Transformation of the U.S. Hegemony in Europe through NATO after the Cold War

Authors Avatar

M. E. T. U

DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

THE MAKING OF EUROPEAN SECURITY

(Prof. Dr. Mustafa TÜRKEŞ)

Transformation of the U.S. Hegemony in Europe through NATO after the Cold War

Prepared by Sinan Taş

Mar 29th, 2006


CONTENTS

Contents                                                                                

Abstract                                                                                1

  1. Introduction                                                                        1
  2. United States’ Security Hegemony in Europe in Post Cold War

        Period, the Challenges and the Transformation of Hegemony        2        

                Establishment of the United States Security Hegemony                        2

        The Rising Challenge: The Background of the ESDP                        4

        Transformation of the U.S. Hegemonic Project in Europe                        5

        Berlin and Brussels (1996) Foreign and Defense Ministerial Meetings        7

        Amsterdam EU Summit (1997) and St.Malo Summit (1998)                9

        U.S. Response to the Challenge and Washington Summit (1999)                10

        Afterwards                                                                        11

  1. Conclusion                                                                        14

References                                                                        16


Abstract

        This study argues the U.S. prolonged hegemony efforts in Europe after the Cold War. What were the changing conditions with the end of the Cold War, How did this change effect the U.S. involvement within the European Security Architecture, What are the U.S. interests in this involvement and finally What has the U.S. done to maintain its security hegemony, which it established during the Cold War? were some of the leading questions addressed in this study. In order to analyze the continuities of this hegemonic project, first we will see how the U.S justifies its existence in Europe with the changing conditions. Then we will further analyze what the U.S. policymakers have done in order to maintain the hegemony. This process will be classified as the transformation and redefinition of the roles of the institutions but mainly NATO since it was the most effective tool for the transatlantic security efforts of the U.S. The reactions of some of the European Union members will show the reader the conflicting views and how they were negotiated in several meetings, culminating in the last decade. Finally, we will argue that the U.S. enabling herself as the European power of the early 21st century successfully served her interests by actively involving with many of the European issues, while trying to maintain her hegemony in Europe.

1. Introduction

        What were the changing conditions with the end of the Cold War and how did this change effect the U.S. involvement within the European Security Architecture? What are the U.S. interests in this involvement, which will also prepare the settings to my theoretical framework stated as the main question “what has the U.S. done to maintain its security hegemony, which it established during the Cold War?” “Did U.S. manage to secure a permanent place for the new security arrangements of Europe?”

        My theoretical stand will utilize the political and military relationship among the nations, particularly U.S. and European countries including non-EU NATO members. I will not deeply analyze the social and economic dynamics behind the motives of the states. The driving forces that shape the states policies are another area of study. U.S. as the central actor of my study has certain interests on European continent, which has a historical depth, becoming inevitable during the Cold War. Europe’s military dependence to the U.S. was obvious and within this framework NATO played a significant role. However, politically and economically we see a more independent Europe especially after the Cold War with the integration process, which could challenge the arrangements and the roles of the actors in the Western system. The discrepancies regarding ESDP can be also analyzed with this perspective.

         U.S. involvement in the region after the Cold War did not decline; on the contrary, we can observe a rising interest such as efforts in the unification process of Germany, democratization of former Soviet bloc, special relations with Russia and the military intervention in the Balkans. According to some scholars, by the end of the Cold War, this involvement shifted U.S. foreign policy from Euro-Atlantic towards the Eurasia region. This shift, which was first triggered with the dissolution of the Soviet Union together with eastern and central Soviet block and its effects on the region, eventually brought more involvement for the U.S. in the area. Today, being part of European Security is of crucial importance for American foreign policy makers. U.S. positioning in latest security and defense arrangements and the compromise, which permanently and inevitably shows the place of U.S in Europe within the structure of the new world order, will provide a sufficient answer to the main question raised above. On the other hand, efforts to create ESDP (European Security and Defense Policy) by EU and its role as the main source of restriction for the United States to reformulate its frame of security hegemony is the other side of the coin.

In this study, I will outline the U.S. reformulation and rearrangement of European Security, by the order of changing conditions with the end of the Cold War, U.S. response to the change in the context of a transforming EU and finally reflection of this response within its perspective in the EU and NATO summits, culminating in NATO Washington Summit of 1999. More than the summary of the events, the study will provide you the continuities and turning points in this transformation process.

        2. United States’ Security Hegemony in Europe in Post Cold War Period, the Challenges and the Transformation of Hegemony

Establishment of the United States Security Hegemony

        After the World War II, the United States united the Western world with the fear that the Soviets would create its own sphere of influence. Soviets claims regarding the Eastern Europe were believed by the United States to be ideological rather than security-based. This belief was confirmed by the European states through the separation of Germany and later on with the developments in Central Europe such as 1956 Soviet intervention to Hungary. Worn-torn European states including Britain was lacking in the economic and political depth to resist this challenge alone. However, the new conditions in Europe for many American policy-makers were enabling the most feasible conditions for the leadership of the United States against so-called Soviet threat.

        Through the restoration period, the western market was kept alive by Marshall Plan through loans of newly created economic institutions. The Soviet type socialism, on the other hand, was promoted to be in conflict with the interest of the Western sphere, i.e. areas of economic and political influence, free flow of capital, goods and so on. In a short span of time, both superpowers combined their global political objectives with their military capabilities, i.e. weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear weapons. This military involvement took the form or, in other words, created the means of enduring political commitments.  The United States, by creating and defending the borders of the Western World provided the necessary framework for a working international (within the structure) system. During the whole of Cold War, NATO was the main insurance of the system in terms of providing a defended and secure zone of the market. It also provided a platform of constructive diplomacy and diminished the effects of European rivalries, thus creating an internal peace system. NATO was designed to protect its members in case of an aggression. However, the cornerstone of the alliance was the commitment of the U.S. to defend Western Europe. Throughout the Cold War, we observed the cycle of “conflict, confrontation and compromise” between the superpowers. Nuclear armament, technology race and military interventions in the third world countries were only the extension and the tools of the maintenance of the cycle.

        Another crucial explanation for the Cold War was to deal with the German problem. Two external superpowers were imposing hegemony as they partitioned Europe, dismembering and occupying Germany and finally integrating Europe against further German aggression. Competition among the superpowers was also justifying the invasion of Germany, while stabilizing Europe militarily. The collapse of Berlin Wall caused such a radical change that in this transformation period, Germany needed American support in dealing with Soviets and French support in dealing with the rest of the Europe. The United States solution for the big Germany was NATO: in other words continuation of the Cold War hegemony, with Germany as their special partner. France, however, was not at ease with the prospect of a superpower grown unipolar.

        With the end of the Cold War, Western values were declared to be triumphant in the battle of clashing ideologies, which were mainly maintained by the balancing moves of the two superpowers for over forty years. However, this victory also brought another question into daylight. What was the role of U.S. in changing Europe, i.e. German unification, collapse of the Soviet Bloc and further integration of European Union, with the new Post-Cold war framework? Art mentions renationalization fears of the Western Europe’s political military elites if the United States would leave Europe, a shift from multilateral, transparent, cooperative approach to a nationalistic, competitive one. These concerns would prove invalid with U.S. Post-cold war efforts regarding the region. For many, the issue was simply the type of role the U.S. should play rather than its existence. However there emerged a need for the redefinition of the current relations between two sides of the Atlantic. In this redefinition process, or generally known as transformation, U.S. repositioned itself in Europe, by simply redefining the roles of the existing institutions. For the purpose of clarity, in this paper, we will only focus on the security part of this redefinition process.

        In the Cold War era, unlike the frustration in the Security Council, U.S. was more successful in her transatlantic efforts by effectively engaging NATO. European security challenge was overcome through NATO by using the resources and well-functioning systems of cooperating democracies. Hence transition to Post-Cold war period requested considerable energy for the U.S. to preserve NATO as one of the significant examples of Western cooperation. Moreover, NATO was considered as the most useful tool for the legitimization of U.S. role in Europe after the Cold War. Reunification of Germany as a full member of NATO, new sovereign states of the Eastern and Central Europe and their institutionalization for democratic governance, together with the adaptation of Russia to the Western sphere could best be utilized through NATO. These new initiatives, together with NATO’s traditional security and defense policy regarding Europe was melted in the same pot, known as “European Security and Policy Identity (ESDI)”, which was envisioned in NATO Strategic Concept of 1991.This new identity was subjected to certain changes with some demands of EU members fostered by domestic policies and specific developments in continental Europe regarding the defense zone and security such as Bosnia and Kosovo crisis.

Join now!

The Rising Challenge: The Background of the ESDP

        After the Cold War, regarding the European Union, we see a clear tendency towards further integration in security and defense policies as a result of the goals defined in the founding treaty of the European Union, Maastricht. However, it was only in 1999 Cologne European Council meeting where the “European Security and Defense Policy” initiative was put under the second pillar of the Union, known as “Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)”, with the goal of strengthening the European institutionalization. In Washington Summit NATO, officially comply with the ESDP policies of EU. ...

This is a preview of the whole essay