Russia Case Study

The NATO, also known as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, was a military alliance that was created as a response to the Soviet Union becoming a threat to the United States. They believed that this alliance would provide them with support and stability and protect them from any threats that they get from the Soviet Union. Document 4 states, "The parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in

Even today, the Balkans remain an invaluable geopolitical crossroads where Russia competes with the West for influence. Currently, many Balkan nations that were either historically non-aligned or allies with Russia are seeking greater relations with the West. Montenegro has recently acceded into NATO, and Serbia and Macedonia have signed several agreements that are considered preconditions for closer cooperation and eventual membership. NATO expansion in general is a sensitive topic for Russia, and is only worsened when it concerns the Balkan nations. Russia has repeatedly stated that it will not go to war with NATO, and no military-political organization has been created to counter the influence of NATO

The Western nations and the foreign minister of 12 countries gathered in Washington D.C. to sign the North Atlantic Treaty. It was more of a security pact with Article 5 stating that if a military attack against any of the signatures would have to be consider an attack against them all. The original membership of NATO was Belgium, Britain, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, and the United States. It was formed as a backbone of the West military against the USSR and its allies. France withdrew military participation in NATO in 1966 and returned in

What used to seem so simple in making every country feel like an equal is failing right now and Europe is not happy about it. “Although NATO is an alliance of equals, with consensus as its core decision making principle, the organization functions and matters only to the degree that the United States remains engaged. The security policy goals of the United States are a key variable for NATO. The Alliance’s future viability depends on whether the Europeans will share American priorities and accept the attendant risks. Today, one must ask to what extent NATO contributes to those goals and where it has fallen short” (Michta 1). Many of these European countries are taking sides not of the United States and this is really hurting their Alliance, for example the United States has a certain strategy for minimizing Islamist terrorism that countries such as France and Germany do not agree with one bit. But it looks like everything is working out for the best and NATO might actually be expanding again. “The United States’ choice to foster NATO enlargement was essential in helping overcome the divisions of the Cold War era. From the start of NATO enlargement, American policy drove the evolution of NATO to a much greater extent than the policies of any other ally. Enlargement reflected expectations that the norm-setting aspect of the Alliance and NATO’s role as a community of values would suffice to reconstitute and sustain it as a viable security

It is desirable to have credible conventional defense to raise the nuclear threshold and increases the policy options. Contrary to that European NATO member countries preferred more reliance on nuclear deterrence due to devastation caused by conventional

However, since 2008, the European security environment has begun to face mounting instability challenges in Eastern Europe as the result of renewed Russian hostility. The renewal of Russian hostility is paramount to the discussion regarding U.S. forward-deployment and NATO nuclear deterrence strategies. The resurgence of Russia has created an increasingly difficult set of problems that the U.S. must face regarding the forward-deployment of nuclear arms. Should U.S. forward-deployment policies remain, and perhaps even be revamped to counter Russian hostilities? Or, should U.S. forward-deployed nuclear weapons be withdrawn from NATO allied states, perhaps unilaterally without Russian reciprocation; in order to deescalate what has the potential to be a

The NATO agreement said that "an armed attack against one or more of its members in Europe and/or America shall be considered an attack against them all." To ward off

There have always been very brief talks about NATO expansion, but nobody really knew which country was going to join NATO. Not until a few years ago when NATO stated that they were trying to bring the european country Georgia into the NATO alliance. NATO has been trying to get Georgia into the alliance for a number of reasons. The biggest reason was to get protection from Russia. The last country to join NATO was Montenegro who joined on June 5, 2017. The fate of Georgia ever becoming a member of the NATO alliance has not been decided yet but there are many pros and cons to why Georgia would be a beneficial member to NATO. Most countries in the NATO alliance gave joined NATO in order to prevent and defend attacks from other countries. NATO's

They have different purposes, but they basically strive for the same goals. UN's purpose is to preserve world peace and security, encourage nations to be just in their actions toward each other, help nations cooperate in trying to solve their problems, and serve as an agency through which nations can work toward these goals. NATO's purpose is to enhance the stability, well-being, and freedom of its members by means of collective security.

Although it may sound cheesy, AP lang - or more specifically the Russia Project - actually changed my life. Before taking AP Lang I had never done a project earlier than the night before it was due. In the past, I took my teachers’ warnings about projects not being “assignments you do the night before” as challenges. My experience with the Russia Project rattled me so deeply to my core that it shattered my decade old habit of procrastination. My group and I toiled relentlessly, researching everything there was to know about Boris Pasternak. We knew all of his works and poems by heart, but we still struggled to come up with an effective and entertaining way to present our information. As the due date slowly crept nearer I suggested we create

Locals of NATO were the principle dangers to the landmass after World War II. Europe needs a security monitor notwithstanding the bedlam,

Well, history never quite repeats itself. Furthermore clearly you might see critical contrasts between what's happening Right away and the frosty war of the past: Russia is not a full-scale superpower, there may be no Warsaw agreement alliance and the Nat doesn't bring At whatever true associates in Europe, absolutely not in the eastern European alternately national European zone even velar will be not very a dependable Russian ally. An alternate Contrast may be that Throughout the frosty war of the previous it might have been broadly accepted that those soviet alliance revealed in unrivalled customary forces, including in national Europe, What's more it might have been nato that might have been relying once atomic discouragement. Today those

It has since grown to include twenty-eight countries including all the members of the soviet union. Although it was founded on the basis of a collective defense, NATO has broadened the scope of its missions over time. Over the last decade, NATO has responded to emerging challenges by taking up new missions on violence, undertaking

President Trump's initial remarks about the North Atlantic Treaty Organization did weaken the alliance's credibility. NATO was rattled by Trump's accusation that NATO was obsolete, the alliance's largest power seeming to disown the validity of the institution. With President Trump's words, the world was reminded of the fragile system humanity created, government. There is nothing natural about states nor the institutions that seem to organize the chaos. In a world of social constructs, there is that reminder of what if the United States were to leave NATO? There is no international police to stop the U.S. from leaving or protect the "free-loading" countries which depend on the resources of the United States. The international arena is the state of anarchy. NATO would miss out on over $500 billion U.S. dollars and 1.4 million troops per

There were three major European Allies; Soviet Union, France, and Britain. Britain and Soviet Union were the major forces. Since France was occupied by Germany after the invasion of Poland. But