5 ms·

Does anyone have a list of the actions NATO has taken since its inception?

• alex_duf 5y ago
  The main power of NATO is dissuasion, and I assume (maybe naively) that it's hard to measure dissuasion.
  • crateless 5y ago
    Qaddafi would like a word.
    • bayesian_horse 5y ago
      That wasn't NATO... and he could have stopped the air raids by stopping his artillery attacks on civilian areas at any time.
      • fit2rule 5y ago
      • ghostwriter 5y ago
        > That wasn't NATO what is a framework to distinguish NATO and non-NATO intervention? Let's say a conflict is small enough for a single country like the US to handle it. Is it still NATO or is it only the US with other members not objecting to it?
        • Xylakant 5y ago
          The NATO has no power to restrict actions of its members - it can just decide not to support them, which is common. Any action unilaterally taken by a member state or a group of member states that is not explicitly adopted by the NATO council is not a NATO mission.
          • ghostwriter 5y ago
            I know that. I am asking about a framework to distinguish between a NATO intervention from the sole US intervention for the side on the receiving end of it.
            • Xylakant 5y ago
              Has the nato council voted on it and unanimously accepted the mission? It’s a NATO mission. Has it not? It’s not. Turkeys actions in Syria? Not a NATO mission. Germany and France providing troops to the Minusma mission in Mali? Not a NATO mission. German soldiers getting killed in Mali doesn’t trigger Article 5. Many NATO interventions happen because the UN Security Council asked the NATO to take leadership on them, others without UN involvement, but all of them require that there’s a political decision before the intervention happens. Of important note: there is currently no NATO support for Ukraine - many NATO member states do support Ukraine, but others are very reluctant- Hungary for example. NATO certainly is a body that acts as coordinator and supports states that feel threatened by Russia at the moment, even backfilling for capabilities that they’re handing over to Ukraine, so that distinction is mostly political - but it has real effects. Should any of Ukraines neighbors decide to unilaterally send troops into Ukraine and they get attacked there, it’s not an automatic trigger for Article 5 either.
      • Xylakant 5y ago
        It was a NATO mission, but based on a UN resolution. The UN has asked the NATO multiple times in the last few decades to lead military missions.
    • jeltz 5y ago
      I am pretty sure Libya was never a NATO member. I am pretty sure you too are talking about different things. Grandparent was talking about difficulty of measuring the upside of joining NATO while you are talking about the more easily measurable downsides. There is no contradiction here.
• yakshaving_jgt 5y ago
  Does this help? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_operations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NATO_operations
• jleyank 5y ago
  Afghanistan comes to mind. Also, if the neocons weren’t so arrogant, there would have been German and French planes over nyc on patrol after 9/11.
• naoqj 5y ago
  Bombing civilians in Beograd.
• AdamH12113 5y ago
  NATO is primarily a defensive alliance. The organization has been used to coordinate some non-defensive activities under UN mandate, mainly intervention in the Yugoslav Wars, enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya during the Arab Spring, and fighting piracy off the coast of Somalia. All of these operations took place after the end of the Cold War. The defensive clause of the treaty has only been invoked once, by the United States after the September 11 attacks.
  • mushbino 5y ago
    Judging by actions, it would seem primarily to be an offensive alliance. What's the point of its existence after the Cold War? Operation Gladio is another facet that seems to be much more offensive than defensive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio