How strong is the Nato military alliance?

BBC ^ | 17 February 2015 Last updated at 19:59 ET | BBC / The Inquiry

[WhiskeyX]

War in Ukraine and the threat of conflict in the Baltics raise fundamental questions about the West's military alliance. What is Nato - the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation - for? And is it up to the job?

Do would-be aggressors still believe that - as stated in Article 5 of Nato's founding treaty - an attack on one Nato member would be treated as an attack on all?

Four expert witnesses including Anders Fogh Rasmussen - who led the organisation until a few months ago - share their insights with the BBC World Service's The Inquiry.

[Paladin2]

NATO is no stronger than Turkey’s slip into Jihad.

[BenLurkin]

Turkey. Still the “Sick Man of Europe”

[Pollster1]

The United States is the leader of NATO, and Obama is (technically) our “leader”, which makes him NATO’s leader. NATO is, like most organizations, as strong as its leader.

[SandRat]

After nearly 8 years of O’, it’s very fragile.

[molson209]

Hello NATO , Obama is using hid flexibility and made a deal with Putin to stay out of his Country Grab for help with Iran

[InterceptPoint]

Is this a joke. Is there still a thing called NATO. Is it a club where old warriors drink beer and talk about old times? I’d forgotten all about it.

[Doogle]

NATO went the way of the UN years ago

[Hulka]

To me, the US is Clint Eastwood in “Pale Rider” and NATO is the town he is hired to save and he trains them but when the bad guys show up, the town (NATO) caves. . .(except for the UK. . .those guys are still an outstanding professional military).

[Former Proud Canadian]

NATO died in April, 1993 when it entered the Serbian war. No NATO signatory nation was attacked or even threatened. And yet NATO commenced an offensive war on a small European nation.

It has been downhill for the alliance ever since.

Turkey acts more like an adversary than an ally. The mess in the Ukraine might be the last nail in the coffin.

[grania]

The US and Europe won’t even save THEMSELVES from invasion. Why would you possibly expect them to save anyone else?

[Star Traveler]

WELL ... NATO is not strong enough to start a THIRD WORLD WAR with Russia!

[baltimorepoet]

Continental Europe has always been the weak link in NATO. You saw it in the Reagan era with all the anti-nuclear protests. Euro-weanies. Large population, large economy, yet they still don’t pull their own weight.

Europe has long been more liberal (and weaker) than America. I think we may have leapfrogged past Europe though, with Obama as our “dear leader”.

[ansel12]

NATO is an overwhelming force compared to Russia today, something that we were not when we had 550.000 men in Europe, under President Reagan.

I would much rather face the Russia of today, than what we were facing in the 1980s.

[dfwgator]

NATO is no stronger than Turkey’s slip into Jihad.

Exactly, a chain is only as strong as its' weakest link.

[Star Traveler]

It wouldn’t be like rolling through Iraq ... with World War III ... you could count on the USA cities being nuked and hundreds of millions of people dead. That’s not much of a “win” for the USA in NATO!

[ansel12]

Tell me what is going in the world that is so big, that suddenly Russia is just desperately seeking any excuse to destroy itself by nuclear fire and cease to exist?

[Star Traveler]

I have no idea what the real thinking of Russia is (or Putin) ... but from what the Bible says, it’s God that puts a bug in Russia’s ear ... :-) ...

[ansel12]

What are you rambling about now?

You think God wants the West to surrender to Russia?

[McGruff]

Well if Ukraine is an example of Europe's testicles I'd say learn to speak Russian.