Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Today
Is NATO Still Relevant?
Aired February 11, 2003 - 11:21 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LEON HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: We are talking, again, about this public split between Washington and some prominent European capitals over Iraq war policy. And this all begs the question about how much of a factor to is NATO nowadays? Is it a Cold War dinosaur? Is it still relevant? Let's talk about that now with our senior political analyst Bill Schneider, who joins us, as you see there from D.C.
Good to see you, Bill.
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Hi, Leon.
HARRIS: Would you explain for us this morning, first of all, what was NATO originally supposed to do?
SCHNEIDER: Well, it was founded in 1949 simply to resist Soviet aggression. That was the whole idea. Well, now it's 50 years later, more than that, and the Soviet Union isn't around any more. NATO still is. And it's getting bigger. Right now, NATO has 19 member countries stretching all the way from Canada and the United States, through western and southern Europe, all the way to Turkey.
Three countries the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland joined in 1999, and seven more countries have been invited to join next year, including four more Eastern European satellites and three Baltic republics that used to be part of the Soviet Union.
Russia itself is now a partner with NATO, though it's not a real member. So clearly, things have changed, and NATO has gotten bigger.
HARRIS: That political complexion of the group has changed, but what has not changed in NATO's mission?
SCHNEIDER: The founding principle, which is collective security. The ideal of that is, if any one member country is attacked, all the other member countries have an obligation to come to that country's defense. That's why all the European countries want to join. They want to make sure the United States will protect them, because they worry that Russia will re-emerge as an aggressive power.
Now, it used to mean that if any European country was attacked by the Soviet Union America would instantly come to its defense. And the Europeans used to joke that the purpose of NATO was to keep America in, Russia out and the Germans down, and you know, it worked, mostly because it was never seriously tested.
HARRIS: Tell us, Bill, is there any simple or one reason why we've come to this point with this current crisis? What's behind all of this?
SCHNEIDER: The current crisis comes out of the founding principle of NATO. One country in NATO, Turkey, a member nation, has requested military assistance, because it says it is facing the possibility of attack, not from Soviet Union, which isn't a threat any more, but from Iraq. If the United States invades Iraq, with Turkey's help, Iraq may attack Turkey.
Now, three countries, as you indicated, France, Belgium and Germany, have balked. They say we don't want to send military aid to Turkey, and they're refusing, at least for the time being, to allow NATO to do that.
HARRIS: We have heard that there have been voices in those three countries and their capitals, saying they've got suspicion about the U.S. motives for following through with this action in Iraq.
But considering that, what do you think their motives might be for actually taking this position against the U.S.?
SCHNEIDER: They're taking a very public position, because they're trying to stop the rush to war. The United States is outraged by all this. Turkey has requested an imminent emergency meeting of NATO. In the end, it's probably all going to be resolved. But these countries of what we call old Europe have resisted.
It's interesting, the new members of NATO are the most pro-United States. They want the United States to protect them in case Russia gets activist again. It's the old European countries, as Secretary Rumsfeld called them, France, Germany, Belgium, that are resisting.
Well, it may all be ironed out. The secretary-general says eventually we think it's going to be ironed out because that's the way the alliance works, he says -- or that's the way it's supposed to work. Some of those old European countries have discovered a new purpose to NATO, not to resist Soviet aggression, but now to resist what they regard as American aggression.
HARRIS: Good point, very interesting.
Thanks, Bill, as always. Take care, Bill Schneider in Washington.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
Aired February 11, 2003 - 11:21 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LEON HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: We are talking, again, about this public split between Washington and some prominent European capitals over Iraq war policy. And this all begs the question about how much of a factor to is NATO nowadays? Is it a Cold War dinosaur? Is it still relevant? Let's talk about that now with our senior political analyst Bill Schneider, who joins us, as you see there from D.C.
Good to see you, Bill.
WILLIAM SCHNEIDER, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: Hi, Leon.
HARRIS: Would you explain for us this morning, first of all, what was NATO originally supposed to do?
SCHNEIDER: Well, it was founded in 1949 simply to resist Soviet aggression. That was the whole idea. Well, now it's 50 years later, more than that, and the Soviet Union isn't around any more. NATO still is. And it's getting bigger. Right now, NATO has 19 member countries stretching all the way from Canada and the United States, through western and southern Europe, all the way to Turkey.
Three countries the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland joined in 1999, and seven more countries have been invited to join next year, including four more Eastern European satellites and three Baltic republics that used to be part of the Soviet Union.
Russia itself is now a partner with NATO, though it's not a real member. So clearly, things have changed, and NATO has gotten bigger.
HARRIS: That political complexion of the group has changed, but what has not changed in NATO's mission?
SCHNEIDER: The founding principle, which is collective security. The ideal of that is, if any one member country is attacked, all the other member countries have an obligation to come to that country's defense. That's why all the European countries want to join. They want to make sure the United States will protect them, because they worry that Russia will re-emerge as an aggressive power.
Now, it used to mean that if any European country was attacked by the Soviet Union America would instantly come to its defense. And the Europeans used to joke that the purpose of NATO was to keep America in, Russia out and the Germans down, and you know, it worked, mostly because it was never seriously tested.
HARRIS: Tell us, Bill, is there any simple or one reason why we've come to this point with this current crisis? What's behind all of this?
SCHNEIDER: The current crisis comes out of the founding principle of NATO. One country in NATO, Turkey, a member nation, has requested military assistance, because it says it is facing the possibility of attack, not from Soviet Union, which isn't a threat any more, but from Iraq. If the United States invades Iraq, with Turkey's help, Iraq may attack Turkey.
Now, three countries, as you indicated, France, Belgium and Germany, have balked. They say we don't want to send military aid to Turkey, and they're refusing, at least for the time being, to allow NATO to do that.
HARRIS: We have heard that there have been voices in those three countries and their capitals, saying they've got suspicion about the U.S. motives for following through with this action in Iraq.
But considering that, what do you think their motives might be for actually taking this position against the U.S.?
SCHNEIDER: They're taking a very public position, because they're trying to stop the rush to war. The United States is outraged by all this. Turkey has requested an imminent emergency meeting of NATO. In the end, it's probably all going to be resolved. But these countries of what we call old Europe have resisted.
It's interesting, the new members of NATO are the most pro-United States. They want the United States to protect them in case Russia gets activist again. It's the old European countries, as Secretary Rumsfeld called them, France, Germany, Belgium, that are resisting.
Well, it may all be ironed out. The secretary-general says eventually we think it's going to be ironed out because that's the way the alliance works, he says -- or that's the way it's supposed to work. Some of those old European countries have discovered a new purpose to NATO, not to resist Soviet aggression, but now to resist what they regard as American aggression.
HARRIS: Good point, very interesting.
Thanks, Bill, as always. Take care, Bill Schneider in Washington.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
