“History of NATO”的意思、由来-开放百科全书

This article outlines the history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). British diplomacy set the stage for NATO to contain the Soviet Union (USSR) and stop the expansion of Communism in Europe. Britain and France in 1947 signed the Treaty of Dunkirk, a defensive pact. This expanded in 1948 with the Treaty of Brussels to add the three Benelux (Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg) countries. It committed them to collective defence against any armed attack for fifty years. The British worked with Washington to expand the alliance into NATO in 1949, adding the U.S. and Canada as well as Italy, Portugal, Norway, Denmark and Iceland.^[1] West Germany and Spain joined later.

Beginnings

The Treaty of Brussels was a mutual defence treaty against the Soviet threat at the start of the Cold War. It was signed on 17 March 1948 by Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France, and the United Kingdom. It was the precursor to NATO. The Soviet threat became immediate with the Berlin Blockade in 1948, leading to the creation of a multinational defence organization, the Western Union Defence Organisation, in September 1948.{{sfn|Isby|Kamps Jr.|1985|p=13}} However, the parties were too weak militarily to counter the Soviet Armed Forces. In addition, the 1948 Czechoslovak coup d'état by the Communists had overthrown a democratic government and British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin reiterated that the best way to prevent another Czechoslovakia was to evolve a joint Western military strategy. He got a receptive hearing in the United States, especially considering American anxiety over Italy (and the Italian Communist Party).{{sfn|Pedaliu|2003|p=97}}

In 1948, European leaders met with US defence, military and diplomatic officials at the Pentagon, exploring a framework for a new and unprecedented association.Cees Wiebes and Bert Zeeman, "The Pentagon Negotiations March 1948: The Launching of the North Atlantic Treaty." International Affairs 59.3 (1983): 351-363. The talks resulted in the North Atlantic Treaty, The U,S, signed on 4 April 1949. It included the five Treaty of Brussels states plus the United States, Canada, Portugal, Italy, Norway, Denmark and Iceland.^[2] The first NATO Secretary General, Lord Ismay, stated in 1949 that the organization's goal was "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down".{{sfn|Reynolds|1994|p=13}} Popular support for the Treaty was not unanimous, and some Icelanders participated in a pro-neutrality, anti-membership riot in March 1949. The creation of NATO can be seen as the primary institutional consequence of a school of thought called Atlanticism which stressed the importance of trans-Atlantic cooperation.^[3]

The members agreed that an armed attack against any one of them in Europe or North America would be considered an attack against them all. Consequently, they agreed that, if an armed attack occurred, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence, would assist the member being attacked, taking such action as it deemed necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. The treaty does not require members to respond with military action against an aggressor. Although obliged to respond, they maintain the freedom to choose the method by which they do so. This differs from Article IV of the Treaty of Brussels, which clearly states that the response will be military in nature. It is nonetheless assumed that NATO members will aid the attacked member militarily. The treaty was later clarified to include both the member's territory and their "vessels, forces or aircraft" above the Tropic of Cancer, including some overseas departments of France.^[4]

The creation of NATO brought about some standardization of allied military terminology, procedures, and technology, which in many cases meant European countries adopting US practices. The roughly 1300 Standardization Agreements (STANAG) codified many of the common practices that NATO has achieved. Hence, the 7.62×51mm NATO rifle cartridge was introduced in the 1950s as a standard firearm cartridge among many NATO countries.^[5] Fabrique Nationale de Herstal's FAL, which used the 7.62mm NATO cartridge, was adopted by 75 countries, including many outside of NATO.{{sfn|Willbanks|2004|pp=129–130}} Also, aircraft marshalling signals were standardized, so that any NATO aircraft could land at any NATO base. Other standards such as the NATO phonetic alphabet have made their way beyond NATO into civilian use.^[6]

Cold War

The outbreak of the Korean War in June 1950 was crucial for NATO as it raised the apparent threat of all Communist countries working together and forced the alliance to develop concrete military plans.{{sfn|Isby|Kamps Jr.|1985|pp=13–14}} Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) was formed to direct forces in Europe, and began work under Supreme Allied Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower in January 1951.^[7] In September 1950, the NATO Military Committee called for an ambitious buildup of conventional forces to meet the Soviets, subsequently reaffirming this position at the February 1952 meeting of the North Atlantic Council in Lisbon. The Lisbon conference, seeking to provide the forces necessary for NATO's Long-Term Defence Plan, called for an expansion to ninety-six divisions. However this requirement was dropped the following year to roughly thirty-five divisions with heavier use to be made of nuclear weapons. At this time, NATO could call on about fifteen ready divisions in Central Europe, and another ten in Italy and Scandinavia.{{sfn|Osgood|1962|p=76}}{{sfn|Park|1986|p=28}} Also at Lisbon, the post of Secretary General of NATO as the organization's chief civilian was created, and Lord Ismay was eventually appointed to the post.^[8]

In September 1952, the first major NATO maritime exercises began; Exercise Mainbrace brought together 200 ships and over 50,000 personnel to practice the defence of Denmark and Norway.^[9] Other major exercises that followed included Exercise Grand Slam and Exercise Longstep, naval and amphibious exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, Italic Weld, a combined air-naval-ground exercise in northern Italy, Grand Repulse, involving the British Army on the Rhine (BAOR), the Netherlands Corps and Allied Air Forces Central Europe (AAFCE), Monte Carlo, a simulated atomic air-ground exercise involving the Central Army Group, and Weldfast, a combined amphibious landing exercise in the Mediterranean Sea involving American, British, Greek, Italian and Turkish naval forces.^[10]

In 1954, the Soviet Union suggested that it should join NATO to preserve peace in Europe.^[13] The NATO countries, fearing that the Soviet Union's motive was to weaken the alliance, ultimately rejected this proposal and on 17 December 1954, the North Atlantic Council approved MC 48, a key document in the evolution of NATO nuclear thought. MC 48 emphasized that NATO would have to use atomic weapons from the outset of a war with the Soviet Union whether or not the Soviets chose to use them first. This gave SACEUR the same prerogatives for automatic use of nuclear weapons as existed for the commander-in-chief of the US Strategic Air Command.

The incorporation of West Germany into the organization on 9 May 1955 was described as "a decisive turning point in the history of our continent" by Halvard Lange, Foreign Affairs Minister of Norway at the time.^[14] A major reason for Germany's entry into the alliance was that without German manpower, it would have been impossible to field enough conventional forces to resist a Soviet invasion.{{sfn|Isby|Kamps Jr.|1985|p=15}} One of its immediate results was the creation of the Warsaw Pact, which was signed on 14 May 1955 by the Soviet Union, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania, and East Germany, as a formal response to this event, thereby delineating the two opposing sides of the Cold War.

Three major exercises were held concurrently in the northern autumn of 1957. Operation Counter Punch, Operation Strikeback, and Operation Deep Water were the most ambitious military undertaking for the alliance to date, involving more than 250,000 men, 300 ships, and 1,500 aircraft operating from Norway to Turkey.^[15]

French withdrawal

NATO's unity was breached early in its history with a crisis occurring during Charles de Gaulle's presidency of France.^[16] De Gaulle protested against the United States' strong role in the organization and what he perceived as a special relationship between it and the United Kingdom. In a memorandum sent to President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Prime Minister Harold Macmillan on 17 September 1958, he argued for the creation of a tripartite directorate that would put France on an equal footing with the US and the UK.{{sfn|Wenger|Nuenlist|Locher|2007|pp=67–69}}

Considering the response to be unsatisfactory, de Gaulle began constructing an independent defence force for his country. He wanted to give France, in the event of an East German incursion into West Germany, the option of coming to a separate peace with the Eastern bloc instead of being drawn into a larger NATO–Warsaw Pact war.^[17] In February 1959, France withdrew its Mediterranean Fleet from NATO command,{{sfn|National Defense University|1997|p=50}} and later banned the stationing of foreign nuclear weapons on French soil. This caused the United States to transfer two hundred military aircraft out of France and return control of the air force bases that it had operated in France since 1950 to the French by 1967.

Though France showed solidarity with the rest of NATO during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, de Gaulle continued his pursuit of an independent defence by removing France's Atlantic and Channel fleets from NATO command.{{sfn|van der Eyden|2003|pp=104–106}} In 1966, all French armed forces were removed from NATO's integrated military command, and all non-French NATO troops were asked to leave France. US Secretary of State Dean Rusk was later quoted as asking de Gaulle whether his order included "the bodies of American soldiers in France's cemeteries?"{{sfn|Schoenbaum|1988|p=421}} This withdrawal forced the relocation of {{abbrlink|SHAPE|Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe}} from Rocquencourt, near Paris, to Casteau, north of Mons, Belgium, by 16 October 1967.^[18] France remained a member of the alliance, and committed to the defence of Europe from possible Warsaw Pact attack with its own forces stationed in the Federal Republic of Germany throughout the Cold War. A series of secret accords between US and French officials, the Lemnitzer–Ailleret Agreements, detailed how French forces would dovetail back into NATO's command structure should East-West hostilities break out.^[19]

When de Gaulle announced his decision to withdraw from the integrated NATO command, President Lyndon Johnson suggested that when de Gaulle "comes rushing down like a locomotive on the track, why the Germans and ourselves, we just stand aside and let him go on by, then we are back together again."^[20] The vision came true. France announced their return to full participation at the 2009 Strasbourg–Kehl summit.^[21]

Détente and escalation

During most of the Cold War, NATO's watch against the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact did not actually lead to direct military action. On 1 July 1968, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons opened for signature: NATO argued that its nuclear sharing arrangements did not breach the treaty as US forces controlled the weapons until a decision was made to go to war, at which point the treaty would no longer be controlling. Few states knew of the NATO nuclear sharing arrangements at that time, and they were not challenged. In May 1978, NATO countries officially defined two complementary aims of the Alliance, to maintain security and pursue détente. This was supposed to mean matching defences at the level rendered necessary by the Warsaw Pact's offensive capabilities without spurring a further arms race.{{sfn|Garthoff|1994|pp=659–661}}

On 12 December 1979, in light of a build-up of Warsaw Pact nuclear capabilities in Europe, ministers approved the deployment of US GLCM cruise missiles and Pershing II theatre nuclear weapons in Europe. The new warheads were also meant to strengthen the western negotiating position regarding nuclear disarmament. This policy was called the Dual Track policy.{{sfn|Njølstad|2004|pp=280–282}} Similarly, in 1983–84, responding to the stationing of Warsaw Pact SS-20 medium-range missiles in Europe, NATO deployed modern Pershing II missiles tasked to hit military targets such as tank formations in the event of war.{{sfn|Njølstad|2004|pp=278–279}} This action led to peace movement protests throughout Western Europe, and support for the deployment wavered as many doubted whether the push for deployment could be sustained.

The membership of the organization at this time remained largely static. In 1974, as a consequence of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, Greece withdrew its forces from NATO's military command structure but, with Turkish cooperation, were readmitted in 1980{{citation needed|reason=Turkish cooperation?|date=March 2018}}. The Falklands War between the United Kingdom and Argentina did not result in NATO involvement because article 6 of the North Atlantic Treaty specifies that collective self-defence is only applicable to attacks on member state territories north of the Tropic of Cancer.{{sfn|Kaplan|2004|pp=89–91}} On 30 May 1982, NATO gained a new member when the newly democratic Spain joined the alliance; Spain's membership was confirmed by referendum in 1986. At the peak of the Cold War, 16 member nations maintained an approximate strength of 5,252,800 active military, including as many as 435,000 forward deployed US forces, under a command structure that reached a peak of 78 headquarters, organized into four echelons.^[22]

After the Cold War

The Revolutions of 1989 and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in 1991 removed the de facto main adversary of NATO and caused a strategic re-evaluation of NATO's purpose, nature, tasks, and their focus on the continent of Europe. This shift started with the 1990 signing in Paris of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe between NATO and the Soviet Union, which mandated specific military reductions across the continent that continued after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991.^[23] At that time, European countries accounted for 34 percent of NATO's military spending; by 2012, this had fallen to 21 percent.^[24] NATO also began a gradual expansion to include newly autonomous Central and Eastern European nations, and extended its activities into political and humanitarian situations that had not formerly been NATO concerns.

The first post-Cold War expansion of NATO came with German reunification on 3 October 1990, when the former East Germany became part of the Federal Republic of Germany and the alliance. This had been agreed in the Two Plus Four Treaty earlier in the year. To secure Soviet approval of a united Germany remaining in NATO, it was agreed that foreign troops and nuclear weapons would not be stationed in the east. Whilst there was no formal commitment in the agreement not to expand NATO to the east, there are diverging views on whether negotiators gave informal commitments regarding further NATO expansion.^[25]^[26]^[27] Jack Matlock, American ambassador to the Soviet Union during its final years, said that the West gave a "clear commitment" not to expand, and declassified documents indicate that Soviet negotiators were given the impression that NATO membership was off the table for countries such as Czechoslovakia, Hungary, or Poland.^[28] Hans-Dietrich Genscher, the West German foreign minister at that time, said in a conversation with Eduard Shevardnadze that "[f]or us, however, one thing is certain: NATO will not expand to the east."^[28] In 1996, Gorbachev wrote in his Memoirs, that "during the negotiations on the unification of Germany they gave assurances that NATO would not extend its zone of operation to the east,"{{sfn|Gorbachev|1996|p=675}} and

repeated this view in an interview in 2008.^[29] However in 2014 Gorbachev stated the opposite – that "The topic of 'NATO expansion' was not discussed at all [in 1990], and it wasn't brought up in those years. I say this with full responsibility. Western leaders didn't bring it up, either."^[25]^[30] According to Robert Zoellick, a State Department official involved in the Two Plus Four negotiating process, this appears to be a misperception, and no formal commitment regarding enlargement was made.^[31] Harvard University historian Mark Kramer also rejects that an informal agreement existed.^[25]^[32]

As part of post-Cold War restructuring, NATO's military structure was cut back and reorganized, with new forces such as the Headquarters Allied Command Europe Rapid Reaction Corps established. The changes brought about by the collapse of the Soviet Union on the military balance in Europe were recognized in the Adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty, which was signed in 1999. The policies of French President Nicolas Sarkozy resulted in a major reform of France's military position, culminating with the return to full membership on 4 April 2009, which also included France rejoining the NATO Military Command Structure, while maintaining an independent nuclear deterrent.^[19]^[33]

Enlargement and reform

Between 1994 and 1997, wider forums for regional cooperation between NATO and its neighbors were set up, like the Partnership for Peace, the Mediterranean Dialogue initiative and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. In 1998, the NATO–Russia Permanent Joint Council was established. On 8 July 1997, three former communist countries, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland, were invited to join NATO, an invitation which was accepted by all three, with Hungarian acceptance being endorsed in a referendum in which 85.3% of voters supported joining NATO.

Czech President Vaclav Havel welcomed the expansion, stating that "Never have we been part of such a broad, solid and binding security alliance, which at the same time respects in its essence the sovereignty and will of our nation." Polish foreign minister Bronislaw Geremek also welcomed the expansion saying that "Poland forever returns where she has always belonged: the free world". Hungarian foreign minister Janos Martonyi stated that the expansion showed that Hungary was returning "to her natural habitat." The expansion was also welcomed by US foreign secretary Madeleine Albright who stated that the expansion would do "for Europe's east what NATO has already helped to do for Europe's west: steadily and systematically, we will continue erasing – without replacing – the line drawn in Europe by Stalin's bloody boot." ^[34]

Expansion was criticised in the US by some policy experts as a "a policy error of historic proportions."^[35] According to George F. Kennan, an American diplomat and an advocate of the containment policy, this decision "may be expected to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking."^[36]

Membership went on expanding with the accession of seven more Central and Eastern European countries to NATO: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania. They were first invited to start talks of membership during the 2002 Prague summit, and joined NATO on 29 March 2004, shortly before the 2004 Istanbul summit. Slovenian membership was endorsed in a referendum in which 66.02% of voters supported joining.

New NATO structures were also formed while old ones were abolished. In 1997, NATO reached agreement on a significant downsizing of its command structure from 65 headquarters to just 20.^[37] The NATO Response Force (NRF) was launched at the 2002 Prague summit on 21 November, the first summit in a former Comecon country. On 19 June 2003, a further restructuring of the NATO military commands began as the Headquarters of the Supreme Allied Commander, Atlantic were abolished and a new command, Allied Command Transformation (ACT), was established in Norfolk, United States, and the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) became the Headquarters of Allied Command Operations (ACO). ACT is responsible for driving transformation (future capabilities) in NATO, whilst ACO is responsible for current operations.^[38] In March 2004, NATO's Baltic Air Policing began, which supported the sovereignty of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia by providing jet fighters to react to any unwanted aerial intrusions. Eight multinational jet fighters are based in Lithuania, the number of which was increased from four in 2014.^[39] Also at the 2004 Istanbul summit, NATO launched the Istanbul Cooperation Initiative with four Persian Gulf nations.^[40]

The 2006 Riga summit was held in Riga, Latvia, and highlighted the issue of energy security. It was the first NATO summit to be held in a country that had been part of the Soviet Union. At the April 2008 summit in Bucharest, Romania, NATO agreed to the accession of Croatia and Albania and both countries joined NATO in April 2009. Ukraine and Georgia were also told that they could eventually become members.^[41] The issue of Georgian and Ukrainian membership in NATO prompted harsh criticism from Russia, as did NATO plans for a missile defence system. Studies for this system began in 2002, with negotiations centered on anti-ballistic missiles being stationed in Poland and the Czech Republic. Though NATO leaders gave assurances that the system was not targeting Russia, both presidents Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev criticized it as a threat.^[42]

In 2009, US President Barack Obama proposed using the ship-based Aegis Combat System, though this plan still includes stations being built in Turkey, Spain, Portugal, Romania, and Poland.^[43] NATO will also maintain the "status quo" in its nuclear deterrent in Europe by upgrading the targeting capabilities of the "tactical" B61 nuclear bombs stationed there and deploying them on the stealthier Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II.^[44]^[45] Following the 2014 annexation of Crimea by Russia, NATO committed to forming a new "spearhead" force of 5,000 troops at bases in Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Romania, and Bulgaria.^[46]^[47]

The Russian intervention in Crimea in 2014 lead to strong condemnation by NATO nations, and Poland invoked Article 4 meetings.^[48] At the subsequent 2014 Wales summit, the leaders of NATO's member states formally committed for the first time spend the equivalent of at least 2% of their gross domestic products on defence by 2024, which had previously been only an informal guideline.^[49] In 2015, five of its 28 members met that goal.^[50]^[51]^[52] At the beginning of 2018, eight of the 29 members either were meeting the target or were close to it; six others had laid out plans to reach the target by 2024 as promised; and Norway and Denmark had unveiled plans to substantially boost defense spending (including Norway's planned purchase 52 new F-35 fighter jets.^[53]

On 15 June 2016, NATO officially recognized cyberwarfare as an operational domain of war, just like land, sea and aerial warfare. This means that any cyber attack on NATO members can trigger Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.^[54] Montenegro became the 29th and newest member of NATO on 5 June 2017, amid strong objections from Russia.^[55]^[56]

On 1 August 2018, the U.S. Department of Treasury sanctioned two senior Turkish government ministers who were involved in the detention of American pastor Andrew Brunson.^[57] Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said that the U.S. behavior will force Turkey to look for new friends and allies.^[58] The U.S.–Turkey dispute appears to be one of the most serious diplomatic crisis between the NATO allies in years.^[59]^[60]

Structural changes

The Defence Planning Committee was a former senior decision-making body on matters relating to the integrated military structure of the Alliance. It was dissolved following a major committee review in June 2010 and its responsibilities absorbed by the North Atlantic Council.

Civilian structure

In NATO: The First Five Years Lord Ismay described the civilian structure as follows:^[61]

Military structure

The Strategic Commanders are the former 'Major NATO Commanders', who sat atop a command hierarchy consisting of Major Subordinate Commanders (MSCs), Principal Subordinate Commanders (PSCs) and Sub-PSCs.^[62] The Military Committee had an executive body, the Standing Group, made up of representatives from France, the United States, and the United Kingdom. The Standing Group was abolished during the major reform of 1967 that resulted from France’s departure from the NATO Military Command Structure.^[63]

Beginnings

A key step in establishing the NATO Command Structure was the North Atlantic Council’s selection of General Dwight D. Eisenhower as the first Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) in December 1950.^[63] After Eisenhower arrived in Paris in January 1951, he and the other members of the multinational Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (SHAPE) Planning Group immediately began to devise a structure for the new Allied Command Europe. NATO official documents say '..The corner stone of the NATO Military Command Structure was laid.. when the North Atlantic Council approved D.C. 24/3 on 18 December 1951.'^[64] They quickly decided to divide Allied Command Europe into three regions: Allied Forces Northern Europe, containing Scandinavia, the North Sea and the Baltic; Allied Forces Central Europe, and Allied Forces Southern Europe (AFSOUTH), covering Italy and the Mediterranean. SHAPE was established at Rocquencourt, west of Paris.

The British post of Commander in Chief Mediterranean Fleet was given a dual-hatted role as NATO Commander in Chief of Allied Forces Mediterranean in charge of all forces assigned to NATO in the Mediterranean Area. The British made strong representations in discussions regarding the Mediterranean NATO command structure, wishing to retain their direction of NATO naval command in the Mediterranean to protect their sea lines of communication running through the Mediterranean to the Middle East and Far East.^[65]

In 1952, after Greece and Turkey joined the Alliance,^[66] Allied Land Forces South-Eastern Europe (LANDSOUTHEAST) was created in Izmir, Turkey, under a U.S. Army General. This was due to the two states' geographic distance from the LANDSOUTH headquarters, as well as political disagreements over which nation should be the overall commander for their ground forces.

With the establishment of Allied Command Atlantic (ACLANT) on 30 January 1952, the Supreme Allied Commander Atlantic joined the previously created Supreme Allied Commander Europe as one of the alliance’s two Major NATO Commanders.^[67] A third was added when Allied Command Channel was established on 21 February 1952 to control the English Channel and North Sea area and deny it to the enemy, and protect the sea lanes of communication.^[68]^[69] The establishment of this post, and the agreement that it was to be filled by the British Commander-in-Chief, Portsmouth, was part of the compromise that allowed an American officer to take up the SACLANT post. Previously Commander-in-Chief Portsmouth had controlled multinational naval operations in the area under WUDO auspices. In due course the CINCHAN role was assumed by the British Commander-in-Chief Fleet.

In 1966, when French president Charles de Gaulle withdrew French forces from the military command structure, NATO's headquarters was forced to move to Belgium. SHAPE was moved to Casteau, north of the Belgian city of Mons. Headquarters Allied Forces Central Europe was moved from the Chateau de Fontainebleau outside Paris to Brunssum, in the Netherlands.

Structure in 1989

After the Cold War

By June 1991, it was clear that Allied Forces Central Europe (a Major Subordinate Command) could be reduced, with the Soviet threat disappearing. Six multinational corps were to replace the previous eight.^[71] Announcements in June 1991 presaged main defensive forces consisting of six multinational corps. Two were to be under German command, one with a U.S. division, one under Belgian command with a pending offer of a U.S. brigade, one under U.S. command with a German division, one under joint German-Danish command (LANDJUT), and one under Dutch command. The new German IV Corps was to be stationed in Eastern Germany, and was not to be associated with the NATO structure.

On July 1, 1994, the Alliance disestablished Allied Command Channel, through retaining many of its subordinate structures after reshuffling. Most of the headquarters were absorbed within ACE, particularly within the new Allied Forces Northwestern Europe.^[72]

From 1994 to 1999 ACE had three Major Subordinate Commands, AFNORTHWEST, AFCENT, and AFSOUTH. In 1995 NATO began a Long Term Study to examine post-Cold War strategy and structure. Recommendations from the study for a new, streamlined structure emerged in 1996.^[73] The European and Atlantic commands were to be retained, but the number of major commands in Europe was to be cut from three to two, Regional Command North Europe and Regional Command South Europe. Activation of the new RC SOUTH occurred in September 1999, and in March 2000 Headquarters AFNORTHWEST closed and the new RC NORTH was activated.^[74] The headquarters of the two Regional Commands were known as Regional Headquarters South (RHQ South) and RHQ NORTH respectively. Each was to supervise air, naval, and land commands for their region as well as a number of Joint Subregional Commands (JSRCs). Among the new JSRCs was Joint Headquarters Southwest, which was activated in Madrid in September 1999.

Organizations and agencies

Prior to the reorganization, the NATO website listed 43 different agencies and organizations and five project committees/offices as of 15 May 2008.^[75] They included:

See also

References

1. ^Cees Wiebes and Bert Zeeman, "The Pentagon Negotiations March 1948: The Launching of the North Atlantic Treaty." International Affairs 59.3 (1983): 351-363.
2. ^{{cite web |url= http://nato.int/cps/en/natohq/declassified_139339.htm |title= A short history of NATO |publisher= NATO |accessdate=26 March 2017}}
3. ^{{cite journal |last=Straus |first=Ira |title=Atlanticism as the Core 20th Century US Strategy for Internationalism |journal=Streit Council |date=June 2005 |series=Annual Meeting of the Society of Historians of American Foreign Relations |url=http://streitcouncil.org/uploads/PDF/Straus-%20Atlanticism%20as%20the%20core%2020th%20century%20US%20Strategy%20for%20internationalism.pdf |accessdate=10 July 2013}}
4. ^{{cite web |url= http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17245.htm |title= Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty on the Accession of Greece and Turkey |publisher= NATO |date= 4 April 1949 |accessdate=17 January 2012}}
5. ^{{web cite|url=http://archives.nato.int/proof-and-inspection-committee-nato-7-62-mm-ammunition;isad|title=Proof and Inspection Committee NATO 7.62 MM Ammunition|publisher=NATO}}
6. ^{{web cite|url=http://nato.int/cps/en/natohq/declassified_136216.htm|title=NATO Declassified – NATO Alphabet|publisher=NATO}}
7. ^¹{{cite web |url= http://archives.nato.int/nato-first-5-years-1949-1954-by-lord-ismay-secretary-general-of-north-atlantic-treaty-organization;isad |title= NATO the first five years 1949–1954 |first= Hastings |last= Ismay |authorlink= Hastings Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay |publisher= NATO |date= 4 September 2001 |accessdate= 10 April 2012 |deadurl= yes |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20170315234941/http://archives.nato.int/nato-first-5-years-1949-1954-by-lord-ismay-secretary-general-of-north-atlantic-treaty-organization%3Bisad |archivedate= 15 March 2017 |df= dmy-all }}
8. ^{{cite news |work= Time |url= http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,816183,00.html |title= NATO: The Man with the Oilcan |date= 24 March 1952 |accessdate=17 January 2012}}
9. ^{{cite journal |last=Baldwin |first=Hanson |date= 28 September 1952 |title=Navies Meet the Test in Operation Mainbrace |journal=New York Times |page=E7 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1952/09/28/archives/navies-meet-the-test-in-operation-mainbrace-important-role-in.html |accessdate=10 April 2012}}
10. ^{{cite web |url= http://archives.nato.int/nato-first-5-years-1949-1954-by-lord-ismay-secretary-general-of-north-atlantic-treaty-organization;isad |title= NATO the First 5 Years |publisher= NATO |date= 17 September 2001 |accessdate= 26 March 2017 |first= Hastings |last= Ismay |authorlink= Hastings Ismay, 1st Baron Ismay |work= NATO the first five years 1949–1954 |deadurl= yes |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20170315234941/http://archives.nato.int/nato-first-5-years-1949-1954-by-lord-ismay-secretary-general-of-north-atlantic-treaty-organization%3Bisad |archivedate= 15 March 2017 |df= dmy-all }}
11. ^{{cite web |url= http://www.natotigers.org/tigerassociation/index.php |title= Organisation |work= NATO Tiger Association |accessdate= 4 September 2013 |year= 2013 |deadurl= yes |archiveurl= https://web.archive.org/web/20131103002437/http://www.natotigers.org/tigerassociation/index.php |archivedate= 3 November 2013 |df= dmy-all }}
12. ^{{cite web |url= http://canadianarmytrophy.com/ |title= Historical Overview |work= Canadian Army Trophy |date= 5 October 2012 |accessdate= 4 September 2013}}
13. ^{{cite news |url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2009/04/03/f-nato-fast-facts.html |date= 6 April 2009 |title=Fast facts about NATO |publisher=CBC News |accessdate=16 July 2011}}
14. ^{{cite news |url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/9/newsid_2519000/2519979.stm |title= West Germany accepted into Nato |work=BBC News |date= 9 May 2011 |accessdate=17 January 2012}}
15. ^{{cite news |url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,891351,00.html |title=Emergency Call |accessdate=27 September 2008 |work= Time |date= 30 September 1957}}
16. ^Garret Martin, "The 1967 withdrawal from NATO – a cornerstone of de Gaulle's grand strategy?" Journal of Transatlantic Studies (2011) 9#3 pp. 232–243. {{doi|10.1080/14794012.2011.593819}}
17. ^{{cite news |url=http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-215_162-3334439.html |title=Not Enough NATO In Afghanistan |publisher=CBS News |date=22 September 2009 |accessdate=4 September 2013 |first=Alan |last=Dowd}}
18. ^{{cite web |url=http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2007/issue2/english/history.html |title=The Big Move |work=NATO Review |first=François |last=Le Blévennec |date=25 October 2011 |accessdate=19 December 2011}}
19. ^¹{{cite news |work=The Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/11/AR2009031100547.html |title=After 43 Years, France to Rejoin NATO as Full Member |date=12 March 2009 |first=Edward |last=Cody |accessdate=19 December 2011}}
20. ^Cited in William I. Hitchcock, "The Ghosts of Crises Past: The Troubled Alliance in Historical Perspective," The End of the West? Crisis and Change in the Atlantic Order, (eds. Jeffrey Anderson, & John G. Ikenberry, & Thomas Risse, Ithaka & London: Cornell University Press, 2008), p. 67.
21. ^{{cite web | url=http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_49201.htm | title=Defence Planning Committee (DPC) (Archived) | publisher=NATO | date= 11 November 2014 | accessdate=13 August 2016}}
22. ^{{cite web |url= http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA532510 |title= NATO Command Structure: Considerations for the Future |first1= W. Bruce |last1= Weinrod |first2= Charles L. |last2= Barry |work= Center for Technology and National Security Policy |publisher= National Defense University |date=September 2010 |format= PDF |accessdate= 4 September 2013}}
23. ^{{cite news |url= https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/jul/15/russia.nato |title= Kremlin tears up arms pact with Nato |first= Luke |last= Harding |work=The Observer |date= 14 July 2007 |accessdate=1 May 2012}}
24. ^{{cite journal |url= http://www.economist.com/node/21551491 |title= The future of NATO: Bad timing |date= 31 March 2012 |journal= The Economist |accessdate=3 April 2012 }}
25. ^¹²{{Cite journal|last=Kramer|first=Mark|last2=Shifrinson|first2=Joshua R. Itzkowitz|date=2017-07-01|title=NATO Enlargement – Was There a Promise?|journal=International Security|volume=42|issue=1|pages=186–192|doi=10.1162/isec_c_00287|issn=0162-2889}}
26. ^{{cite news|title= Deal or No Deal? The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion |doi=10.1162/ISEC_a_00236}}
27. ^{{cite news |url= http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141845/mary-elise-sarotte/a-broken-promise |title= A Broken Promise? |first= Mary Elise |last= Sarotte |work= Foreign Affairs |date=September–October 2014 |accessdate= 28 August 2014}}
28. ^¹{{Cite news |last1= Klussmann |first1= Uwe |last2= Schepp |first2= Matthias |last3= Wiegrefe |first3= Klaus |date= 26 November 2009 |title= NATO's Eastward Expansion: Did the West Break Its Promise to Moscow? |url= http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-s-eastward-expansion-did-the-west-break-its-promise-to-moscow-a-663315.html |work= Spiegel Online |accessdate= 7 April 2014 }}
29. ^{{cite news |title = Gorbachev: US could start new Cold War |author=Blomfield A and Smith M |location=Paris |date=6 May 2009 |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1933223/Gorbachev-US-could-start-new-Cold-War.html |publisher=The Telegraph |accessdate=22 May 2009}}
30. ^{{Cite news|url=https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/|title=Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says "No"|last=Pifer|first=Steven|date=|work=Brookings|access-date=2017-09-11|language=en-US}}
31. ^{{cite news |first=Robert B. |last=Zoellick |url=https://www.questia.com/read/1G1-65576869 |title=The Lessons of German Unification |publisher=The National Interest |date=22 September 2000}}
32. ^{{Cite journal|last=Kramer|first=Mark|date=2009-04-01|title=The Myth of a No-NATO-Enlargement Pledge to Russia|journal=The Washington Quarterly|volume=32|issue=2|pages=39–61|doi=10.1080/01636600902773248|issn=0163-660X}}
33. ^{{cite news |title=Sarkozy military plan unveiled |last=Stratton |first=Allegra |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jun/17/france.military |work=The Guardian |location=UK |date=17 June 2008 }}
34. ^{{cite journal |last1=Perlez |first1=Jane |title=Expanding Alliance: The Overview; Poland, Hungary and the Czechs Join NATO |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1999/03/13/world/expanding-alliance-the-overview-poland-hungary-and-the-czechs-join-nato.html |journal=New York Times |accessdate=13 July 2018}}
35. ^[NATO Expansion Would Be an Epic 'Fateful Error' http://articles.latimes.com/1997/jul/07/local/me-10464], Los Angeles Times, 7 July 1997
36. ^"NATO Expansion Would Be a Fateful Blunder", New York Times, 5 February 1997
37. ^{{cite web |url= http://www.nato.int/docu/speech/1997/s971216aa.htm |title= Statement by Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright During the North Atlantic Council Ministerial Meeting |work= NATO |date= 16 December 1997 |accessdate= 4 September 2013 |first= Madeleine |last= Albright |authorlink= Madeleine Albright}}
38. ^{{cite web |url= http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_52091.htm |title= Allied Command Operations (ACO) |work= NATO |date= 10 May 2013 |accessdate= 4 September 2013}}
39. ^{{cite news |url= https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-security-baltics-idUSKCN0WV1NV |title= NATO needs to beef up defense of Baltic airspace: top commander |agency= Reuters |first= Andrius |last= Sytas |date= 29 March 2016 |accessdate= 9 April 2016}}
40. ^{{cite web |url= http://www.nato.int/docu/update/2004/06-june/e0629d.htm |title= NATO elevates Mediterranean Dialogue to a genuine partnership, launches Istanbul Cooperation Initiative |publisher= NATO Update |date= 16 October 2008 |accessdate= 22 July 2017}}
41. ^{{cite web|url=http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/04/03/nato.members/index.html |title=U.S. wins NATO backing for missile defense shield |publisher= CNN.com |accessdate=3 April 2008 |deadurl=bot: unknown |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080407062445/http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/04/03/nato.members/index.html |archivedate=7 April 2008 |df= }}
42. ^{{cite news |url= https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/medvedev-calls-missile-defense-a-threat-to-russia/2012/03/23/gIQA9Id2VS_story.html |title= Medvedev calls missile defense a threat to Russia |work=The Washington Post |first= Will |last= Englund |date= 23 March 2012 |accessdate=10 April 2012}}
43. ^{{cite news |url= http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/16/world/europe/turkey-radar-station/index.html |title= Part of NATO missile defense system goes live in Turkey |work= CNN |date= 16 January 2012 |accessdate=16 January 2012}}
44. ^Norton-Taylor, Richard. [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/11/nato-nuclear-weapons-upgrade "Nato plans to upgrade nuclear weapons 'expensive and unnecessary'."] The Guardian, 10 May 2012.
45. ^Becker, Markus. "US Nuclear Weapons Upgrades." Der Spiegel, 16 May 2012.
46. ^{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31142276 |title= Ukraine crisis: Nato bolsters Eastern Europe against Russia |work= BBC News |date= 5 February 2015 |accessdate= 4 March 2015}}
47. ^{{cite news |url= http://www.newsweek.com/nato-meets-approve-strengthening-forces-eastern-europe-304566 |title= NATO Meets to Approve Strengthening Forces in Eastern Europe |work= Newsweek |agency= Reuters |date= 5 February 2015 |accessdate= 4 March 2015}}
48. ^{{cite news |url= http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_107716.htm |title= Statement by the North Atlantic Council following meeting under article 4 of the Washington Treaty |work= NATO Newsroom |date= 4 March 2014 |accessdate= 2 April 2014}}
49. ^{{cite web | last1=Techau | first1=Jan | title=The Politics of 2 Percent: NATO and the Security Vacuum in Europe | url=http://carnegieeurope.eu/2015/09/02/politics-of-2-percent-nato-and-security-vacuum-in-europe-pub-61139 | date=2 September 2015 | publisher=Carnegie Europe |quote="A month before [the alliance’s summit in Riga in 2006], Victoria Nuland, then the U.S. ambassador to NATO, called the 2 percent metric the "unofficial floor" on defense spending in NATO. But never had all governments of NATO’s 28 nations officially embraced it at the highest possible political level – a summit declaration."|accessdate=11 July 2018}}
50. ^{{cite web | title=Military Spending by NATO Members | url=https://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/02/daily-chart-11 | date=16 February 2017 | publisher=The Economist | accessdate=4 March 2017}}
51. ^{{cite web | last1=Bendavid | first1=Naftali | title=Just Five of 28 NATO Members Meet Defense Spending Goal, Report Says | url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/nato-calls-for-rise-in-defence-spending-by-alliance-members-1434978193 | date=22 June 2015 | publisher=The Wall Street Journal | accessdate=4 March 2017}}
52. ^{{cite web | last1=Ivana | first1=Kottasova | title=These NATO Countries are Not Spending Their Fair Share on Defense | url=http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/08/news/nato-summit-spending-countries/ | date=8 July 2016 | publisher=CNNMoney | accessdate=4 March 2017}}
53. ^{{cite news |last1=Gramer |first1=Robbie |title=Ahead of NATO Summit, U.S. President Exhorts Allies to Pay Up |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/27/ahead-of-nato-summit-u-s-president-exhorts-allies-to-pay-up-transatlantic-alliance-trump-brussels-summit-letter-to-allies-burden-sharing-two-percent-defense-spending/ |accessdate=12 July 2018 |work=Foreign Policy magazine |date=27 June 2018}}
54. ^{{Cite web|url=http://www.euronews.com/2016/06/15/cyberspace-is-officially-a-war-zone-nato/|title=Cyberspace is officially a war zone – NATO|last=Hardy|first=Catherine|website=Euronews|date=15 June 2016|access-date=16 June 2016}}
55. ^{{Cite web|url=https://www.rferl.org/a/montenegro-joins-nato-russia-outraged/28529932.html|title=Montenegro Officially Joins NATO At Ceremony In Washington|date=5 June 2017|website=Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty|access-date=5 June 2017}}
56. ^{{Cite news|url=http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/defying-russia-montenegro-finally-joins-nato-47837516|title=Defying Russia, Montenegro finally joins NATO|last=Milic|first=Predrag|date=5 June 2017|work=ABC News|access-date=5 June 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170607120315/http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/defying-russia-montenegro-finally-joins-nato-47837516|archive-date=7 June 2017|dead-url=yes|language=en}}
57. ^{{cite news |title=US sanctions Turkish officials over detained pastor |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/donald-trump-administration-to-sanction-turkish-officials-over-imprisonment-of-american-pastor-andrew-brunson/ |work=Politico |date=August 1, 2018}}
58. ^"US changing strategic NATO partner with pastor, Turkish President Erdoğan says". Hürriyet Daily News. August 11, 2018.
59. ^{{cite news |title=US sanctions Turkey over Pastor Brunson detention |url=https://www.thenational.ae/world/europe/us-sanctions-turkey-over-pastor-brunson-detention-1.756238 |work=The National |date=August 1, 2018}}
60. ^{{cite news |title=Turkey, US in diplomatic crisis after ministers hit by sanctions |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/middle-east/turkey-us-in-diplomatic-crisis-after-ministers-hit-by-sanctions/articleshow/65243086.cms |work=The Times of India |date=August 2, 2018}}
61. ^{{cite web |url=http://archives.nato.int/nato-first-5-years-1949-1954-by-lord-ismay-secretary-general-of-north-atlantic-treaty-organization;isad |title=Chapter 6 - The civilian structure |accessdate=2008-01-03 |work=NATO the first five years 1949-1954 |publisher=NATO}}
62. ^T.D. Young, Reforming NATO's Military Structures, 7.
63. ^¹Dr Gregory W. Pedlow, Evolution of NATO's Command Structure 1951-2009.
64. ^{{web cite|url=http://archives.nato.int/summary-of-nato-military-command-structure-terms-of-references-and-areas-of-responsibility-of-major-nato-commanders-and-their-immediate-subordinate-commanders;isad|title=SUMMARY OF THE NATO MILITARY COMMAND STRUCTURE, TERMS OF REFERENCES AND AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY OF THE MAJOR NATO COMMANDERS' AND THEIR IMMEDIATE SUBORDINATE COMMANDERS}}
65. ^Sean Maloney, 'To Secure Command of the Sea,' University of New Brunswick thesis, 1991, p.258-261
66. ^{{cite web |url=http://archives.nato.int/nato-first-5-years-1949-1954-by-lord-ismay-secretary-general-of-north-atlantic-treaty-organization;isad |title=Chapter 7 - The Military Structure |accessdate=2008-01-03 |work=NATO the first five years 1949-1954 |publisher=NATO}}
67. ^{{cite web |url=http://archives.nato.int/nato-first-5-years-1949-1954-by-lord-ismay-secretary-general-of-north-atlantic-treaty-organization;isad |title=Chapter 7 - The Military Structure - Atlantic Command |accessdate=2008-01-03 |work=NATO the first five years 1949-1954 |publisher=NATO |date= }}
68. ^{{cite web |url=http://www.nato.int/archives/1st5years/chapters/7.htm |title=Chapter 7 - The Military Structure - Channel Command and Channel Committee|accessdate=2008-09-03 |work=NATO the first five years 1949-1954 |publisher=NATO |date= }}
69. ^{{cite web |url=http://archives.nato.int/nato-first-5-years-1949-1954-by-lord-ismay-secretary-general-of-north-atlantic-treaty-organization;isad |title=NATO the first five years 1949-1954 |accessdate=2017-04-04 |publisher=NATO |date= }}
70. ^{{cite web|title=Revised Terms of Reference for SACLANT|url=http://archives.nato.int/uploads/r/null/1/0/104795/MC_0058_REV_ENG_PDP.pdf|website=NATO Archives|publisher=NATO Standing Committee|accessdate=26 September 2016}}
71. ^Barbara Starr, 'Cold War Battle Orders Make Way for a New NATO Era,' Jane's Defence Weekly, 8 June 1991.
72. ^Thomas-Durrell Young, Command in NATO After the Cold War: Alliance, National, and Multinational Considerations, U.S. Army Strategic Studies Institute, June 1, 1997, 11, citing JDW July 17, 1993.
73. ^Pedlow, 12.
74. ^T.D. Young, 'NATO After 2000,' 16-18.
75. ^NATO, Organizations and Agencies, accessed May 2008
76. ^NATO C3 Agency
77. ^NATO Communication and Information Systems Agency {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080421131121/http://www.ncsa.nato.int/ |date=2008-04-21 }}
78. ^NATO Research & Technology Organization