Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

NATO-Russia Relations after 9/11: New Challenges, Old Issues

  • Chapter
NATO beyond 9/11

Part of the book series: New Security Challenges ((NSECH))

  • 448 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter provides an analysis of NATO-Russia relations from 9/11 to the alliance’s announcement of its phased withdrawal from Afghanistan. While in the aftermath of the attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon NATO’s relations with Moscow appeared to experience a qualitative revitalization — which was formalized through the establishment of the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) in 2002 — the events of 9/11 did not affect the fundamental dynamics of relations between the alliance and Moscow. NATO-Russia relations continue to be shaped by structural divergences that predated 9/11 and have their roots in the post-Cold War international settlement and Russia’s junior partner status within it; they stretch from missile and conventional defence to NATO enlargement and globalization and energy security. The Obama administration’s announcement of a ‘reset’ in relations with Moscow in 2009, although leading to a resumption of cooperation after the 2008 Russian-Georgian war, failed to usher in a solid and long-term engagement. The chapter proceeds in four sections. It begins with a short summary of NATO-Russia relations since 9/11. It then lays out the main theoretical frameworks which have been used to explain relations between the alliance and Moscow: liberal, social-constructivist, and realist ideas about, and prescriptions for, NATO-Russia relations; the next section applies all sets of perspectives to the record of key post-9/11 NATO-Russia relations; the final section discusses the prospects for NATO-Russia relations after the financial crisis and the alliance’s forthcoming withdrawal from Afghanistan.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Dov Lynch, ‘“The Enemy is at the Gate”: Russia After Beslan’, International Affairs, Vol. 81 (1), January 2005, p. 141; Moscow’s international airport of Domodevo was the site of another major terrorist act on 24 January 2011, when an explosion caused by a suicide bomber killed 37 and injured 173 people.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. J.A. Baker III, ‘Russia in NATO?’, Washington Quarterly, Winter 2002, p. 101.

    Google Scholar 

  3. For a comprehensive evaluation of relations between NATO and the Russian Federation since the end of the Cold War see Aurel Braun (ed.), NATO-Russia Relations in the Twenty-First Century (London: Routledge, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dmitri Trenin, ‘NATO and Russia: Partnership or Peril?’, Current History, Vol. 108 (720) (October 2009), p. 300.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Andrei Kelin, ‘Attitude to NATO Expansion: Calmly Negative’, International Affairs (Moscow), Vol.50(1), 2004, pp. 17–25.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Charles Fairbanks, ‘Georgia’s Rose Revolution’, Journal of Democracy, Vol. 15 (2), April 2004, pp. 110–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. A.R. Rachwald, ‘A‘Reset’ of NATO-Russia Relations: Real or Imaginary?’, European Security, Vol. 20 (1), 2011, p. 122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. In 2006 Moscow offered Kiev unilateral security guarantees in return for an agreement to permanently base Russia’s Black Sea Fleet on Ukrainian territory. Stephen Blank, ‘Russia and the Black Sea’s Frozen Conflicts in Strategic Perspective’, Mediterranean Quarterly, Vol. 19(3), Summer 2008, pp. 23–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. The Kremlin, somehow resurrecting the abjured Brezhnev doctrine, claimed a right to intervene militarily in the territory of former Soviet republics to settle, with military force if necessary, any disputes in neighbouring states, maintain oil and gas pipelines running, and continue ‘the civilizing role of Russia on the Eurasian continent’. D. Trenin, ‘Pirouettes and Priorities: Distilling a Putin Doctrine’, The National Interest Winter (74), 2003/2004, pp. 76–83;

    Google Scholar 

  10. V. Frolov, ‘A new Post-Soviet Doctrine’, The Moscow Times, 20 May 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. Kulhanek, ‘Russia’s Uncertain Rapprochement with NATO’, The RUSI Journal, Vol. 156 (1), 2011, p. 41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Merje Kuus, ‘“Love, Peace and NATO”: Imperial Subject-Making in Central Europe’, Antipode, Vol. 39 (2), 2007, p. 273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Ronald D. Asmus, Richard L. Kluger, and F. Stephen Larrabee, ‘Building a New NATO’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72(4), September/October 1993, p. 23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. The US debate on of the establishment of a ‘League of democracies’ reflected the liberal belief in democracy promotion, just as the allure of inclusion in NATO among former Soviet bloc states would set the scene for a Kantian ‘perpetual peace’. See Ivo Daalder and James Lindsay, ‘Democracies of the World Unite’, The American Interest, January/February 2007;

    Google Scholar 

  15. Charles A. Kupchan, ‘Minor League, Major Problems: The Case Against a League of Democracies’, Foreign Affairs, November/December 2008, pp. 96–109.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lars S. Skálnes, ‘From the Inside Out: NATO Expansion and International Relations Theory’, Security Studies, Vol. 7(4), Summer 1998, pp. 44–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. For a reading of relations between the West and Russia along these lines see Gale. A. Mattox, ‘Resetting the US–Russian Relationship: is ‘Cooperative Engagement’ Possible’, European Security, Vol. 20 (1), 2011, pp. 103–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Frank Schimmelfennig, ‘NATO Enlargement: A Constructivist Explanation’, Security Studies, Vol. 8 (2/3), 1999, p. 211.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Quoted in Helene Sjursen, ‘On the Identity of NATO’, International Affairs, Vol. 80 (4), 2004, p. 689;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Thomas Risse-Kappen, ‘Collective Identity in a Democratic Community: The Case of NATO’, in Peter J. Katzenstein (ed.), The Culture of National Security: Norms and Identity in World Politics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), pp. 357–399.

    Google Scholar 

  21. On social-constructivist accounts of NATO–Russia relations see Williams and Neumann, ‘From Alliance to Security Community: NATO, Russia, and the Power of Identity’ (2000);

    Google Scholar 

  22. Jef Huysmans, ‘Shape-shifting NATO: Humanitarian Action and the Kosovo Refugee Crisis’, Review of International Studies, Vol. 28, 2002, pp. 599–618;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. E. Adler, ‘The Spread of Security Communities: Communities of Practice, Self-Restraint, and NATO’s Post–Cold War Transformation’, European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 14 (2), 2008, pp. 195–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. E. Adler, ‘The Spread of Security Communities: Communities of Practice, Self-Restraint, and NATO’s Post-Cold War Transformation’, European Journal of International Relations, Vol. 14 (2), 2008, pp. 208–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. The concept of cognitive authority, which develops from social epistemology, was defined by Wilson as the authority to influence thoughts that human beings would consider proper. Patrick Wilson, Second-Hand Knowledge: An Inquiry into Cognitive Authority (Greenwood Press: Westport, 1983), p. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  26. R. E. Kante & M. H. A. Larivé, ‘NATO and Russia: A Perpetual New Beginning’, Perceptions, Vol.XVII(1), Spring 2012, p. 76.

    Google Scholar 

  27. See M. E. Brown, ‘The Flawed Logic of Expansion’, Survival, Vol.37(1), Spring 1995, pp. 34–52;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Michael Mandelbaum, ‘Preserving the New Peace: the Case against NATO Expansion’, Foreign Affairs, Vol.74(3), May–June 1995, pp. 9–13;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. M. Mandelbaum, The Dawn of Peace in Europe (New York: Twentieth Century Fund Press, 1996);

    Google Scholar 

  30. P. Zelikow, ‘The Masque of Institutions’, Survival, Vol.38(1), Spring 1996, pp. 6–18;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. D. Reiter, ‘Why NATO Enlargement does not Spread Democracy’, International Security, Vol.25(4), Spring 2001, pp. 41–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. E. Rumer and A. Stent, ‘Russia and the West’, Survival, Vol.51(2), April–May 2009, p. 94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Jeffrey Mankoff, ‘The Politics of US Missile Defence Cooperation with Europe and Russia’, International Affairs, Vol. 88 (2), 2012, p. 345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. N. Korchunov, ‘You Say Defense We Say Threat’, The International Herald Tribune, 6 June 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ivanka Barzashka, Timor Kadyshev, Glitz Neuneck and Ivan Oelrich, ‘Bridging the Missile Defense Gap’, International Herald Tribune, 17 May 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Janusz Bugajski, ‘Russia’s Pragmatic Reimperialization’, Caucasian Review of International Affairs, Vol.(4), no. 1, 2010, p. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Alexander Bratersky, ‘Pundits Stand Divided on the Success of “Reset”’, The St. Petersburg Times, 28 March 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  38. While not antagonizing Moscow, some European members of the alliance are trying to reduce dependency from Russia. Prominent among these efforts is the Nabucco pipeline project, which would take gas from Iran, Turkmenistan, Iraq and Turkey to Central and Western Europe, bypassing Russia, with first deliveries expected in 2017. F.S. Larrabee, ‘Ukraine at the Crossroads’, The Washington Quarterly, Vol.30(4), Autumn 2006, pp. 45–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. David Morgan, ‘US asks Poland for More Time on Missile Defense’, International Herald Tribune, 19 February 2009.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Luca Ratti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. King’s College London, UK

    Ellen Hallams (Lecturer in Defence Studies) (Lecturer in Defence Studies)

  2. Roma Tre University, Italy

    Luca Ratti (Associate Professor in History of International Relations) (Associate Professor in History of International Relations)

  3. University of Ottawa, Canada

    Benjamin Zyla (Assistant Professor) (Assistant Professor)

Copyright information

© 2013 Luca Ratti

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ratti, L. (2013). NATO-Russia Relations after 9/11: New Challenges, Old Issues. In: Hallams, E., Ratti, L., Zyla, B. (eds) NATO beyond 9/11. New Security Challenges. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230391222_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation