2. NATO Reiter, Dan. 2001. Why NATO Enlargement Does Not Spread Democracy. International Security 25:41-67. 1

3. Plan 1.Quick NATO background 2.Why enlarge NATO? 3.Membership 4.Spreading Democracy? 5.Credibility Problem 6.Alienating Russia 7.Security Organizations Part 2: The Arab League & CENTO 8.The Utility of Joining an Alliance 9.The production of “knowledge” 2

4. North Atlantic Treaty Organization THE Cold War alliance of the West Established 1949 – just a political organization Then a war galvanized the member states Which war? –KOREAN WAR 1950-1953 The first NATO Secretary General, Lord Ismay (UK), famously stated the organization's goal was: “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.” 3

5. Article 5? “an armed attack against one… shall be considered an attack against them all” The principle of collective defense Invoked once: –9/12/2001 –http://www.nato.int/terrorism/five.htmhttp://www.nato.int/terrorism/five.htm 4

6. Important aside: What was the rival alliance of the “East”? The Warsaw Pact Dissolved with the end of the Cold War 5

7. With the end of the Cold War, what good is NATO & why enlarge it? Spread democracy? 6

8. Why *not* enlarge NATO? 1.Credibility problem 2.Alienating Russia 7

9. North Atlantic Treaty Organization HQ located where? –Brussels, Belgium April 4,1949: 12 countries signed the North Atlantic Treaty –Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal (dictatorship until 1975!), the United Kingdom, and the United States 3 components of the treaty relevant to enlargement and democratization are notable 1.Article 5 is the most binding aspect of the treaty: “an armed attack against one or more of [the parties] in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.” 2.The treaty in two places (Articles 2 and 10) states its commitment to democratic principles 3.Article 10 allows for the inclusion of new members by unanimous vote –Four nations joined as new members during the Cold War: –1952: Greece (Dict 1967-73) & Turkey (Authoritarian until 1960, with military interventions in 1971 & 1980. 1980-1982 military rule!!!) –1955: West Germany in 1955 (Dem) –1982: Spain (Dem 1977-) 8

10. Take-aways from previous slide: Membership has grown – 2 joined as dictatorships (Portugal, Turkey) –2 experienced democratic breakdowns (Greece, Turkey) Article 5: Common defense Articles 2 & 10: Democratic principles 9

11. 1994 Secretary of State Warren Christopher: pushes for NATO enlargement Christopher come from the “institutionalist” school of thought – believes international institutions promote democracy, trade, peace March 1999: Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland (Bush... Neo-con?...) March 2004: Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia April 2009: Albania, Croatia Wiki timeline: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Map_of_NATO_chronological.gif h http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c3/Map_of_NATO_chronological.gif 10

12. How might NATO spread democracy? Carrot –Since 1995, NATO only admits democracies –Thus governments that want to join NATO have an incentive to bring about democracy –Problem? –This is a new rule. Historically there have been non-democratic members 11

13. How might NATO spread democracy? Stick –Ejection – NATO *might* eject countries if democracy breaks down –Thus member governments have an incentive to continue to play by democratic rules –Problem? –There is no legal basis for this! –At best this might be possible through a unanimous vote, but there are so many members, unanimity on ejection is unlikely –Organization of American States and European Union do have explicit ejection procedures 12

14. How might NATO spread democracy? Socialization effect: –Teach military leaders the importance of civilian supremacy over the military –NATO provides an institutionalized environment transgovernmental contacts between militaries, spread norms of civilian control of the military –Problem? –The major determinant of the survival of democracy is per capita income (Przeworski) –However – we will discuss the work of Pevehouse (class 24) 13

15. Risks for NATO from enlargement 1.Credibility problem 2.Alienating Russia 14

16. Risks for NATO (1): Credibility problem “an armed attack against one…shall be considered an attack against them all.” –Poland: 31% of the American public agrees that the US has a vital interest –Japan: 87% of the American public agrees that the US has a vital interest If we are unwilling to come to the defense of NATO members, the organization is *weakened* 15

17. Risks for NATO (2): Alienating Russia Russian point of view: –With the end of the Cold War came the end of the Warsaw Pact –So, why is there still a NATO? –And why is it growing? –And why is it growing right up to our borders?? 16

18. The Risk: Waking the Sleeping Bear 17 ?

19. The 2008 South Ossetia War a.k.a. the Russia–Georgia War Georgia enter NATO? Putin warns Bush Georgia continues quest to join NATO 18

20. Conclusion The continued usefulness of NATO depends on it being credible (defending ALL members) The point is to bring about peace not alienate rivals (Russia) Enlargement may promote peace by promoting democracy But it is not obvious that NATO membership can indeed promote democracy 19

21. Security Organizations Part 2: The Arab League & CENTO Gilligan, Michael and W. Ben Hunt. 1998. The Domestic and International Sources of Foreign Policy: Alliance formation in the Middle East 1946-78. In Strategic Politicians, Institutions and Foreign Policy, edited by Randolph Siverson, pp. 143-68. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. 20

22. Most threats are domestic 21

23. The Utility of Joining an Alliance 22 Realism Domestic Politics

24. Military expenditure: –The military expenditure of the country in question as a share of the total military expenditures of the other countries in the region plus the global powers (UNSC P5) Alliance military expenditure: –Similarly defined as share of the country’s allies’ expenditures External threat & Alliance external threat: –Sum of “threatening events” directed against the country 23

25. Expected probability of a government change (internal threat) Authors estimate the probability of a government change 24

26. What the heck? 25

27. The production of “knowledge” When published? Where published? Cited? –http://scholar.google.com/http://scholar.google.com/ 26

28. Take home point: Look for domestic sources of foreign policy 27

29. Thank you WE ARE GLOBAL GEORGETOWN! 28