This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: nmaking was formally respected. Moreover, in the aftermath of the Cold War there were no obvious alternatives to keep the United States and
Europe close once American troops withdrew and the nuclear umbrella became irrelevant. Creating something new was beyond the imagination
of Washington's foreign policy makers at the time. Lastly, because it was and would remain primarily a military organization, NATO was one
institution that the United States, with its nuclear arsenal and vast military superiority, would be certain to continue to dominate. Yet by
transforming the alliance into an agency for addressing international crises of all kinds, NATO's advocates have only called greater attention to its
inadequacy for the 21st century. NATO's new "comprehensive approach" to security endows it with a catch-all mandate that changes as new
threats or missions arise and has grown to include responsibilities that go far beyond the exercise of military force. But while its mandate has
changed, its tools and thinking have lagged behind. There is no better example than NATO's flagship mission in Afghanistan, whe...
View Full Document