Expanding NATO

Vladimir Putin’s speech at the Munich Security Conference two weeks ago (read it in English here, in German here – HT Dr. Dean) continues to have fallout in Germany.  Foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier has an interview today in the Handelsblatt where he criticizes the US for its plans to build bases for an anti-missle shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. The Washington Post picked up Steinmeier’s words:

"Because the sites for the stationing are quite near Russia, one should have talked about it with Russia beforehand," Steinmeier said in remarks released ahead of publication."In view of the strategic nature of this sort of project, I urge one to act with caution and to engage in an intensive dialogue with all the partners directly and indirectly involved," he added.

Steinmeier and others have questioned whether there is really a threat from Iran that would warrant these bases. But the bases are only the latest provocation for Russia. Underlying Putin’s angry speech is the continued expansion of NATO eastward to Russia’s borders.  New York TImes columnist Tom Friedman returned from Moscow last week and wrote:

For those of us who opposed NATO expansion, the point was simple: there is no major geopolitical issue, especially one like Iran, that we can resolve without Russia’s help. So why not behave in a way that maximizes Russia’s willingness to work with us and strengthens its democrats, rather than expanding NATO to countries that can’t help us and are not threatened anymore by Russia, and whose democracies are better secured by joining the European Union?

The economist Albrecht Müller, writing in his blog NachDenkSeiten, reminds us that the NATO’s expansion was not always desired. In fact, at one point following the collapse of the Berlin Wall the SPD adopted a program of dissolving NATO – or at least transforming it from a purely military alliance. Albrecht Müller quotes from the 1989 SPD program:

Unser Ziel ist es, die Militärbündnisse durch eine europäische Friedensordnung abzulösen. … Der Umbruch in Osteuropa verringert die militärische und erhöht die politische Bedeutung der Bündnisse und weist ihnen eine neue Funktionen zu: Sie müssen, bei Wahrung der Stabilität, ihre Auflösung und den Übergang zu einer europäischen Friedensordnung organisieren. Dies eröffnet auch die Perspektive für das Ende der Stationierung amerikanischer und sowjetischer Streitkräfte außerhalb ihrer Territorien in Europa.
Im Bündnis muss der Grundsatz gleicher Souveränität gelten.

(my trans. It is our goal to replace the military alliances with a European Peace order…The revolution in eastern Europe lessens the military importance of the alliances and increases its political importance, as it leads to a new function: to reorganize and transform themselves into a European peace order while maintaining stability. This also opens the possibility of eliminating the stationing of American and Soviet forces outside of their respective territories in Europe. The (new) alliance must be based on equal sovereignty.)