Partners versus Members? NATO as an Arena for Coalitions

Abstract

In this chapter, I discuss the importance of burden-sharing partnerships with NATO as a development that is, as I argue, symptomatic of the evolution of the Alliance into becoming an arena or platform for coalitions of the ‘willing and able’. After the end of the Cold War, we live in an era where armed attacks against one or several Alliance members, obliging others to respond immediately (although not necessarily by military means), have become rare and unlikely. As a result, the organization has increasingly turned into a ‘two-tiered’ or ‘multi-tiered’ alliance. Current operations are mostly Article 4 and hence, unlike Article 5 cases, voluntary. This implies that partners, as well as members, may contribute. Moreover, few members seem to be willing and able to make a contribution,1 something that inter alia the Libya operation has shown — only eight allies were actually willing to contribute combat capabilities. In other operations, like ISAF, all members contribute, but only a few with risk-willing capabilities. All ‘show the flag’, but few are willing and able to contribute to sharp operations that require top skill and risk-willingness.