NATO’s Dilemma: To Enlarge or Not to Enlarge
| dc.contributor.advisor | Bercuson, David J. | |
| dc.contributor.author | Kendrick, Riley | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2018-12-12T19:09:10Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2018-12-12T19:09:10Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2018-09-04 | |
| dc.description.abstract | This policy brief outlines the No1th Atlantic Treaty Organization's current enlargement policy and whether or not Canada should continue to support the policy. The impact of the policy on the Alliance's effectiveness and ability to carry out its mandate is examined. The history of the Alliance and the enlargement policy is examined in detail, in order to better understand the policy's purpose. This brief explores Canada's contributions to the Alliance and also its continued support of NATO's enlargement policy. Canada, like majority of NATO member-states, has long been a proponent of NATO's enlargement policy, which has resulted in NATO's expansion from the original 12 members to the current number of 29 members. Enlargement was originally seen as beneficial because of NATO's ability to gain strategic allies in different parts of Europe; however, since the end of the Cold War, strategic allies were no longer necessary. Despite the end of the Cold War and the end of NATO's long-time adversary, the Soviet Union, NATO has almost doubled in-size, bringing in new members from the former Soviet Union and the former Yugoslavia. No longer are new NATO members economic, military or political powers but rather they join the Alliance and immediately become dependents of the Alliance. Recommendations are made to help determine what the best course of action is for Canadian foreign policy and therefore, NATO's enlargement policy. Tlu·ee alternatives are investigated, which include maintaining the status quo, completly eliminating the enlargement policy, and amending the current policy to still allow enlargement but make it more difficult for countries to join the Alliance due to stricter requirements. This brief recommends that the current policy be amended, so it is more difficult for countries to receive accession into the Alliance but still allows enlargement to occur if necessary. The brief concludes that this would help mitigate the accession of new members that would be dependent on the organization, and therefore, would not help further the Alliance's mandate but would still appease some member-states who are in favour of enlargement because enlargement could still occur. | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Kendrick, R. (2018). NATO’s Dilemma: To Enlarge or Not to Enlarge (Unpublished master's project). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. | |
| dc.identifier.doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/34955 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1880/109333 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.publisher.department | School of Public Policy | |
| dc.publisher.faculty | Faculty of Graduate Studies | |
| dc.publisher.institution | University of Calgary | |
| dc.title | NATO’s Dilemma: To Enlarge or Not to Enlarge | |
| dc.type | master thesis |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1