NATO: Expansion or declining relevance?
By Baba Abdullahi Machina
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was established in 1949, at the onset of the Cold War, as a military alliance aimed at containing the Soviet Union and promoting liberal democracy and capitalism. Originally comprising 12 founding members Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States NATO has since expanded the membership.
During the Cold War, NATO’s primary objective was to counter Soviet influence, often through proxy conflicts. In response, the Soviet Union established the Warsaw Pact, a military alliance headquartered in Poland, to serve as a counterweight to NATO. However, with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Warsaw Pact was dissolved, leading to a shift in the global security landscape.
NATO’s expansion and the breach of agreements
As part of the post-Cold War negotiations between Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and U.S. President Bill Clinton, there was an informal understanding that NATO would not expand eastward into former Soviet-aligned states. This agreement facilitated German reunification, merging the previously divided East and West Germany under the Western bloc.
However, despite these assurances, NATO has since expanded into Eastern Europe, admitting former Warsaw Pact members such as the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland, along with later additions like Albania and Croatia. Russia has repeatedly warned that NATO’s eastward expansion poses a direct threat to its national security, particularly as discussions emerged about Ukraine potentially joining the alliance. This geopolitical tension culminated in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, aimed at preventing the country from aligning with NATO.
The future of NATO: Expansion or decline?
The relevance and future of NATO remain subjects of debate among international relations scholars and strategic analysts. The alliance has faced increasing scrutiny, particularly during the first term of U.S. President Donald Trump, who questioned the financial burden placed on the United States. Trump argued that NATO member states should increase their defense spending, as the U.S. was contributing approximately 50% of NATO’s total defense budget while receiving little direct benefit. He even suggested that the U.S. might reconsider its participation if member states failed to meet spending commitments.
Trump’s call for NATO members to allocate at least 5% of their GDP to defense came at a time when many countries were grappling with economic challenges and internal political instability. This raises critical questions:
Can NATO members afford to increase their defense spending amid economic hardships?
Should the United States withdraw from NATO if it perceives the alliance as a financial burden? What is the future of NATO in a rapidly changing global order?
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently stated that the current global order no longer favors the United States. This statement prompts further inquiry: If the global order is shifting, who is shaping it, and how will NATO adapt?
The Ukraine factor and NATO’s strategic dilemma
Ukraine has been at the center of NATO’s geopolitical challenges. Despite extensive military and financial support from the U.S. and its allies, Ukraine has struggled to sustain its war effort against Russia. U.S. Senator J.D. Vance recently acknowledged that Ukraine is facing a manpower shortage and that continued support may be unsustainable. This has created tensions between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Western leaders, particularly after the U.S. signaled a potential halt in military aid.
With Ukraine’s battlefield momentum waning and NATO’s reluctance to escalate direct involvement, the alliance faces a critical juncture. If NATO continues expanding, it risks further provoking Russia and deepening global divisions. Conversely, if NATO loses relevance, it could mark a shift toward a truly multipolar world order, where regional powers dictate security dynamics rather than a single dominant alliance.
NATO’s future will be shaped by economic realities, shifting political priorities, and evolving global power structures. While the alliance remains a formidable military force, its long-term viability depends on whether it can adapt to the challenges of a multipolar world. The coming years will determine whether NATO continues expanding, maintains its current structure, or gradually declines in relevance amid a rapidly changing international order.
Baba Abdullahi Machina, a political scientist, writes from London, UK
