Russia and NATO’s ‘Open Door’ Policy in the Post-Bipolar Period
A major problem for Russia in formulating and defending its national interests after the Cold War was to fit in the European political order, dominated by the collective West and its institutions. The North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) was not dissolved after completing the mission it had been created f...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Moscow University Press
2024-07-01
|
| Series: | Вестник Московского Университета. Серия XXV: Международные отношения и мировая политика |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://fmp.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/218 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832572194024062976 |
|---|---|
| author | P. Ye. Smirnov |
| author_facet | P. Ye. Smirnov |
| author_sort | P. Ye. Smirnov |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | A major problem for Russia in formulating and defending its national interests after the Cold War was to fit in the European political order, dominated by the collective West and its institutions. The North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) was not dissolved after completing the mission it had been created for; moreover, it started taking on ever new responsibilities to keep the European allies in the U.S. sphere of influence. In this respect, the ongoing NATO enlargement — primarily by accession of the former Warsaw Treaty allies of the USSR — has become one of the key policy tools for Washington after the breakup of the bipolar system in Europe. This study sets a dual goal, i.e. to identify the changing logic of the NATO’s eastward expansion and assess its consequences for the alliance itself, as well as to trace shifts in Russia’s official position in the light of these developments. The first section of the article highlights the main stages of the NATO enlargement in the post-bipolar period. The author argues that the Western countries, viewing the ’open door’ principle as a next phase of the containment policy under new geopolitical circumstances and reaping tangible security benefits throughout its implementation, realized at a certain point that a swift accession of post-Soviet states to NATO was unattainable, and switched attention to the Nordic countries. The second section analyzes Russia’s response to the alliance’s maneuvering. The study emphasizes that the concern of the Russian leadership about its possible marginalization in the Euro-Atlantic institutions gradually gave way to resolute actions to counter the NATO’s ‘open door’ policy as the alliance was expanding beyond its purview. The author concludes that NATO enlargement has had an ambiguous impact on both the European security architecture, and the alliance itself. On the one hand, it gave the United States new opportunities to project power and consolidate its hegemonic status in Europe. On the other hand, the viability and effectiveness of this policy are being questioned by a number of serious challenges for the West both in Europe and beyond. Given these uncertainties, NATO will gradually give up the ‘open door’ principle in favor of more flexible formats of military and political cooperation with non-member countries. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-375073a4781a49d682dee19f4fa965dc |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2076-7404 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-07-01 |
| publisher | Moscow University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Вестник Московского Университета. Серия XXV: Международные отношения и мировая политика |
| spelling | doaj-art-375073a4781a49d682dee19f4fa965dc2025-02-02T11:10:32ZengMoscow University PressВестник Московского Университета. Серия XXV: Международные отношения и мировая политика2076-74042024-07-011619314010.48015/2076-7404-2024-16-1-93-140185Russia and NATO’s ‘Open Door’ Policy in the Post-Bipolar PeriodP. Ye. Smirnov0Georgy Arbatov Institute for U.S. and Canada Studies Russian Academy of Sciences (ISKRAN)A major problem for Russia in formulating and defending its national interests after the Cold War was to fit in the European political order, dominated by the collective West and its institutions. The North Atlantic Alliance (NATO) was not dissolved after completing the mission it had been created for; moreover, it started taking on ever new responsibilities to keep the European allies in the U.S. sphere of influence. In this respect, the ongoing NATO enlargement — primarily by accession of the former Warsaw Treaty allies of the USSR — has become one of the key policy tools for Washington after the breakup of the bipolar system in Europe. This study sets a dual goal, i.e. to identify the changing logic of the NATO’s eastward expansion and assess its consequences for the alliance itself, as well as to trace shifts in Russia’s official position in the light of these developments. The first section of the article highlights the main stages of the NATO enlargement in the post-bipolar period. The author argues that the Western countries, viewing the ’open door’ principle as a next phase of the containment policy under new geopolitical circumstances and reaping tangible security benefits throughout its implementation, realized at a certain point that a swift accession of post-Soviet states to NATO was unattainable, and switched attention to the Nordic countries. The second section analyzes Russia’s response to the alliance’s maneuvering. The study emphasizes that the concern of the Russian leadership about its possible marginalization in the Euro-Atlantic institutions gradually gave way to resolute actions to counter the NATO’s ‘open door’ policy as the alliance was expanding beyond its purview. The author concludes that NATO enlargement has had an ambiguous impact on both the European security architecture, and the alliance itself. On the one hand, it gave the United States new opportunities to project power and consolidate its hegemonic status in Europe. On the other hand, the viability and effectiveness of this policy are being questioned by a number of serious challenges for the West both in Europe and beyond. Given these uncertainties, NATO will gradually give up the ‘open door’ principle in favor of more flexible formats of military and political cooperation with non-member countries.https://fmp.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/218russiaukrainecentral and eastern europepost-soviet spaceunited statesnato enlargement‘open door’ policyeuropean unionpos-tbipolar period |
| spellingShingle | P. Ye. Smirnov Russia and NATO’s ‘Open Door’ Policy in the Post-Bipolar Period Вестник Московского Университета. Серия XXV: Международные отношения и мировая политика russia ukraine central and eastern europe post-soviet space united states nato enlargement ‘open door’ policy european union pos-tbipolar period |
| title | Russia and NATO’s ‘Open Door’ Policy in the Post-Bipolar Period |
| title_full | Russia and NATO’s ‘Open Door’ Policy in the Post-Bipolar Period |
| title_fullStr | Russia and NATO’s ‘Open Door’ Policy in the Post-Bipolar Period |
| title_full_unstemmed | Russia and NATO’s ‘Open Door’ Policy in the Post-Bipolar Period |
| title_short | Russia and NATO’s ‘Open Door’ Policy in the Post-Bipolar Period |
| title_sort | russia and nato s open door policy in the post bipolar period |
| topic | russia ukraine central and eastern europe post-soviet space united states nato enlargement ‘open door’ policy european union pos-tbipolar period |
| url | https://fmp.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/218 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT pyesmirnov russiaandnatosopendoorpolicyinthepostbipolarperiod |