were considering security structures besides NATO could spur enlargement; in effect, the United States reduced its control over events.
- 9.
For a related argument, see Porter (2018).
- 10.
- 11.
Domestic politics may have entered the calculation in a slightly different way following the 2016 election of Donald Trump. Trump was widely perceived to be overly interested in establishing a good relationship with Russia in general and Russian President Vladimir Putin in particular. Combined with accusations that Russia helped engineer Trump’s election in the first place, Democrats began charging Trump with selling out the United States’ European interests and, especially, allies to Moscow; this had the effect of encouraging Democrats to double-down on the importance of NATO and pre-Trump US policy toward Europe. Many Republicans, meanwhile, seemingly felt vulnerable to charges of being subservient or soft on Russia; seeking to differentiate themselves from Trump, they too began highlighting the value of the United States’ existing approach toward Europe. The net effect was sustained bipartisan support for NATO and the alliance’s continued growth despite—and perhaps because of—the Trump administration. Of course, this specific domestic political angle should not be taken too far: after all, bipartisan support for NATO enlargement preceded the Trump years, just as the drive to separate from Trump’s policies was itself seemingly a response to other factors (e.g., public opinion, concerns with U.S. influence)—the choice did not emerge randomly, and may not have been purely political in nature. Still, future research should investigate whether and how the Trump administration’s particular features affected the domestic politics behind NATO enlargement.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
Likely Swedish and Finnish membership in NATO may mitigate some of the problems associated with a conventional defense of the Baltics, though is unlikely to resolve all issues. For that matter, Finland—despite its impressive indigenous capabilities—may present another difficult military challenge for the alliance.
- 15.
To be sure, the US is free not to utilize nuclear weapons on behalf of a NATO ally amid a crisis. Still, given the questions this could raise over the United States’ future credibility and the concern US leaders have historically shown over the United States’ willingness to reassure its partners, expansion increases the likelihood US leaders may feel obliged to escalate up to and including nuclear use for NATO’s new members.
- 16.
Of course, it remains unclear if the US and/or other NATO members would expand to Ukraine, Georgia, or additional countries bordering Russia if conflict were ongoing. Nevertheless, the US has certainly stressed it is willing to consider continued expansion and, in any case, leaders in Russia, Ukraine, and beyond may believe we are serious about further enlargement. Thanks go to Robert Jervis for help on this point.
- 17.
Critics might argue that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine highlights that Europe indeed faces a hegemonic threat. That argument is wrong. As the Russia-Ukraine War demonstrates, Russia lacks the capability to even conquer even moderately capable neighbors and, in any case, faces strong counterbalancing pressures from other regional actors. It may be aggressive, but it is in no place to bid for European hegemony.
- 18.
The canonical statement of the first point is Olson and Zeckhauser 1966. The second point needs elaboration. Alliances tend to wax and wane as states pool resources in response to threats. This is costly and risky domestically—requiring resource mobilization—and internationally—as states rely on one another for their security. For alliances facing limited threats, it is reasonable to expect states to buckpass and underinvest in military forces as much as possible, hoping that their allies will instead bear the burdens of confronting what threats there are.
References
Albright, M. 2010. Testimony Before the U.S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations. NATO: Report on the Group of Experts, 111th Cong., 2nd sess., May 20.
Art, R.J. 1996. Why Western Europe Needs the United States and NATO. Political Science Quarterly 111 (1): 1–39.
Art, R.J. 1998. Creating a Disaster: NATO’s Open Door Policy. Political Science Quarterly 113 (3): 341–342.
Art, R.J. 1999. Geopolitics Updated: The Strategy of Selective Engagement. International Security 23 (3): 79–113.
Asmus, R. 2002. Opening NATO’s Door: How the Alliance Remade Itself for a New Era. New York: Columbia University Press.
Asmus, R.D., and R.C. Nurick. 1996. NATO Enlargement and the Baltic States. Survival 38 (2): 121–142.
Associated Press. 2022. U.S. Senate Approves Finland and Sweden for Membership into NATO. National Public Radio, August 4. https://www.npr.org/2022/08/04/1115537908/u-s-senate-approves-finland-and-sweden-for-membership-into-nato.
Bandow, D. 2014. Washington Should Not Defend Ukraine or Expand NATO: US Should Shift Responsibility for Europe’s Defense to Europe. Forbes, April 7.
Baldwin, D. 2012. Power and International Relations. In Handbook of International Relations, ed. W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse, and B.A. Simmons, 273–297. London: Sage.
Barnes, J., and H. Cooper. 2019. Trump Discussed Pulling US from NATO, Aides Say amid New Concerns over Russia. New York Times, January 14.
BBC News. 2018. German Army Problems “Dramatically Bad”, Report Says, February 20. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43134896.
Beckley, M., and H. Brands. 2021. China Is a Declining Power—And That’s the Problem. Foreign Policy, September 24. https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/09/24/china-great-power-united-states/.
Blainey, G. 1988. The Causes of War. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.
Belkin, P. 2016. NATO’s Warsaw Summit: In Brief. R44550. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.
Biden, J. 2022. Remarks by President Biden on the United Efforts of the Free World to Support the People of Ukraine. White House, March 26. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/03/26/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-united-efforts-of-the-free-world-to-support-the-people-of-ukraine/.
Birnbaum, M. 2011. Gates Rebukes European Allies in Farewell Speech. Washington Post, June 10. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/gates-rebukes-european-allies-in-farewell-speech/2011/06/10/AG9tKeOH_story.html.
Brands, H. 2016a. American Grand Strategy and the Liberal Order: Continuity, Change, and Options for the Future. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
———. 2016b. Making the Unipolar Moment: U.S. Foreign Policy and the Rise of the Post-Cold War Order. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
———. 2019. If NATO Expansion Was a Mistake, Why Hasn’t Putin Invaded? Bloomberg, May 14. Available at https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-05-14/nato-expansion-if-it-was-a-mistake-why-hasn-t-putin-invaded.
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.
Brooks, S.G., and W.C. Wohlforth. 2016. America Abroad: The United States’ Global Role in the 21st Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brzezinski, I. 2003. Remarks in U.S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations 2003.
Burns, N. 2003. Remarks in U.S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations 2003.
Burns, N., and D. Lute. 2019. NATO at Seventy: An Alliance in Crisis. Cambridge, MA: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
Burns, W.J. 2019. The Back Channel: A Memoir of American Diplomacy and a Case for Its Renewal. New York: Random House.
Bush, G.H.W. 1993. National Security Strategy of the United States. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Bush, G.W. 2004. Remarks by the President of the United States at the NATO Accession Ceremony, March 29. https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/2004/s040329b.htm.
Bush, G.W. 2010. Decision Points. New York: Crown.
Butt, A. 2019. Why Did the United States Invade Iraq in 2003? Security Studies 28 (2): 250–285.
Cirilli, K. 2014. McCain: Put Ukraine on Track to Join NATO. Hill, May 15. https://thehill.com/policy/international/206241-mccain-put-ukraine-on-track-to-join-nato.
Congressional Research Service. 2019. Georgia: Background and U.S. Policy. R45307. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, October 17. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R45307.pdf.
Cook, L., and S. Niksic. 2018. NATO Gives Bosnia Green Light to Advance on Membership Path. US News and World Report, December 5. https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2018-12-05/nato-gives-bosnia-green-light-to-advance-on-membership-path.
Clemens, W., Jr. 1997. An Alternative to NATO Expansion. International Journal 52 (2): 353–357.
Clinton, H. 2010. NATO’s Future. Remarks delivered on February 22. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/commentary/transcript/transcript-hillary-clinton-on-nato-s-future/.
Clinton, W.J. 1994a. A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement. Washington, DC: White House.
———. 1994b. Partnership for Peace, Building a New Security. Remarks to the North Atlantic Council, Brussels, January 10. Available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PPP-1994b-book1/html/PPP-1994b-book1-doc-pg18.htm.
———. 1994c. Address to the Polish Parliament in Warsaw. The American Presidency Project, University of California Santa Barbara. Available at https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-polish-parliament-warsaw.
Clinton, W.J. 1995. A National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement. Washington, DC: White House.
———. 1999a. A National Security Strategy for a New Century. Washington, DC: White House.
———. 1999b. Memorandum of Telephone Conversation: Telephone Conversation with Russian President Yeltsin. National Security Archive, March 24. https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/16841-document-16-memorandum-telephone-conversation.
Chollet, D., and J. Goldgeier. 2008. America Between the Wars: From 11/9 to 9/11—The Misunderstood Years Between the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the Start of the War on Terror. New York: Council on Foreign Relations.
Cottey, A. 2009. The Kosovo War in Perspective. International Affairs 85 (3): 593–608.
Croft, S. 2002. Guaranteeing Europe’s Security? Enlarging NATO Again. International Affairs 78 (1): 97–114.
Daalder, I.H. 2005. The End of Atlanticism. In Beyond Paradise and Power: Europe, America, and the Future of a Troubled Partnership, ed. T. Lindberg, 39–59. London: Routledge.
Daalder, I.H., and J. Goldgeier. 2006. Global NATO. Foreign Affairs 85 (5): 105–113.
———. 2008. NATO: A Mockery of Enlargement. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, April 8. https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/nato-a-mockery-of-enlargement/.
Davis, J. 2018. Trump Warns NATO Allies to Spend More on Defense, or Else. New York Times, 2 July. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/02/world/europe/trump-nato.html.
Dempsey, J. 2017. NATO’s Eastern Flank and Its Future Relationship with Russia. Carnegie Paper 23. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 23 October. https://carnegieendowment.org/files/CP_318_Eastern_Flank_FNL4WEB.pdf.
Deni, J. 2004. The NATO Rapid Deployment Corps: Alliance Doctrine and Force Structure. Contemporary Security Policy 25 (3): 498–523.
Department of Defense. 2021. U.S.-Ukraine Strategic Defense Framework. https://media.defense.gov/2021/Aug/31/2002844632/-1/-1/0/US-UKRAINE-STRATEGIC-DEFENSE-FRAMEWORK.PDF.
Department of State. 1997. Report to the Congress on the Enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Washington DC: Department of State.
Department of State. 2021. U.S.-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership. https://www.state.gov/u-s-ukraine-charter-on-strategic-partnership/.
Dessler, D. 1989. What’s at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate? International Organization 43 (3): 441–473.
DeYoung, K., and G. Jaffe. 2011. NATO Runs Short on Some Munitions in Libya. Washington Post, 15 April. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nato-runs-short-on-some-munitions-inlibya/2011/04/15/AF3O7ElD_story.html.
Eagleburger, L. 1993. Parting Thoughts: U.S. Foreign Policy in the Years Ahead. 5 January. Supplied to Author by James Goldgeier.
Engel, J.A. 2010. A Better World…but Don’t Get Carried Away: The Foreign Policy of George H.W. Bush Twenty Years On. Diplomatic History 34 (1): 25–46.
———. 2013. Bush, Germany, and the Power of Time: How History Makes History. Diplomatic History 37 (4): 1–25.
———. 2017. When the World Seemed New: George H.W. Bush and the End of the Cold War. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Everett, B., and A. Hanna. 2017. Rand Paul’s Latest Lonely Fight Incenses Fellow Senators. Politico, March 31. https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/rand-paul-senate-backlash-obamacare-russia-236272.
Flanagan, S.J. 2019. NATO from Liaison to Enlargement: A Perspective from the State Department and the National Security Council 1990–1999. In Open Door: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Security After the Cold War, ed. D. Hamilton and K. Spohr, 93–114. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy Institute/Henry Kissinger Center for Global Affairs, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.
Finkbeiner, A., and R. Van Noorden. 2022. Will War in Ukraine Mark a New Era for European Defense Research? Nature, August 17. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02185-x.
Friedman, T. 1998. And Now, a Word from Mr. X. New York Times, May 2. Available at https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/02/opinion/foreign-affairs-now-a-word-from-x.html.
Gaddis, J.L. 1998. History, Grand Strategy and NATO Enlargement. Survival 40 (1): 145–151.
Gallis, P.E. 1997. NATO Enlargement: The Process and Allied Views. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, July 1.
Gates, R.M. 2014. Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Garcia, M. 2009. NATO Enlargement: Senate Advice and Consent. Report RL31915. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, January 16.
Gavin, F. 2015. Strategies of Inhibition: U.S. Grand Strategy, the Nuclear Revolution, and Nonproliferation. International Security 40 (1): 9–46.
George, A.L., and A. Bennett. 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gholz, E., D. Press, and H. Sapolsky. 1997. Come Home, America: The Strategy of Restraint in the Face of Temptation. International Security 21 (4): 5–48.
Glaser, C.L. 2010. Rational Theory of International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Goldberg, J. 2016. The Obama Doctrine. Atlantic 316 (3): 70–90.
Goldgeier, J.M. 1999a. Not Whether but When: The U.S. Decision to Enlarge NATO. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
———. 1999b. The US Decision to Enlarge NATO: How, When, Why, and What Next. Brookings Review 17 (3): 18–21.
Guardian. 2022. Germany pauses buying Puma tanks after mass breakdown. The Guardian, December 19. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/19/germany-pauses-buying-puma-tanks-after-mass-breakdown.
Gunitsky, S. 2017. Aftershocks: Great Powers and Domestic Reforms in the Twentieth Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hamilton, D.S. 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.
———. 2019b. Piece of the Puzzle: NATO and the Euro-Atlantic Architecture after the Cold War. In Open Door: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Security After the Cold War, ed. D. Hamilton and K. Spohr, 3–47. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy Institute/Henry Kissinger Center for Global Affairs, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.
———. 2019c. New Members, New Missions: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Architecture in the Second Clinton Administration. In Open Door: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Security After the Cold War, ed. D. Hamilton and K. Spohr, 339–384. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy Institute/Henry Kissinger Center for Global Affairs, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.
Hanna, A. 2017. Senate Votes Overwhelmingly to Admit Montenegro to NATO. Politico, March 28. https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/senate-approves-montenegro-nato-treaty-236606.
Hendrickson, R.C. 2000/2001. NATO’s Open Door Policy and the Next Round of Enlargement. Parameters 30 (4): 53–66.
Hendrickson, R.C., and Readman, K.S. 2004. From the Baltic to the Black Sea: Bush’s NATO Enlargement. White House Studies 4 (3): 319–336.
Hill, W.H. 2018. No Place for Russia: European Security Institutions Since 1989. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hille, P., and Werkhäuser, N. 2022. The German Military's New Shopping List. DW.com, June 3. https://www.dw.com/en/how-will-the-german-military-spend-100-billion/a-62020972.
Hunter, R.E. 1999. NATO at Fifty: Maximizing NATO—A Relevant Alliance Knows How to Reach. Foreign Affairs 78 (3): 190–203.
Hunter, R.E. 2002. The European Security and Defense Policy: NATO’s Companion—Or Competitor? Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Huntington, S. 1999. The Lonely Superpower. Foreign Affairs 78 (2): 25–49.
Hunzeker, M.A., and A. Lanoszka. 2015/2016. Landpower and American Credibility. Parameters 45 (4): 17–26.
Hutchings, R. 1997. American Diplomacy and the End of the Cold War: An Insider’s Account of U.S. Policy in Europe, 1989–1992. Washington, DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.
Ikenberry, G.J. 2018. The End of Liberal International Order? International Affairs 94 (1): 7–23.
Japaridze, T. 2014. If NATO Delays Path to Georgia’s Membership, What Is the Alternative? Atlantic Council (blog), June 30. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/publications/articles/if-nato-delays-path-to-georgia-s-membership-what-is-the-alternative.
Jervis, R. 1995. Legacies of the Cold War. Brown Journal of World Affairs 2 (2): 21–27.
Jervis, R. 2009. Unipolarity: A Structural Perspective. World Politics 61 (1): 188–213.
Kagan, R. 2008. The Return of History and the End of Dreams. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
———. 2018. Things Will Not Be Okay. Washington Post, July 12. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/everything-will-not-be-okay/2018/07/12/c5900550-85e9-11e8-9e80-403a221946a7_story.html.
Kamp, K. 1998. NATO Entrapped: Debating the Next Enlargement Round. Survival 40 (3): 170–186.
Kay, S. 2020. Email Communication with Author, January 11.
Karnitschnig, M. 2019. Germany’s Soldiers of Misfortune. Politico, February 15. https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-biggest-enemy-threadbare-army-bundeswehr/.
Keil, S., and Arts, S. 2018. NATO After the Brussels Summit: Bruised or Emboldened? Washington, DC: German Marshall Fund of the United States, September 15. http://www.gmfus.org/publications/nato-after-brussels-summit-bruised-or-emboldened.
Khong, Y.F. 1992. Analogies at War: Korea, Munich, Dien Bien Phu, and the Vietnam Decisions of 1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kupchan, C.A. 1998. After Pax Americana: Benign Power, Regional Integration, and the Sources of a Stable Multipolarity. International Security 23 (2): 40–79.
Krauthammer, C. 2002. The Bold Road to NATO Expansion. Washington Post, November 22. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2002/11/22/the-bold-road-to-nato-expansion/e1d6448a-735f-4d04-a190-839ff1c1636d/?utm_term=.7d8296a3706b.
Kuhn, U. 2018. Preventing Escalation in the Baltics. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Lake, A. 2004. Interview, 6 November. William J. Clinton Presidential History Project, Miller Center, University of Virginia. http://web1.millercenter.org/poh/transcripts/ohp_2004_1106_lake.pdf.
Lanoszka, A., and M.A. Hunzeker. 2019. Conventional Deterrence and Landpower in Northeastern Europe. Carlisle, PA: US Army War College Press.
Larrabee, F.S. 1999. NATO Enlargement After the First Round. International Spectator 34 (2): 73–86.
Layne, C. 1993. The Unipolar Illusion: Why New Great Powers Will Rise. International Security 17 (4): 5–51.
———. 2002. The “Poster Child for Offensive Realism”: America as a Global Hegemon. Security Studies 12 (2): 120–164.
———. 2006. The Peace of Illusions: American Grand Strategy from 1940 to the Present. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
———. 2009. The Waning of U.S. Hegemony—Myth or Reality? A Review Essay. International Security 34 (1): 147–172.
Lebow, R.N., and T. Risse-Kappen, eds. 1995. International Relations Theory and the End of the Cold War. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lieber, R. 2012. Power and Willpower in the American Future: Why the United States Is Not Destined to Decline. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lowenkron Files. Box CF01527. George H.W. Bush Presidential Library. College Station, TX.
Lucas, E. 2022. NATO Is Dangerously Exposed in the Baltic. Foreign Policy, February 2. https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/02/02/nato-baltic-states-sea-russia-military-defense/.
Machi, V. 2022. Macron Petitions Europe to Support Its Own Defense Industry Amid New ‘War Economy’’. Defense News, June 13. https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/eurosatory/2022/06/13/macron-petitions-europe-to-support-its-own-defense-industry-amid-new-war-economy/.
Martuscelli, C. 2022. Germany to Miss 2 Percent NATO Defense Spending Target: Think Tank. Politico, August 15. https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-to-miss-2-percent-nato-defense-spending-target-think-tank/.
Mastanduno, M. 1997. Preserving the Unipolar Moment: Realist Theories and US Grand Strategy After the Cold War. International Security 21 (4): 49–88.
Mearsheimer, J.J. 1990. Back to the Future: Instability in Europe After the Cold War. International Security 15 (1): 5–56.
———. 2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton.
———. 2014a. Why the Ukraine Crisis Is the West’s Fault. Foreign Affairs 93 (5): 77–89.
———. 2014b. Getting Ukraine Wrong. The New York Times, 13 March. Available at https://www.nytimes.com/2014b/03/14/opinion/getting-ukraine-wrong.html.
———. 2019. Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International Order. International Security 43 (4): 7–50.
Mearsheimer, J.J., and S.M. Walt. 2016. The Case for Offshore Balancing: A Superior US Grand Strategy. Foreign Affairs 95 (4): 70.
Michta, A. 2009. NATO Enlargement Post-1989: Successful Adaptation or Decline? Contemporary European History 18 (3): 363–379.
Miller, F.C. 2018a. 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).
Monaghan, A. 2006. “Calmly Critical”: Evolving Russian Views of US Hegemony. Journal of Strategic Studies 29 (6): 987–1013.
Monteiro, N. 2014. Theory of Unipolar Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moyer, A. 2000. Prospects for NATO Enlargement: Examining the “Big Bang” Approach. Master’s Thesis, Naval Postgraduate School.
Mueller, J. 1989. Retreat from Doomsday: The Obsolescence of Major War. New York: Basic Books.
Myers, S.L. 2008. Bush Backs Ukraine Bid to Join NATO. New York Times, April 1. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/world/europe/01iht-prexy.4.11593095.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.
[Name redacted]. 2016. NATO’s Warsaw Summit: In Brief. Report R44550. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 14 November.
NATO. 1995a. The Alliance’s Strategic Concept. In NATO Handbook, 40–42. Brussels: NATO.
———. 1995b. Study on Enlargement, September 3. Available at https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_24733.htm.
———. 1997a. NATO’s Enlargement. Last modified 4 July 1997, https://www.nato.int/docu/comm/1997a/970708/infopres/e-enl.htm.
———. 1997b. Founding Act on Mutual Relations, Cooperation and Security Between NATO and the Russian Federation Signed in Paris, France, May 27. https://www.nato.int/cps/su/natohq/official_texts_25468.htm.
———. 1997c. Remarks by Russian President Yeltsin. Signing Ceremony of the NATO–Russia Founding Act, Paris, May 27. https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/1997/s970527e.htm. Accessed 23 January 2020.
———. 1997d. Madrid Declaration on Euro-Atlantic Security and Cooperation, July 8.
———. 1999a. An Alliance for the 21st Century’ Washington Summit Communiqué Issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C., April 24. Available at https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_27440.htm?selectedLocale=en.
———. 1999b. The Alliance's Strategic Concept (1999a) Approved by the Heads of State and Government participating in the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Washington D.C., April 24. Available at https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_27433.htm?selectedLocale=en.
———. 1999c. Membership Action Plan (MAP) Approved by the Heads of State and Government Participating in the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council, April 24. Available at https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_27444.htm?selectedLocale=en.
———. 1999d. Washington Summit Communique, April 24.
———. 1999e. Press: Development of the European Security and Defense Identity (ESDI) Within NATO. https://www.nato.int/docu/comm/1999b/9904-wsh/pres-eng/05esdi.pdf.
New York Times. 2002. Bush’s Speech on NATO Enlargement. November 21. https://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/21/international/bushs-speech-on-nato-enlargement.html.
———. 2018a. NATO Summit Live Updates: Trump Pushes Allies to Increase Spending. July 11. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/11/world/europe/trump-nato-live-updates.html.
———. 2018b. Why NATO Matters. New York Times Editorial, July 8. Available at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/08/opinion/editorials/why-nato-matters.html.
———. 2022. U.S. Offers ‘Diplomatic Path’ in Answer to Russian Demands. January 26. https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/01/26/world/ukraine-russia-us#the-us-delivers-its-written-response-to-russias-demands-in-eastern-europe.
Obama, B. 2014. Remarks by President Obama to the People of Estonia, September 3. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/09/03/remarks-president-obama-people-estonia.
O’Hanlon, M., and Skaluba, C. 2019. A Report from NATO's Front Lines. The National Interest, June 10. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/report-natos-front-lines-62067.
Oprysko, C. 2020. “NATO Plus ME”: Trump Proposes NATO Expansion into Middle East. Politico, January 9. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/09/trump-nato-expansion-proposal-096772.
Pifer, S. 2019. NATO’s Ukraine Challenge. Brookings Institution blog, June 6. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/06/06/natos-ukraine-challenge/.
Posen, B.R. 2006. European Union Security and Defense Policy: Response to Unipolarity? Security Studies 15 (2): 149–186.
———. 2009. Emerging Multipolarity: Why Should We Care? Current History 108 (721): 347–352.
———. 2014. Restraint: A New Foundation for U.S. Grand Strategy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
———. 2020. Europe Can Defend Itself. Survival 62 (6): 7–34.
Porter, P. 2018. Why America’s Grand Strategy Has Not Changed: Power, Habit, and the U.S. Foreign Policy Establishment. International Security 42 (4): 9–46.
Portman, R. 2021. At Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing, Portman Presses Secretary Blinken on Nord Stream II, U.S. Support for a NATO Membership Action Plan for Ukraine and Georgia. Rob Portman, June 8. https://www.portman.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senate-foreign-relations-committee-hearing-portman-presses-secretary.
Radin, A., and C. Reach. 2017. Russian Views of the International Order. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Radin, A., et al. 2019. What Will Russian Military Capabilities Look Like in the Future? Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty. 2019. Stoltenberg: Georgia Will Join NATO, and Russia Can Do Nothing About It. March 25. https://www.rferl.org/a/stoltenberg-georgia-will-join-nato-and-russia-can-do-nothing-about-it/29840885.html.
Reiter, D. 2001. Why NATO Enlargement Does Not Spread Democracy. International Security 25 (4): 41–67.
Reuters. 2014. Hard for NATO to Defend Baltic States from Russia: Spiegel, May 18. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ukraine-crisis-nato/hard-for-nato-to-defend-baltic-states-from-russia-spiegel-idUKBREA4H08D20140518.
Rice, C. 2011. No Higher Honor. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Risse-Kappen, T. 1996. Identity in a Democratic Security Community: The Case of NATO. In The Culture of National Security, ed. P. Katzenstein, 357–399. New York: Columbia University Press.
Rodman, P. 1999. The Fallout from Kosovo. Foreign Affairs 78 (4): 45–51.
Rosner, J. 1996. NATO Enlargement’s American Hurdle: The Perils of Misjudging Our Political Will. Foreign Affairs 75 (4): 9–16.
Rovner, J. 2020. The Primacy Problem: Explaining America’s Afghan Purgatory. War on the Rocks, January 8. https://warontherocks.com/2020/01/the-primacy-problem-explaining-americas-afghan-purgatory/.
Ruger, W. 2019a. NATO at 70: Will Continued Expansion Endanger Americans? War on the Rocks, April 4. https://warontherocks.com/2019/04/nato-at-70-will-continued-expansion-endanger-americans/.
———. 2019b. We Should Firmly Shut the Open Door. Law and Liberty, April 24. Available at https://www.lawliberty.org/liberty-forum/we-should-firmly-shut-the-open-door/.
Sayle, T.A. 2019. Enduring Alliance: A History of NATO and the Postwar Global Order. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Sarotte, M.E. 2009. 1989. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
———. 2019a. The Convincing Call from Central Europe: Let Us Into NATO. Foreign Affairs Snapshot, March 12. Available at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2019-03-12/convincing-call-central-europe-let-us-nato.
Sarotte, M.E. 2019. How to Enlarge NATO: The Debate inside the Clinton Administration, 1993–95. International Security 44 (1): 7–41.
Saunders, E. 2009. Transformative Choices: Leaders and the Origins of Intervention Strategy. International Security 34 (2): 119–161.
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.
Schmitt, E. 1998. Senate Approves Expansion of NATO by Vote of 80 to 19. Clinton Pleased by Decision. New York Times, May 1.
Schuessler, J., and J. Shifrinson. 2020. The Shadow of Exit from NATO. Strategic Studies Quarterly 13 (3): 38–51.
Shanker, T., and E. Schmitt. 2011. Seeing Limits to “New” Kind of War in Libya. New York Times, October 21. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/22/world/africa/nato-war-in-libya-shows-united-states-was-vital-to-toppling-qaddafi.html.
Sharp, J. 1993. Europe’s Nuclear Dominos. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 49 (5): 29–33.
Shlapak, D.A., and M. Johnson. 2016. Reinforcing Deterrence on NATO’s Eastern Flank. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
Shifrinson, J.R.I. 2016. Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion. International Security 40 (4): 7–44.
———. 2017a. Time to Consolidate NATO? The Washington Quarterly 40 (1): 109–123.
———. 2017b. Trump and NATO: Old Wine in Gold Bottles? H-Diplo/ISSF Policy Series 1 (5). https://issforum.org/roundtables/policy/1-5ba-nato.
———. 2020a. NATO Enlargement and US Foreign Policy: The Origins, Durability, and Impact of an Idea. International Politics (first view). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-020-00224-w.
———. 2020b. Eastbound and Down: The United States, NATO Enlargement, and Suppressing the Soviet and Western European Alternatives, 1990–1992. Journal of Strategic Studies (first view). https://doi.org/10.1080/01402390.2020.1737931.
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. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1629.html.
Sloan, S.R. 1995. US Perspectives on NATO’s Future. International Affairs 71 (2): 217–231.
———. 2010. Permanent Alliance? NATO and the Transatlantic Bargain from Truman to Obama. New York: Bloomsbury.
———. 2016. Defense of the West: NATO, the European Union and the Transatlantic Bargain. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
Steinberg, J., and P. Gordon. 2001. NATO Enlargement: Moving Forward; Expanding the Alliance and Completing Europe’s Integration. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, November 15. https://www.brookings.edu/research/nato-enlargement-moving-forward-expanding-the-alliance-and-completing-europes-integration/.
Stavridis, J. 2019. Why NATO Is Essential for World Peace, According to Its Former Commander. Time, April 4. https://time.com/5564171/why-nato-is-essential-world-peace/.
State Department. 2020a. Secretary Antony J. Blinken at a Press Availability. January 26. https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-a-press-availability-13/.
———. 2020b. Secretary Antony J. Blinken on Russia’s Threat to Peace and Security at the UN Security Council. February 17. https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-on-russias-threat-to-peace-and-security-at-the-un-security-council/.
———. 2020c. Secretary Blinken’s Press Availability, March 4. https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-a-press-availability-15/.
———. 2020d. Secretary Antony J. Blinken at a Press Availability, May 15. https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-a-press-availability-18/.
Thompson, J.A. 2015. A Sense of Power: The Roots of America’s Global Role. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Talbott, S. 2019. Bill, Boris, and NATO. In Open Door: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Security After the Cold War, ed. D. Hamilton and K. Spohr, 405–424. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy Institute/Henry Kissinger Center for Global Affairs, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.
Tobey, W. 2014. Responding to Russian Aggression in Ukraine and Restoring U.S. Credibility. Foreign Policy, March 3. https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/responding-russian-aggression-ukraine-and-restoring-us-credibility.
Trachtenberg, M. 2009. The Craft of International History: A Guide to Method. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Trubowitz, P., E. Goldman, and E. Rhodesi, eds. 1996. The Politics of Strategic Adjustment. New York: Columbia University Press.
Tunsjo, O. 2018. The Return of Bipolarity in World Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
Van Evera, S. 1997. Guide to Methods for Students of Political Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Vesser, D. 1992. Extracts from 18 Feb 92 DPG Draft. March 26, online via National Archives. https://www.archives.gov/files/declassification/iscap/pdf/2008-003-docs1-12.pdf.
Vershbow, A. 2019. Present at the Transformation: An Insider’s Reflection on NATO Enlargement, NATO-Russia Relations, and Where We Go from Here. In Open Door: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Security After the Cold War, ed. D. Hamilton and K. Spohr, 425–448. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy Institute/Henry Kissinger Center for Global Affairs, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.
U.S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations. 1998. The Debate on NATO Enlargement, 105th Cong., 1st sess., 7 October 1997. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
U.S. Senate, Committee on Foreign Relations. 2019. NATO Expansion: Examining the Accession of North Macedonia, 116th Cong., 1st sess., 12 June. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
Walker, J. 2019a. Enlarging NATO: The Initial Clinton Years. In Open Door: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Security After the Cold War, ed. D. Hamilton and K. Spohr, 263–275. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy Institute/Henry Kissinger Center for Global Affairs, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.
Walker, J. 2019b. Enlarging NATO: The Initial Clinton Year. In Open Door: NATO and Euro-Atlantic Security After the Cold War, ed. D. Hamilton and K. Spohr, 263–276. Washington, DC: Foreign Policy Institute/Henry Kissinger Center for Global Affairs, School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.
Wallander, C.A. 1999. Mortal Friends, Best Enemies: German-Russian Cooperation After the Cold War. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Walt, S.M. 2009. Alliances in a Unipolar World. World Politics 61 (1): 86–120.
Waltz, K.N. 1993. The Emerging Structure of International Politics. International Security 18 (2): 44–79.
Washington Post. 2018. Trump Is Poisoning NATO. Why? July 11. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/trump-is-poisoning-nato/2018/07/11/7c8bdc66-851d-11e8-8553-a3ce89036c78_story.html.
White House. 2016. Press Conference by President Obama after NATO Summit. July 9. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/07/09/press-conference-president-obama-after-nato-summit.
———. 2017a. Remarks by the Vice President and Georgian Prime Minister in a Joint Press Conference. August 1. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-vice-president-georgian-prime-minister-joint-press-conference/.
———. 2017b. Statement by the Press Secretary on Montenegro’s NATO Accession Protocol. April 11. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-press-secretary-montenegros-nato-accession-protocol/.
———. 2019. Remarks by Vice President Pence at NATO Engages: The Alliance at 70. April 3. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-vice-president-pence-nato-engages-alliance-70/.
———. 2022a. Remarks by President Biden on Russia’s Unprovoked and Unjustified Attack on Ukraine. February 24. Available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022a/02/24/remarks-by-president-biden-on-russias-unprovoked-and-unjustified-attack-on-ukraine/.
———. 2022b. Remarks by President Biden on the United Efforts of the Free World to Support the People of Ukraine. Warsaw, Poland, March 26. Available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022b/03/26/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-united-efforts-of-the-free-world-to-support-the-people-of-ukraine/.
———. 1998. The Balance of Power and NATO Expansion. Working Paper 5.66. Berkeley: University of California Center for German and European Studies.
Wilson, D., and D. Kramer. 2018. Enlarge NATO to Ensure Peace in Europe. New Atlanticist blog, August 7. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/enlarge-nato-to-ensure-peace-in-europe.
Williams, P. 1985. The Senate and US Troops in Europe. London: Macmillan.
Wohlforth, W.C. 1999. The Stability of a Unipolar World. International Security 24 (1): 5–41.
———. 2016. The Right Choice for NATO. In Sustainable Security: Rethinking American National Security Strategy, ed. J. Suri and B. Valentino, 245–262. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zelikow, P., and C. Rice. 2019. To Build a Better World: Choices to End the Cold War and Create a Global Commonwealth. Illustrated. New York, NY: Twelve.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Shifrinson, J.R.I. (2023). The NATO Enlargement Consensus and US Foreign Policy: Origins and Consequences. In: Goldgeier, J., Shifrinson, J.R.I. (eds) Evaluating NATO Enlargement. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23364-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23364-7_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-23363-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-23364-7
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)