Skip to main content

‘Unsuccessful’ Disintegration: The Transatlantic Security Community

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Normative Change and Security Community Disintegration
  • 247 Accesses

Abstract

Chapter 4 deals with the empirical case of the NATO. It is shown how norm leaders initially struggled to adapt to the major external ‘shock’ following the end of the Cold War, leading to serious norm conflicts among norm leaders, and culminating in the crisis over the Iraq War, which arguably took the transatlantic security community to the brink. War among its members is still unthinkable and there is no indication of a member considering the resolution of conflicts by threatening the use of force. At the same time, however, disintegrative tendencies and norm conflicts persist suggesting that, while war remains unthinkable in the North Atlantic area, normative change remains a possibility.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 19.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 27.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    What is often overlooked is the fact that Deutsch remained somewhat cautious about the existence of a pluralistic security community in the North Atlantic area at the time of his writing. Deutsch’s caution is understandable given that his book was written only ten years after the end of World War II. At that time, Spain and Portugal were still dictatorships, and there still was considerable mistrust among European states toward (West) Germany (Deutsch et al. 1957, p. 118).

  2. 2.

    The following countries make up the transatlantic security community today: Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, and the USA.

  3. 3.

    On the concept of the ‘transatlantic West’ see, for example, Miliopoulos 2007; O’Hagan 2002; Koschut 2010.

  4. 4.

    Interview by the author with a senior member of the German Armed Forces at the International Institute for Politics and Economics in Hamburg in 21 March 2011.

  5. 5.

    Article 5 of the NATO treaty limits collective defense to armed attacks ‘in Europe or North America’. This territorial restriction of Article 5, increasingly blurring during the Balkan Wars, was redefined at the NATO Summit in Prague in 2002: ‘Recalling the tragic events of 11 September 2001 and our subsequent decision to invoke Article 5 of the Washington Treaty, we have approved (…) to meet the challenges to the security of our forces, populations and territory, from wherever they may come. (…) NATO must be able to field forces that can move quickly to wherever they are needed’ (emphasis added, NATO 2002, p. 127).

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Koschut, S. (2016). ‘Unsuccessful’ Disintegration: The Transatlantic Security Community. In: Normative Change and Security Community Disintegration. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30324-6_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics