NATO. Really?

Economics/Politics

Support this proposal

Adapt this proposal

27 Jul 2010

Location: Globe

The Soviet Berlin Blockade led to the start of NATO, an alliance that could include the USA. Clearly the USSR were rather miffed. After a 'will-they-won't-they' that lasted for far too many years, bringing the world to the brink of nuclear war and back again, the cold war ended, the wall came down and all was well.

-ish.

So NATO had nothing to do. They dabbled in Kosovo. They are still dabbling in Afghanistan. But wht do they actually do? Their main purpose, their reason for formation was the communist threat - but that's long gone. The Warsaw Pact fell apart, why hasn't the same happened to NATO?

Are the big powers just trying to maintain a hold over the world? Perhaps America cannot 'let go' of her power. The smaller states are becoming involved in the alliance. WHY?! For protection, sure, but why else? Eastern European countries (which used to be under soviet influence) are creeping into NATO. And still, Russia does not get!

I appreciate 'traditions' might have something to do with it, but it's a big scary world, and i'm almost certain that Russia is by no means the biggest threat to the world right now.

I think NATO should 'man up'. It has 2 choices - to either break up, quietly, quickly and with no fuss, or to find common ground within the member states. Focus economically or politically about a real threat - the global financial crisis, or communist China (if communism is to remain a theme) !!

Okay, so I know i'm not a NATO expert, but really, if an organisation has no purpose, no common ground, then why continue to (try to) remain at the forefront of international relations?