NATO

The disappearance of bipolar system following the disintegration of the Soviet :union:, has also changed many strategic concepts. Central Asia, as a part of the Soviet empire, has become an arena for regional and global challenges after these transformations. The region, already faced with various political, economic, social and cultural problems, soon became a location for the activities of Islamic fundamentalists, which in turn intensified regional crisis. Different socio-political problems made the ground for these activities. The basic question of this paper is: What is the role of NATO enlargement and its effects on security provision in Central Asia? This paper tries to answer that, “what role can NATO play in Central Asia in order to provide security in this region specially after September 11th and the following events”. Based on current security issues in Central Asia, America has seriously emphasized on socio-economic reforms under the” Greater Middle East” framework. Central Asian leaders are obliged to control political, social and economic crisis to prevent terrorist acts and reduce public dissatisfaction. Political transformations following the Soviet :union: collapse have clearly revealed that the roots of threat and instability in Central Asia are essentially internal. Sooner or later, leaders of these states have to resolve these threats, based on a clear understanding of regional sociopolitical realities.

This article examines the security relations between Europe and the USA in the framework of NATO and during the Bush and Obama administrations. The author tried to show that the security relations between Europe and America started from the time of absolute dependence of Europe on Washington and, later on with the development of the European Union and also NATO, this dependence has gradually turned into mutual strategic cooperation. On the other hand, Europe attempts to form a defensive and security structure independently of the United States and mainly in the framework of NATO, which has led to an improvement in the defense treaties between the Eastern European countries. It seems that Europe seeks to play an equally important role to the USA and is using NATO as a powerful tool for this purpose. In fact, by developing its relations with NATO, the EU is trying to show the capabilities of Europe in crisis management and to make itself independent of the USA. However, America’s attitude towards NATO across the Atlantic is sometimes different, and conservative and democrat governments in America prefer either a mutual coalition or an American initiative.

Today, the Baltic Sea has become the epicenter of the European crisis. The Baltic Sea is the only region where NATO has a land border with Russia, increasing the region's sensitivity. The slightest incident can turn into a full-blown war in the region. Russia's complex security challenges, the region's geopolitical situation, and the Baltic states' defense vulnerabilities have raised the need to revive NATO's military presence and strengthen deterrence against Russia. In the light of interpretive structural modeling, this study seeks to answer the question of what effect Russia's escalating activities in the Baltic Sea have had on the effectiveness of NATO's deterrence strategy in the region. Given the theoretical framework of broad deterrence, it hypothesized that Russia's security strategy in the three areas of conventional, nuclear, and hybrid threat had led NATO to move toward broad deterrence based on the threat of punishment and denial. However, both types of deterrence do not have the quantity and quality necessary to fully contain Russia in the region, as in the Cold War. In order to measure efficiency according to the research method and its extended formulation, the indicators of credibility, communication, and capability are used. The findings show that deterrence through punishment is much more pronounced than deterrence through denial and that the normal state of deterrence in NATO is highly vulnerable to Russia. Weaknesses in capability and communication have also led to the fragility of NATO's deterrent credentials in the region, making the Baltic Sea very sensitive and critical.

The significance of having an alliance was defined in the Great War when weak European and strong countries decided to ally to fight the mighty power of the Central Powers. Afterward, fragile countries decided to join strong alliances to overcome threats from their neighbors. The Second World War was another example of being allied with strong countries to cope with threats from Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and the Japanese Empire. During the Winter War and Russia-Ukraine War, Finland, and Ukraine, respectively, resemble weak countries with limited military and economic capabilities taking on a dominant and belligerent force. Neorealism is one of the structural theories in International Relations, which states that states intend and follow the balance of power to ensure their security. Neorealism posits that security organizations and alliances are vital tools in the pursuit of balancing threats and ensuring national security. This research aims to highlight the importance of alliances with Russia's neighbors to avoid future conflicts with Russia. The main question of this research is why Russia's neighbors need to form or join alliances to hedge against Russia's aggression and assist member states in reducing the large amount of budget spent on military expenses. This research argues that Finland's position in 1939 and Ukraine's in 2022 are the consequence of self-reliance under an anarchic system without having an alliance and leading to final defeat or territory cession. This paper argues alliances can secure European countries and act as a shield from Russia's threats. This research will employ the explanatory method as its research method.